LCD vs. Plasma TVs
- Thread starter Σάββας Σ.
- Start date
underdog
Supreme Member
Πόσοι κάνουμε την ίδια μέτρηση και ασχολούμαστε σοβαρά για το ψυγείο, το φούρνο και το πλυντήριό μας; Μάλλον σε τελική ανάλυση αυτό που μετράει είναι πόσο καθαρά βγαίνουν τα ρούχα, όχι πόσο καίει. Σωστά Γιάννη;
Καμια σχεση.Το πλυντηριο κ ο φουρνος μπορει να λειτουργουν 2 ωρες/εβδ.
Ενω η τηλεοραση κ το φωτιστικο του καθιστικου σε μια 4μελη οικογενεια 10ωρες/ημερα.
Αλλωστε ολες οι οικιακες συσκευες που ειναι Α+ κλαση ενεργειας π.χ. κουζινα, ψυγειο, a/c κλπ ειναι πολυ ανωτερες κ σε ολα τα υπολοιπα.
Προσφατως νυμφευθης γαρ.
Ενω η τηλεοραση κ το φωτιστικο του καθιστικου σε μια 4μελη οικογενεια 10ωρες/ημερα.
Αλλωστε ολες οι οικιακες συσκευες που ειναι Α+ κλαση ενεργειας π.χ. κουζινα, ψυγειο, a/c κλπ ειναι πολυ ανωτερες κ σε ολα τα υπολοιπα.
Προσφατως νυμφευθης γαρ.
-Γιώργος-
Supreme Member
Why you shouldn't buy a plasma TV ...
LCD man says plasma is no longer at the cutting edge
Traditionally, high-end plasma televisions have been considered to be the best the TV industry has to offer. But many LCD manufacturers are now saying that plasma is no longer worth the expense, with large panels often costing twice as much as similar-sized LCD ones.
Tommaso Monetto of Sharp says that despite plasma screens reigning as king of large sizes in the past, LCD panels are now taking over.
Plasma vs LCD
"The debate between LCD versus plasma is a long running one," he told TechRadar. "Technology improvements in image processing, higher resolution and contrast ratio have helped LCD to increasingly become the preferred technology for flat panel displays.
"Through increased picture information on screen, the LCD can now exceed the picture quality of plasmas in large screen sizes. Ultimately, LCD technology is encroaching on the territory of plasma. Developments in contrast ratio technology have also allowed LCD images to compete with plasma by providing unparalleled black levels," he said.
LCD struggles with blacks
In the past, LCD panels have been unable to reproduce the deep blacks we see in the best plasma screens. That’s because LCD panels are transmissive, so each pixel acts as a shutter to block out an ‛always on’ white backlight. Unfortunately as well as needing a continuous power input, the LCD shutter is unable to fully block the light from the lamp, and that often results in a washed out image, particularly in dark, ambient conditions.
But this looks set to change with a new range of LCD TVs set to hit the market in 2010.
Back at IFA in August, Sharp's CEO Toshiyuki Tajima revealed some new prototypes of what he said would be possible to produce at the company’s brand new 10th generation LCD factories. The 52-inch panels were just 20mm thick, had contrast ratios of 100,000:1 (enabling very deep blacks) and genuine 180 degree viewing angles.
Tajima would not tell us exactly how these stats were achieved, but it’s a fair guess that it was through using two LCD panels on top of each other, instead of just one. That would explain how the TVs were able to filter the light out so effectively.
LCD has the edge?
So it would appear that for anyone looking to buy a new TV, LCD has the edge in a number of areas. For a start you can buy good quality LCD TVs in small sizes, unlike plasma. A good LCD is not as expensive as a good quality plasma. Improvements are being made all the time. And in the future, LCD panels promise to deliver unprecedented levels of quality – although that doesn’t help today’s purchaser.
Energy efficiency is also on the side of LCD. In general, LCD panels consume less power, although this changes depending on certain variables. Plasma panels consume a varying amount of power because when a pixel is black, it’s effectively turned off. So a black and white movie, for example, will consume a lot less power on a plasma because more pixels will be turned off.
The backlight in LCD panels, however, is always on, meaning it’s constantly using up the same number of watts. There are obvious exceptions like the one above but, in general, it’s cheaper to run an LCD TV than a plasma one.
Sharp says that by 2011, LCD TVs will have over 90 per cent of the flatscreen TV market. And when the 10G LCD factories go online in 2010, Sharp will be capable of producing not only very large panels, but also very small ones with 1080p resolutions. That is something plasma technology will never be able to achieve.
LCD dominating plasma
"The latest LCD technology by Sharp includes more than 6 million sub pixels, a 4ms response time and picture enhancement technology, designed to prevent image judder and provide brilliant contrast for better overall picture quality," said Monetto.
"I think you will always have loyal plasma buyers who enjoy the colour temperature of plasma panels, but if you look at the price erosion of our sets, plasma cannot match that. So you're probably going to get to a situation whereby dealers will not stock plasma anymore because consumers will just want LCD and not plasma."
So the key message here is that, while plasma TVs such as those in Pioneer’s Kuro range are the best money can buy, LCD is catching up. And with prices on LCD’s side of the fence, value for money might be the deciding factor.
The price is right
"Sharp’s HD-ready 1080p Aquos XL2 range features 100Hz double-frame drive technology that recreates images with twice the number of frames as conventional systems for clear motion reproduction as well as smooth and natural scenes," said Monetto.
"This means that sports programmes and content with quick camera action, for example action movies, can be viewed with clarity."
