LCD vs. Plasma TVs
- Thread starter Σάββας Σ.
- Start date
Αντωνης Β
AVClub Addicted Member
- 18 June 2006
- 2,551
Απάντηση: Re: LCD vs. Plasma TVs
Όσο αφορά το τηλεοπτικό σήμα η εμπειρία σου τι μας λέει;
Όσο αφορά το τηλεοπτικό σήμα η εμπειρία σου τι μας λέει;
Yperion
AVClub Fanatic
Re: Απάντηση: Re: LCD vs. Plasma TVs
Με το λογικο να ειναι να συγκρινουμε παρομοια μεγεθη και τιμες LCD και πλασμα θα ελεγα οτι για παραδειγμα η Sony 40V2500 εχει το ιδιο καλη εικονα σε SD με την Panasonic 42PX60. Tην PX70 δεν την εχω δει αν και το Ηχος-Εικονα στο τελευταιο συγκριτικο εχει βαλει καλυτερο βαθμο στη 40V2500 απο την 42PΧ70.
Με το λογικο να ειναι να συγκρινουμε παρομοια μεγεθη και τιμες LCD και πλασμα θα ελεγα οτι για παραδειγμα η Sony 40V2500 εχει το ιδιο καλη εικονα σε SD με την Panasonic 42PX60. Tην PX70 δεν την εχω δει αν και το Ηχος-Εικονα στο τελευταιο συγκριτικο εχει βαλει καλυτερο βαθμο στη 40V2500 απο την 42PΧ70.
Yperion
AVClub Fanatic
Re: Απάντηση: LCD vs. Plasma TVs
Υπαρχουν τηλεορασεις που συνδυαζουν αρκετα καλα και τα δυο. Για παραδειγμα η Pioneer 427XD και η Sony 40W2000. Η πρωτη ειναι αριστη στο τηλεοπτικο σημα και πολυ καλη σε HD η δευτερη τελεια σε ΗD και απλως καλη σε SD.
Υπαρχουν τηλεορασεις που συνδυαζουν αρκετα καλα και τα δυο. Για παραδειγμα η Pioneer 427XD και η Sony 40W2000. Η πρωτη ειναι αριστη στο τηλεοπτικο σημα και πολυ καλη σε HD η δευτερη τελεια σε ΗD και απλως καλη σε SD.
Yperion
AVClub Fanatic
Re: Απάντηση: LCD vs. Plasma TVs
Διαβασα σημερα αυτην την αναλυση απο ενα μελος του avforums που συνοψιζει αρκετα καλα τα θετικα και τα αρνητικα των Plasma:
http://www.avforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4741734&postcount=25
Διαβασα σημερα αυτην την αναλυση απο ενα μελος του avforums που συνοψιζει αρκετα καλα τα θετικα και τα αρνητικα των Plasma:
http://www.avforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4741734&postcount=25
Yperion
AVClub Fanatic
Re: Απάντηση: LCD vs. Plasma TVs
Τεστ καταναλωσης LCD και plasma:
http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6475_7-6400401-3.html?tag=nav
Για παραδειγμα η Samsung LN-S4096D (LCD) εχει 209.14 W , ενω η Samsung HP-S4253 (plasma) εχει 281.12 W.
Η διαφορα ομως στην καταναλωση ειναι μονο $13 καθε χρονο (για συγκεκριμενο αριθμο ωρων λειτουργιας).
Τεστ καταναλωσης LCD και plasma:
http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6475_7-6400401-3.html?tag=nav
Για παραδειγμα η Samsung LN-S4096D (LCD) εχει 209.14 W , ενω η Samsung HP-S4253 (plasma) εχει 281.12 W.
Η διαφορα ομως στην καταναλωση ειναι μονο $13 καθε χρονο (για συγκεκριμενο αριθμο ωρων λειτουργιας).
georgede
AVClub Enthusiast
- 29 June 2006
- 995
Και εκει που αποφασισα Plasma
:angry:
LG Closes Plasma Factory, Is The Future LCD?
