I was originally looking at LCDs, but from what i gathered, plasmas are cheaper, larger, better contrast, and better viewing angles, while lcds are lighter, less power-consumption, and higher resolutions. Personally, contrast and size are my main concerns. Also, plasmas rarely have burn-in issues these days, especially after the first 200 hrs or so of use.Originally Posted by darkshadow
10/4/04 - 8/20/07
yes, in the size to price ratio plasma's are bigger and have a nice contrast ratio, i really dont dig lcd contrast ratio's either, its just the lower resolution that makes me go for lcd, in a year from now however, SED will make its debut, and we will get both benefits in a pretty package ( its basically a flat crt >_>, contrast ratios : 100,000:1 ! 1ms response time )
here is some info about this great upcoming hdtv ( die lcd, dlp, plasma!!! )
http://gear.ign.com/articles/679/679235p1.html
"It gets better. The prototype SEDs on-hand at CES 2006 are far from finished, according to company spokespersons. The sets we viewed were running in 720p and not the standard 1080p that SEDs will accommodate later this year. Meanwhile, the 42" SEDs we saw will be axed in favor of a base size that begins at 55", Toshiba promises. The SEDs will also deliver a 1 millisecond response time, which guarantees that blurring or refresh issues will be a thing of the past. And get this - craziest of all, the final SEDs will ship with a contrast ratio of 100,000:1 to one. Yes, we wrote that correctly -- one-hundred thousand to one."
"Toshiba reps are confident of SED, calling these sets the "new standard." And having seen them in motion, we agree. These babies are beautiful and nothing else that we've seen even comes close."
im definitly getting one >_>
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote