Initial Hasstles of a Plasma

[haisaikat]

Hi,
When reviewing LEDS in 42+ size I was quite inclined for BRAVIA 46EX710 and LG 47LE5500 not only for the PQ but also for the power consumption as one of my requirements is to run them on inverter during power cut offs. But lately figured out that LG 50PK550 has very low power consumption compared to SAMSUNG Plasmas and cost much less than LEDs.

However I do see on several posts in this site that people are running some slides of pictures frames for hours during the initial phase to make the plasma suit long hour runs and prevent from burn ins from logos of channels, etc.

Is this problem with all the plasmas? In that case it will be very difficult to view it for longer duration for initial periods. Please suggest

 

[CANDUU]

Yes u should handle it with more respect for initial burn in period,u can audition pana v20 plasma which is superior in plasma class and hassle free.
Lg le5500 is better than sony 710 led .there is a dedicated thread running in our forum u can search for it for more info.

 

[hemant0285]

Jus go for d Plasma... The present new gen Plasmas don hav any problems..

 

[haisaikat]

so does that mean panasonic does not need to run the slides as compared to lg? And power consumption? Lg 50pk550 draws only 202w.

 

[adder]

Well if you do happen to have lots of power cuts then yes LED-lit lcd are way to go.There power consumption is quite low some of the most efficient 40" EDGE led based tv can consume less then a tubelight(NON-electronic choke).

Between the LG 5500 and EX710.The EX710 has better blacks,overall a better image processing.Even better is the EX700 although its usually in out of stock as better blacks,viewing angle.
The LG has better viewing angle and is cheaper and 1" bigger.It wins in VFM.

 

[haisaikat]

hope there are good world cup offers in plasma and led.

 

[NetFreak]

However I do see on several posts in this site that people are running some slides of pictures frames for hours during the initial phase to make the plasma suit long hour runs and prevent from burn ins from logos of channels, etc.

That is not required anymore. Only thing one needs to do is to keep Contrast/Brightness less than 50 for a month.

 

[RetinalNV]

The break in slides is actually not required in the new generation plasma's.

Some professionals continue to use it as a controlled way to calibrate the set's for clients.
This essentially means a myth propagated for the benefit of someone.

My friend has a v20 that he never bothered doing anything to. Just out of the box an normal viewing, it has no problems.

Besides with a 3 year warranty its well worth it!

 

[viper08]

If you want bigger screen size in good budget, plasma is the way to go.

 

[heynownow]

I'm a 50PK550 owner. From my experience, ever after 100 hours, you'll always have to put ISM in orbiter mode, and image retention and line bleeding will be there. But for dvd's, blu-rays and consoles, there is really no better choice. News junkies and day traders hooked on cnbc, stay away from Plasmas. I did put on burn in slides, but not nearly as extensively as folks have recommended here. basically as long you stop getting paranoid abt this, and use basic common sense abt lingering on screen elements, you should be fine with a plasma. Oh yeah, make sure the message notification icon which most stb's display is done away with (read/delete the message) , that almost caused a slight burn in, as I was away on a long business trip and wifey didn't turn it off for 2 weeks. That took me a whole days worth of breakin slides and whitewashing to get rid of.

 

[heynownow]

Also would like to mention something about power consumption. Unlike LCDs/LEDs power usage of Plasmas varies with the content being played, a very dark scene can consume just 70w, where as in the white wash mode (screen completely white) can consume peak power of 400w. so with balanced viewing (as in you don't watch sports all the time, with a good sprinkling or dvd films, some news, and some soap) power prices wont hurt you. However a 47" LCD like the LG LD460 will consume 260w continuously. In any case the blacks in a Plasma are actually blacks and not grey's like LCDs and edge lit LEDs, so you can keep brigtness down and contrasts up. So at the end of the month, the two tv would've probably consumed the same amount of power units; give-or-take some. On an average I have noticed that my leccy bills have been Rs. 150-200 more (4-5 hours of viewing per day on avg) , which is kinda a reasonable price to pay for the joys of watching a glorious 50" screen and making neighbors/friends jealous

Having said that I speak only from the perspective of a LG 2010 model Plasma owner. The consumption patterns for different brands or older models would be different

 

[adder]

Also would like to mention something about power consumption. Unlike LCDs/LEDs power usage of Plasmas varies with the content being played, a very dark scene can consume just 70w, where as in the white wash mode (screen completely white) can consume peak power of 400w. so with balanced viewing (as in you don't watch sports all the time, with a good sprinkling or dvd films, some news, and some soap) power prices wont hurt you. However a 47" LCD like the LG LD460 will consume 260w continuously. In any case the blacks in a Plasma are actually blacks and not grey's like LCDs and edge lit LEDs, so you can keep brigtness down and contrasts up. So at the end of the month, the two tv would've probably consumed the same amount of power units; give-or-take some. On an average I have noticed that my leccy bills have been Rs. 150-200 more (4-5 hours of viewing per day on avg) , which is kinda a reasonable price to pay for the joys of watching a glorious 50" screen and making neighbors/friends jealous

Having said that I speak only from the perspective of a LG 2010 model Plasma owner. The consumption patterns for different brands or older models would be different

Well when you talk about 260watt power consumption of the 47" lg its the max power consumption ,it will be many X times brighter then the plasma.So unless one uses it in outdoors no one would keep such bright settings.