Author Gordon Kelly
Published 21st May 2007
LG Closes Plasma Factory, Is The Future LCD?
On the high definition landscape Blu-ray verses HD DVD isn't the only format war, LCD and Plasma are also going at it hammer and tongs but could the former slowly be gaining the upper hand? It certainly seems that way following news from LG...
LG is one of the few companies to offer LCD and plasma TVs and it is also world's second largest plasma panel maker, yet this week The Wall Street Journal reported it has posted operating losses in its plasma division and announced plans to shut down its Korean plasma factory.
Plasma lovers will take heart from the fact the factory was only a small part of its overall repertoire (it cuts plasma unit production by just 70,000 units) and cynics would suggest LG has always been more inclined towards LCD. By contrast however LG's plasmas fared reasonably well in our reviews and it does reinforce general industry opinion that plasma's days are numbered.
The primary reason for this is cost: LCDs are cheaper to make and high resolutions - particularly in these 1080p 'Full HD' obsessed times - are easier to achieve. On the downside, many HDTV purists will tell you – myself included – that despite these advantages high end plasmas (notably models from Pioneer and Panasonic) still tend to offer the best picture quality.
That said, money talks (at least metaphorically) and since more people shop for HDTVs with budgets under £1,000 than over £2,000 it appears that ultimately there can only be one winner...
Link:
LG UK
http://www.trustedreviews.com/tvs/news/2007/05/21/LG-Closes-Plasma-Factory-Is-The-Future-LCD/p1
:angry: LG Closes Plasma Factory, Is The Future LCD?
Author Gordon Kelly
Published 21st May 2007
LG Closes Plasma Factory, Is The Future LCD?
On the high definition landscape Blu-ray verses HD DVD isn't the only format war, LCD and Plasma are also going at it hammer and tongs but could the former slowly be gaining the upper hand? It certainly seems that way following news from LG...
LG is one of the few companies to offer LCD and plasma TVs and it is also world's second largest plasma panel maker, yet this week The Wall Street Journal reported it has posted operating losses in its plasma division and announced plans to shut down its Korean plasma factory.
Plasma lovers will take heart from the fact the factory was only a small part of its overall repertoire (it cuts plasma unit production by just 70,000 units) and cynics would suggest LG has always been more inclined towards LCD. By contrast however LG's plasmas fared reasonably well in our reviews and it does reinforce general industry opinion that plasma's days are numbered.
The primary reason for this is cost: LCDs are cheaper to make and high resolutions - particularly in these 1080p 'Full HD' obsessed times - are easier to achieve. On the downside, many HDTV purists will tell you – myself included – that despite these advantages high end plasmas (notably models from Pioneer and Panasonic) still tend to offer the best picture quality.
That said, money talks (at least metaphorically) and since more people shop for HDTVs with budgets under £1,000 than over £2,000 it appears that ultimately there can only be one winner...
Link:
LG UK
http://www.trustedreviews.com/tvs/news/2007/05/21/LG-Closes-Plasma-Factory-Is-The-Future-LCD/p1
Οι Κορεάτες έχουν την παγκόσμια πρωτιά στην παραγωγή lcd panels. Σιγά μην αγοράζουν plasma από άλλους.
Δεν έχω καμιά ψευδαίσθηση ότι η τεχνολογία plasma θα αντέξει τον ανταγωνισμό από την lcd. Αλλά δεν αγοράζω τηλεόραση με αυτό το πρίσμα. Μέχρι να εξαφανιστούν οι plasma (δεν θα πάρει 5 χρόνια; ) ίσως να πρέπει αλλάξω κι εγώ τηλεόραση.
Δεν έχω καμιά ψευδαίσθηση ότι η τεχνολογία plasma θα αντέξει τον ανταγωνισμό από την lcd. Αλλά δεν αγοράζω τηλεόραση με αυτό το πρίσμα. Μέχρι να εξαφανιστούν οι plasma (δεν θα πάρει 5 χρόνια; ) ίσως να πρέπει αλλάξω κι εγώ τηλεόραση.
