Initial Hasstles of a Plasma

[haisaikat]

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.

have you yourself faced any of the problems that you have mentioned and have they been repaired?

 

[techcheat]

have you yourself faced any of the problems that you have mentioned and have they been repaired?

I bought my plasma last week. It was a choice between Samsung 40C550 and Pana 42X20D... but I was on a budget as I had a temporary cash crunch. So I havent faced any of the problems but I know the painful burn in process lies ahead. Yes the sports looks lot better in Plasma thanks to no motion blur, but as stated earlier its like finding the benefit of the situation I was in. If I had the money though, I would have gone for another LCD...

 

[winallodd]

After reading this thread till now I am getting that with plasma we would face burn ins, etc after some time. Now my query is: whether by running appropriate slides of picture frames can we avoid this..? or there is another way to avoid this.

winallodd.

 

[CANDUU]

i got a doubt , y ur more inclined to plasma?
crt then plasma then lcd then led ,y u opt for plasma?

 

[haisaikat]

i got a doubt , y ur more inclined to plasma?
crt then plasma then lcd then led ,y u opt for plasma?

I believe cost is a factor that everyone will consider even the first timers like me who are upgrading from 21inch CRTs. LG 50 inch plasma costs around 70K but the same company's 47 inch LEDs are in 90K range. 20K is a lot of money. But again the reason why we are all debating is to get an idea on whether the hassle / headache that comes with the plasma are really worth the 20K or not .

Televisions are something that we always (at least me) switch to during our relaxation times and if I have to keep then in mind how much brightness / contrast / channel logo / stb message icon are going to cause damage so I have to always keep fixing them using workaround then it spoils the intent of relaxation.

 

[v.anand]

Another major reason for Plasma over LED/LCD's are the picture quality in terms of colours, response time etc., for which till this day the best of LED's are a no match to the best of plasmas.

I am very shortly getting the Panasonic 42V20D, but this thread has got me worried too. I completely agree with @haisaikat with respect to TVs being as hassle free as possible and can't spare too much time and effort to take care of it unlike LED's.

In terms of panel life, the Panasonic Brand shop person clearly mentioned that it has a life of 1,00,000 hours and comes with 3 years warranty. Isn't this sufficient peace of mind factor? Do I need to change my choice otherwise due to my above mentioned requirement? 80% of viewing in my case would be the regular STB and the balance DVD's at the moment.

 

[manu79]

I believe cost is a factor that everyone will consider even the first timers like me who are upgrading from 21inch CRTs. LG 50 inch plasma costs around 70K but the same company's 47 inch LEDs are in 90K range. 20K is a lot of money. But again the reason why we are all debating is to get an idea on whether the hassle / headache that comes with the plasma are really worth the 20K or not .

Televisions are something that we always (at least me) switch to during our relaxation times and if I have to keep then in mind how much brightness / contrast / channel logo / stb message icon are going to cause damage so I have to always keep fixing them using workaround then it spoils the intent of relaxation.

In your scenario a LCD/led tv is more suitable, if you do a lot of dth then LCD/led is the way to go. I am not saying that Plasma is strict no no but Plasma sets are usually bought by Customers on budget (wrt screen size) or enthusiasts.

While a burn in problem exists if used roughly, in most cases its over exaggerated. In my case i opted for plasma because i liked its life like natural color reproduction, detailing and lack of motion blur. It also seemed pretty easy on eyes. I have not followed any sort of "burn in period" or whatever i just kept the settings to "True Cinema" mode. I use my set mostly for watching movies and playing games. My Tatasky HD box is yet to come....

Have said that i sincerely hope this doesn't turn out to be another LCD\Plasma bashing thread.

 

[haisaikat]

In your scenario a LCD/led tv is more suitable, if you do a lot of dth then LCD/led is the way to go. I am not saying that Plasma is strict no no but Plasma sets are usually bought by Customers on budget (wrt screen size) or enthusiasts.

dth will be 80% since my mother will be watching it most of the time during the day / evening around 8 to 10 hours a day.