46" Sony edgeLED tv consumes a max of just 115watt these at max backlight settings where its many times brighter then a plasma.
If one switches on the ambient light sensor at night the tv is going to reduce the backlight lower then the lowest backlight user setting available,so in those instances the power consumption will be in the mid 2 digit.

For many power bills wont be a big deal,but in places which have poor power production.Increasing the demand won't help in reducing power cuts and if every one starts using inverters and UPS,the amount of power required to charge the lead acid batteries is 1.5x the power used with the addition of the power consumption of the UPS and inverter.

So generally speaking just because of one's selfish needs others less fortunate people have to suffer(people who just want to put a fan when its hot,or put the light when its dark who can't afford a inverter/UPS).

 

[heynownow]

Well when you talk about 260watt power consumption of the 47" lg its the max power consumption ,it will be many X times brighter then the plasma.So unless one uses it in outdoors no one would keep such bright settings.

No I am just quoting the figures from the LG website
LG 47LD460 LCD TV - Latest member of the Jazz Series LCD TV's. - LG Electronics IN

and no manufacturer would be daft to punt the "max consumption"

46" Sony edgeLED tv consumes a max of just 115watt these at max backlight settings where its many times brighter then a plasma.
If one switches on the ambient light sensor at night the tv is going to reduce the backlight lower then the lowest backlight user setting available,so in those instances the power consumption will be in the mid 2 digit.

I was only referring to LCD's and the 46" - 50" category
And according according to sony's own specs their 46 incher LCD (KLV-46EX400 : EX400 Series : BRAVIA LCD TV : Sony India) consumes 195w and that by no estimates fall in the "mid 2 digit" as you so eloquently put it, despite the brightness levels

In any case the running costs price savings of large -screen LED TVs are offset by the steep prices of the set itself (1.5x-2x the price of LCDs and Plasmas) .


For many power bills wont be a big deal,but in places which have poor power production.Increasing the demand won't help in reducing power cuts and if every one starts using inverters and UPS,the amount of power required to charge the lead acid batteries is 1.5x the power used with the addition of the power consumption of the UPS and inverter.

err your argument falls in the realm of fundamental policy and energy issues, it has little bearing in a hi-vi discussion forum


So just because of one selfish needs others less fortunate people have to suffer(people who just want to put a fan when its hot,or put the light when its dark who can't afford a inverter/UPS).

Again, you're going on a social commentary in order to obfuscate the issue. In any case dude, your rants would would have a little more weight if you'd presented some statistics. Just what %tage of total household electrical consumption is used up by large screen TV, and honestly what would be the %tage of households in teh country with large screen TV's compared to the millions of standard CRTs around (which consume much more than equivalent or larger LCDs) . Air-conditioners and Heaters consume kilowatts of energy, so are you going to carry out a crusade against them. I am not undermining the plight of less privileged members of society, but it's ridiculous blaming the relatively few owners of Plasma televisions for the sad state of power Infrastructure in our country.

 

[adder]

No I am just quoting the figures from the LG website
LG 47LD460 LCD TV - Latest member of the Jazz Series LCD TV's. - LG Electronics IN

and no manufacturer would be daft to punt the "max consumption"


I was only referring to LCD's and the 46" - 50" category
And according according to sony's own specs their 46 incher LCD (KLV-46EX400 : EX400 Series : BRAVIA LCD TV : Sony India) consumes 195w and that by no estimates fall in the "mid 2 digit" as you so eloquently put it, despite the brightness levels


In any case the price savings of large -screen LED TVs are offset by the steep prices of the set itself (1.5x-2x the price of LCD) .

err your argument falls in the realm of fundamental policy and energy issues, it has little bearing in a hi-vi discussion forum
[
B]Again, you're going on a social commentary in order to obfuscate the issue. In any case dude, your rants would would have a little more weight if you'd presented some statistics. Just what %tage of total household electrical consumption is used up by large screen TV, and honestly what would be the %tage of households in teh country with large screen TV's compared to the millions of standard CRTs around (which consume much more than equivalent or larger LCDs) . Air-conditioners and Heaters consume kilowatts of energy, so are you going to carry out a crusade against them. I am not undermining the plight of less privileged members of society, but it's ridiculous blaming the relatively few owners of Plasma televisions for the sad state of power Infrastructure in our country.

[/B]

Relax dude.

No one is forcing you to buy a lcd/led-lcd or go eco friendly.It wasn't a rant .

BTW if you read my post correctly i said the power consumption of a 46" EDGE LED lcd you are comparing it a regular EX400 which is a CCFL lcd.

Thanks for letting me know that led-lit lcds costs more

Power consumption is relevant to this thread since the OP asked about it and further he has a inverter.

But there is nothing wrong in sharing the fact that led-lit lcd consume much lesser or the fact that the power required to recharge those Pb batteries which are relevant to the thread starter.