Yperion
AVClub Fanatic
Οι πλασμα δεν προκειται να εξαφανιστουν οπως δεν εχουν εξαφανιστει ουτε οι προβολικες , απλως οι LCD θα εχουν το μεγαλο κομματι απο την πιτα της αγορας ενω οι πλασμα θα ειναι στο περιθωριο.
Οι Πλασμα θα ειναι εδω για αρκετα ακομα χρονια!
PDP Competitive Breakthrough? Maybe
May 29th, 2007
At the SID press breakfast last week, Ross Young of DisplaySearch gave a disruptive technologies presentation and revealed the Advanced PDP Development Center (APDC) (Tokyo, Japan; www.advanced-pdp.jp) has achieved plasma display efficiencies of 10 lm/W (lumens / watt) up roughly 4 to 5 times from today’s 2.0 to 2.5 lm/W efficiency. The group was formed in 2003 and represents a consortia of Japan PDP makers including: Matsushita, Hitachi and Pioneer.
Steve Sechrist
Senior Analyst and Editor
Projection Monthly
The advancement are claimed to be able to offer significant performance and cost advantages including better contrast and brightness, improved pixel density and lower component costs.
But there appears to be a catch. The improvements require changes to the cell structure discharge scheme and are believed to be up to 2 years away from mass production according to Young’s report.
The technology behind all these advancements remains murky too. For example, Young indicated the APDC breakthrough was based on "significantly more tolerance in the plasma material due to declining discharge error," - but what does this really mean? And, if the group is at the cusp of a new breakthrough-they’re not talking (at least not at SID). There were no papers submitted by the APDC group and only one of the 12 papers presented on PDP came from a consortia member, Pioneer, who talked about a new dithering algorithm that increased the number of gray levels.
Insight Media analyst Ken Werner is currently looking into these developments, so we will have more soon.
On the benefits side, Young said the advance will significantly lower costs and increase performance of PDPs. One possible result could be cost effective 32-inch 1080 PDP-TVs, for example, which cost compete toe-to-toe with LCDs. LG is apparently planning to launch a 32″ PDP in Q3′07.
And, the technology could empower a 55-inch PDP with 4K x 2K resolution going beyond even the quad HD (3840 x 2160) pixel density offered by state-of-the-art LCDs. This is important today for broadcast quality monitors and beyond 2010, for next generation commercial displays, according to Japan broadcaster NHK (see QFHD article in June issue of Projection Monthly).
PS07 Banner
The benefits to manufacturing cost are also staggering with an estimated 33% savings, says Young. The new process eliminates one of the upper electrodes and one of the drive boards, cuts out 50% of the process steps currently used in PDP production. The resulting large decline in address voltage means lower driver IC costs and reduced costs in EMI and optical filters as well.
Finally, this plasma panacea improves brightness of the display by a factor of 2X and contrast by 4X. These are the stated goals of APDC, which seem ambitious to us. Nevertheless, the need to try to achieve these goals is real as PDP competitiveness in the 40-inch range is under assault.
So the real question is: has this dramatic (disruptive) improvement to PDP technology that moves the category from a high-powered discharge to a low-power display device come too late? APDC partner Pioneer thinks no as it has already announced (at CES) moving up deployment of "new breakthrough technologies" that perhaps are the results of this research. In early May the company unveiled its 8th generation "Project Kuro" line that boasts especially deep black levels, and the four 1080p-native 50- and 60-inch sets offer 20,000:1 contrast ratio. The line-up will be available in 42 and 50-inch screen sizes in XGA (available from June) and Full HD in 50 and 60-inch (available from September), according to the company.
http://displaydaily.com/2007/05/29/pdp-competitive-breakthrough-maybe/
PDP Competitive Breakthrough? Maybe
May 29th, 2007
At the SID press breakfast last week, Ross Young of DisplaySearch gave a disruptive technologies presentation and revealed the Advanced PDP Development Center (APDC) (Tokyo, Japan; www.advanced-pdp.jp) has achieved plasma display efficiencies of 10 lm/W (lumens / watt) up roughly 4 to 5 times from today’s 2.0 to 2.5 lm/W efficiency. The group was formed in 2003 and represents a consortia of Japan PDP makers including: Matsushita, Hitachi and Pioneer.
Steve Sechrist
Senior Analyst and Editor
Projection Monthly
The advancement are claimed to be able to offer significant performance and cost advantages including better contrast and brightness, improved pixel density and lower component costs.
But there appears to be a catch. The improvements require changes to the cell structure discharge scheme and are believed to be up to 2 years away from mass production according to Young’s report.
The technology behind all these advancements remains murky too. For example, Young indicated the APDC breakthrough was based on "significantly more tolerance in the plasma material due to declining discharge error," - but what does this really mean? And, if the group is at the cusp of a new breakthrough-they’re not talking (at least not at SID). There were no papers submitted by the APDC group and only one of the 12 papers presented on PDP came from a consortia member, Pioneer, who talked about a new dithering algorithm that increased the number of gray levels.
Insight Media analyst Ken Werner is currently looking into these developments, so we will have more soon.
On the benefits side, Young said the advance will significantly lower costs and increase performance of PDPs. One possible result could be cost effective 32-inch 1080 PDP-TVs, for example, which cost compete toe-to-toe with LCDs. LG is apparently planning to launch a 32″ PDP in Q3′07.
And, the technology could empower a 55-inch PDP with 4K x 2K resolution going beyond even the quad HD (3840 x 2160) pixel density offered by state-of-the-art LCDs. This is important today for broadcast quality monitors and beyond 2010, for next generation commercial displays, according to Japan broadcaster NHK (see QFHD article in June issue of Projection Monthly).
PS07 Banner
The benefits to manufacturing cost are also staggering with an estimated 33% savings, says Young. The new process eliminates one of the upper electrodes and one of the drive boards, cuts out 50% of the process steps currently used in PDP production. The resulting large decline in address voltage means lower driver IC costs and reduced costs in EMI and optical filters as well.
Finally, this plasma panacea improves brightness of the display by a factor of 2X and contrast by 4X. These are the stated goals of APDC, which seem ambitious to us. Nevertheless, the need to try to achieve these goals is real as PDP competitiveness in the 40-inch range is under assault.
So the real question is: has this dramatic (disruptive) improvement to PDP technology that moves the category from a high-powered discharge to a low-power display device come too late? APDC partner Pioneer thinks no as it has already announced (at CES) moving up deployment of "new breakthrough technologies" that perhaps are the results of this research. In early May the company unveiled its 8th generation "Project Kuro" line that boasts especially deep black levels, and the four 1080p-native 50- and 60-inch sets offer 20,000:1 contrast ratio. The line-up will be available in 42 and 50-inch screen sizes in XGA (available from June) and Full HD in 50 and 60-inch (available from September), according to the company.
http://displaydaily.com/2007/05/29/pdp-competitive-breakthrough-maybe/
Re: Κριτικες τηλεορασεων LCD και Plasma.
Από μια γρήγορη έρευνα που έκανα στο διαδίκτυο κατέλειξα στο συμπέρασμα ότι οι LCD υπερτερούν σε πολλούς τομείς από τις Plasma....
Τι να πρωτοαναφέρω? Το βάρος, τις αναλύσεις, την ακτινοβολία, το "τρόμο" του burn in, την ευαισθησία σε μεταφορές και μετατοπίσεις κλπ κλπ?