In this world lots of people are ignorant and selfish in some way or other,my self included.Some are like "hey i can afford it,so i will do what ever i want ,switch on how many appliances i want" but in the long run i believe thats not going to help.

 

[longshanks]

If your priority is pic quality and mostly what you use the tv is for viewing DVD,Bluray or playing games for that matter then buy the plasma.I have both plasma and LCD, when it comes to pic quality LCD is no match for a plasma and plasma technology is just getting better every year and more inexpensive. Image retention is just a low priority issue and most wont even notice it unless observed carefully in a dark room.

If you want to save little energy but sacrifice on pic quality and your priority is watching still images or DTH then get an LCD.Buying an LCD for the sole purpose of saving energy is just as pointless as spending 30 lakhs to buy a Toyota prius.

Rather convert all ur home lighting to LED,Try carpooling, Cycling or walking short distances,Use refrigerator and Air conditioner in proper temperature,plant neem tree around your house,use heat reflective paint to paint your home and many other things which will really make sense in terms of saving energy.

 

[haisaikat]

Relax dude.

Power consumption is relevant to this thread since the OP asked about it and further he has a inverter.

Thanks for understanding my problem

 

[haisaikat]

If your priority is pic quality and mostly what you use the tv is for viewing DVD,Bluray or playing games for that matter then buy the plasma.I have both plasma and LCD, when it comes to pic quality LCD is no match for a plasma and plasma technology is just getting better every year and more inexpensive. Image retention is just a low priority issue and most wont even notice it unless observed carefully in a dark room.

If you want to save little energy but sacrifice on pic quality and your priority is watching still images or DTH then get an LCD.Buying an LCD for the sole purpose of saving energy is just as pointless as spending 30 lakhs to buy a Toyota prius.

Rather convert all ur home lighting to LED,Try carpooling, Cycling or walking short distances,Use refrigerator and Air conditioner in proper temperature,plant neem tree around your house,use heat reflective paint to paint your home and many other things which will really make sense in terms of saving energy.

Power consumption was not my only concern. My another big concern was the burn-in issue. As someone mentioned in this thread that the message icon of an STB led to the burn in effect, that is something which will surely discourage buyers like me to go for plasma since most of the time I will be in office on weekedays and my mother will be watching it who at her age cannot look at the plasma burn ins in between watching tvs. So my question was if the panasonic polasmas for which i saw the most positive ratings are they indeed free of this burn-in problem due to channel logo-s, etc.

 

[haisaikat]

The break in slides is actually not required in the new generation plasma's.

Some professionals continue to use it as a controlled way to calibrate the set's for clients.
This essentially means a myth propagated for the benefit of someone.

My friend has a v20 that he never bothered doing anything to. Just out of the box an normal viewing, it has no problems.

Besides with a 3 year warranty its well worth it!

Is 3 year warranty always offered on present day pana plasmas? And does present day plasma do not suffer from channel logos, etc

 

[techcheat]

I recently bought Pana 42X20D.... caz I was on a budget *period*. Having said that there are following advantages of Plasma:

- motion blur on LCD is more pronounced, plasma's due to their fast response time dont suffer from the same (very important in Indian context given our SD signals)
- Darker blacks

Negatives
- Image Retention
- Burn-In (permanent damage) possible no matter what the manfacturers say
- Shorter life
- Heavier
- More power consumption
- Cant work at high altitude

As you read above, the negatives outweight the positives and therefore the market has moved from Plasma's to LCD->LED's over the years. The numbers say it all, in 2010 Plasma's sold 2 milion IIRC as opposed to 20 million LCDs.

Now having said all that Pana does offer great picture quality for all its cons and is covered by 3 years warranty. If you have 10-15k more to spare go for LCD else I would recommend Plasma.

If I had a choice between an expensive Plasma or LED TV, budget no bar, than I would have gone for LED/LCD. Thats the honest answer, no matter what anyone says on this forum.

 

[haisaikat]

Also would like to mention something about power consumption. Unlike LCDs/LEDs power usage of Plasmas varies with the content being played, a very dark scene can consume just 70w, where as in the white wash mode (screen completely white) can consume peak power of 400w. so with balanced viewing (as in you don't watch sports all the time, with a good sprinkling or dvd films, some news, and some soap) power prices wont hurt you. However a 47" LCD like the LG LD460 will consume 260w continuously. In any case the blacks in a Plasma are actually blacks and not grey's like LCDs and edge lit LEDs, so you can keep brigtness down and contrasts up. So at the end of the month, the two tv would've probably consumed the same amount of power units; give-or-take some. On an average I have noticed that my leccy bills have been Rs. 150-200 more (4-5 hours of viewing per day on avg) , which is kinda a reasonable price to pay for the joys of watching a glorious 50" screen and making neighbors/friends jealous

Having said that I speak only from the perspective of a LG 2010 model Plasma owner. The consumption patterns for different brands or older models would be different

I think the LG PK550 consumes 202W power comparable to CCFL LCDs if not edge-lit LEDs. Does LG plasmas have similar hasstles as other plasmas as running mainatince modes with special slides?