Μόνο στο contrast και στη φωτεινότητα κερδίζει τη μάχη. Αλλά αν είναι να έχεις συνέχεια το άγχος του Burn in και να φοβάσαι να παίξεις με τις ρυθμίσεις...... Ο μόνος λόγος που θα μπορούσε να με δελεάσει μια Plasma είναι το χαμηλό κόστος/ίντσες
Από μια γρήγορη έρευνα που έκανα στο διαδίκτυο κατέλειξα στο συμπέρασμα ότι οι LCD υπερτερούν σε πολλούς τομείς από τις Plasma....
Τι να πρωτοαναφέρω? Το βάρος, τις αναλύσεις, την ακτινοβολία, το "τρόμο" του burn in, την ευαισθησία σε μεταφορές και μετατοπίσεις κλπ κλπ?
Μόνο στο contrast και στη φωτεινότητα κερδίζει τη μάχη. Αλλά αν είναι να έχεις συνέχεια το άγχος του Burn in και να φοβάσαι να παίξεις με τις ρυθμίσεις...... Ο μόνος λόγος που θα μπορούσε να με δελεάσει μια Plasma είναι το χαμηλό κόστος/ίντσες
Yperion
AVClub Fanatic
Eκανα μια λιστα με θετικα και αρνητικα των δυο τεχνολογιων στο AVforums πριν λιγες μερες και την δημοσιευω και εδω:
Plasma advantages:
-Excellent real contrast ratios and black levels
-Excellent color reproduction
-Excellent viewing angle with no real loss of color or contrast
Plasma disadvantages:
-Burn in/image retention
-Shorter life span
-Phosphor Trails
-Screen Reflections
-Power consumption
-Lower Peak brightness
-Low resolution for some models (1024x768)
-False contouring/posterisation (in some cheaper/older models)
-Weight
-Electromagnetic field emmision
-Flicker (when there is no 100 Hz refresh rate)
LCD advantages:
-Very thin and lightweight
-Excellent sharpness at native resolution
-Excellent longevity
-Among the brightest direct view displays
-Highest resolutions possible (1080p and higher possible)
-No practical screen burn-in effect
-Silent with no moving parts or fans
LCD disadvantages:
-Not very deep blacks (not the case for some LCDs like Sammy M86)
-Expensive cost-to-size ratio
-Viewing angles
-Bluring during fast motion (problem almost solved in 100 Hz LCDs)
-Not accurate color reproduction
Plasma advantages:
-Excellent real contrast ratios and black levels
-Excellent color reproduction
-Excellent viewing angle with no real loss of color or contrast
Plasma disadvantages:
-Burn in/image retention
-Shorter life span
-Phosphor Trails
-Screen Reflections
-Power consumption
-Lower Peak brightness
-Low resolution for some models (1024x768)
-False contouring/posterisation (in some cheaper/older models)
-Weight
-Electromagnetic field emmision
-Flicker (when there is no 100 Hz refresh rate)
LCD advantages:
-Very thin and lightweight
-Excellent sharpness at native resolution
-Excellent longevity
-Among the brightest direct view displays
-Highest resolutions possible (1080p and higher possible)
-No practical screen burn-in effect
-Silent with no moving parts or fans
LCD disadvantages:
-Not very deep blacks (not the case for some LCDs like Sammy M86)
-Expensive cost-to-size ratio
-Viewing angles
-Bluring during fast motion (problem almost solved in 100 Hz LCDs)
-Not accurate color reproduction
Yperion
AVClub Fanatic
Re: Κριτικες τηλεορασεων LCD και Plasma.
Εχω κανει μια λιστα με θετικα και αρνητικα εδω:
http://www.avclub.gr/forum/showpost.php?p=232152&postcount=113
Εχω κανει μια λιστα με θετικα και αρνητικα εδω:
http://www.avclub.gr/forum/showpost.php?p=232152&postcount=113
Στα LCD disadvantages μπορεις να προσ8εσεις τα:
- Clouding
- Burned/stuck pixels
- Backlight Buzzing
- low contrast ratios (οχι τις μαϊμουδιες με τα "dynamic ratios", τα πραγματικα)
κ.α.
- Clouding
- Burned/stuck pixels
- Backlight Buzzing
- low contrast ratios (οχι τις μαϊμουδιες με τα "dynamic ratios", τα πραγματικα)
κ.α.
Yperion
AVClub Fanatic
Αφου τα ειπαμε και παλι. Η 40D3000 εχει καλυτερο contrast ratio (πραγματικο οχι dynamic) απο την 42PX70 (501:1 εναντι 415:1) συμφωνα με το Hi tech που μετραει το contrast ratio κατα ANSI (chessboard):
Another measure is the ANSI contrast, in which the measurement is done with a checker board patterned test image where the luminosity values are measured simultaneously.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contrast_ratio
Dead pixels , buzzing και screen uniniformity εχουν και οι πλασμα:
Για δες εδω:
Lab Test Results
Dead pixels 3 subpixels (2 blue, 1 red)
http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/Samsung-PS50Q97HDX/Benchmark.php
Και εδω για buzzing και dirty screen:
http://www.avforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=466376&highlight=Pioneer+dirty+screen
Μαλιστα οι πλασμα εχουν buzzing απο την φυση τους το οποιο δημιουργειται απο τα υψηλα πεδια ρευματος που χρεαιαζονται για την λειτουργια τους.
Απο εκει και περα δεν καταλαβαινω γιατι πρεπει να λεμε τα ιδια καθε φορα. Αν δεν σου αρεσουν οι LCD ειναι πολυ απλο να αγορασεις μια πλασμα και να καθαρισεις.
Yperion
AVClub Fanatic
To CNET ειχε τεσταρει 54 TVs (rear projection , plasma , LCD) στην καταναλωση ρευματος. Τα αποτελεσματα ηταν...
Average plasma: 328 watts
Average rear-projection: 208 watts
Average LCD: 193 watts
Average CRT: 146 watts
Περισσοτερες λεπτομερειες εδω...
The basics of TV power
και εδω...
54 TVs' power consumption compared
Average plasma: 328 watts
Average rear-projection: 208 watts
Average LCD: 193 watts
Average CRT: 146 watts
Περισσοτερες λεπτομερειες εδω...
The basics of TV power
και εδω...
54 TVs' power consumption compared
-Γιώργος-
Supreme Member
Θα συμφωνήσω απόλυτα με τα πλεονεκτήματα και τα μειονεκτήματα των δύο τεχνολογιών όπως τα έγραψε ο Rivers. Όπως επίσης είναι αυτονόητο πως έχουν υπερισχύσει οι LCD στον τομέα των πωλήσεων, αλλά και οι plasma θα συνεχίσουν να παράγονται για καιρό ακόμα. Δεν μπορώ να εξηγήσω γιατί υπερίσχυσε η συγκεκριμένη τεχνολογία αλλά σίγουρα κάποια σχέση έχει το γεγονός πως οι plasma υπήρχαν αποκλειστικά σε πολλές ίντσες που τις έκανε απρόσιτες για τους περισσότερους σε αγορές όπως η ελληνική. Σίγουρα έπαιξε και ρόλο το ποιά τεχνολογία θα απέφερε περισσότερο κέρδος στους κατασκευαστές.
Παρ'όλα αυτά δεν νομίζω πως κάποια από τις δύο τεχνολογίες υπερέχει της άλλης. Η επιλογή είναι θέμα αναγκών και προσωπικής άποψης στο τι είναι "καλύτερη" εικόνα.
Αν και είμαι κάτοχος LCD η επόμενη μου τηλεόραση θα είναι σίγουρα plasma, αφού στην πορεία ανακάλυψα πως η εικόνα τους έρχεται πιο κοντά σε αυτό που εγώ θεωρώ ιδανικό και δεν με απασχολεί καθόλου προς το παρών το κύριο μειονέκτημα τους που έχει να κάνει με τις χαμηλότερες αναλύσεις και την συνδεσιμότητα με PC.