Of course this doesn’t change the fact that if money is no object, anyone buying a large (over 42 inches) TV this year would be wise to go with a high-end plasma. But in a few years' time, this may be a different story.
http://www.techradar.com/news/television/why-you-shouldnt-buy-a-plasma-tv-318343
LCD man says plasma is no longer at the cutting edge
Traditionally, high-end plasma televisions have been considered to be the best the TV industry has to offer. But many LCD manufacturers are now saying that plasma is no longer worth the expense, with large panels often costing twice as much as similar-sized LCD ones.
Tommaso Monetto of Sharp says that despite plasma screens reigning as king of large sizes in the past, LCD panels are now taking over.
Plasma vs LCD
"The debate between LCD versus plasma is a long running one," he told TechRadar. "Technology improvements in image processing, higher resolution and contrast ratio have helped LCD to increasingly become the preferred technology for flat panel displays.
"Through increased picture information on screen, the LCD can now exceed the picture quality of plasmas in large screen sizes. Ultimately, LCD technology is encroaching on the territory of plasma. Developments in contrast ratio technology have also allowed LCD images to compete with plasma by providing unparalleled black levels," he said.
LCD struggles with blacks
In the past, LCD panels have been unable to reproduce the deep blacks we see in the best plasma screens. That’s because LCD panels are transmissive, so each pixel acts as a shutter to block out an ‛always on’ white backlight. Unfortunately as well as needing a continuous power input, the LCD shutter is unable to fully block the light from the lamp, and that often results in a washed out image, particularly in dark, ambient conditions.
But this looks set to change with a new range of LCD TVs set to hit the market in 2010.
Back at IFA in August, Sharp's CEO Toshiyuki Tajima revealed some new prototypes of what he said would be possible to produce at the company’s brand new 10th generation LCD factories. The 52-inch panels were just 20mm thick, had contrast ratios of 100,000:1 (enabling very deep blacks) and genuine 180 degree viewing angles.
Tajima would not tell us exactly how these stats were achieved, but it’s a fair guess that it was through using two LCD panels on top of each other, instead of just one. That would explain how the TVs were able to filter the light out so effectively.
LCD has the edge?
So it would appear that for anyone looking to buy a new TV, LCD has the edge in a number of areas. For a start you can buy good quality LCD TVs in small sizes, unlike plasma. A good LCD is not as expensive as a good quality plasma. Improvements are being made all the time. And in the future, LCD panels promise to deliver unprecedented levels of quality – although that doesn’t help today’s purchaser.
Energy efficiency is also on the side of LCD. In general, LCD panels consume less power, although this changes depending on certain variables. Plasma panels consume a varying amount of power because when a pixel is black, it’s effectively turned off. So a black and white movie, for example, will consume a lot less power on a plasma because more pixels will be turned off.
The backlight in LCD panels, however, is always on, meaning it’s constantly using up the same number of watts. There are obvious exceptions like the one above but, in general, it’s cheaper to run an LCD TV than a plasma one.
Sharp says that by 2011, LCD TVs will have over 90 per cent of the flatscreen TV market. And when the 10G LCD factories go online in 2010, Sharp will be capable of producing not only very large panels, but also very small ones with 1080p resolutions. That is something plasma technology will never be able to achieve.
LCD dominating plasma
"The latest LCD technology by Sharp includes more than 6 million sub pixels, a 4ms response time and picture enhancement technology, designed to prevent image judder and provide brilliant contrast for better overall picture quality," said Monetto.
"I think you will always have loyal plasma buyers who enjoy the colour temperature of plasma panels, but if you look at the price erosion of our sets, plasma cannot match that. So you're probably going to get to a situation whereby dealers will not stock plasma anymore because consumers will just want LCD and not plasma."
So the key message here is that, while plasma TVs such as those in Pioneer’s Kuro range are the best money can buy, LCD is catching up. And with prices on LCD’s side of the fence, value for money might be the deciding factor.
The price is right
"Sharp’s HD-ready 1080p Aquos XL2 range features 100Hz double-frame drive technology that recreates images with twice the number of frames as conventional systems for clear motion reproduction as well as smooth and natural scenes," said Monetto.
"This means that sports programmes and content with quick camera action, for example action movies, can be viewed with clarity."
Of course this doesn’t change the fact that if money is no object, anyone buying a large (over 42 inches) TV this year would be wise to go with a high-end plasma. But in a few years' time, this may be a different story.
http://www.techradar.com/news/television/why-you-shouldnt-buy-a-plasma-tv-318343
Last edited:
-Γιώργος-
Supreme Member
Why you shouldn't buy an LCD TV ...
Pioneer technician describes the frivolities of LCD technology
If you bought a large LCD television this year, you may have made a big mistake. At least, that’s what Pioneer technician, Dominic Feeney, says. He thinks LCD technology is so vastly inferior to most plasma screens that it makes no sense to buy a large LCD TV from the likes of Sharp and Sony."Plasma TVs have a larger and more accurate colour range, a higher contrast ratio and better black level for improved depth of field," Feeney told TechRadar.
Is plasma better than LCD?
"LCD manufacturers often quote wide viewing angles but don't mention that although the picture is still visible at a wider angle, the quality of picture decreases dramatically off axis. Plasma viewing angles are comparable yet maintain the full picture quality at all times.
"Motion response times are also better in plasma TVs. That’s because they typically have less than a millisecond response time; LCDs are just about hitting 4 milliseconds [although Philips' new 9000 series LCD TVs have a response time of around 2 miliseconds - ed]. This is too slow for fast moving action and results in blurred edges especially in fine detail areas. Ironically, LCDs only hold a 1080p resolution with a static image. When the image moves fast, the perceived resolution your eye resolves from a 1080p LCD is actually less than standard definition. Hilarious!"
Pioneer is responsible for the creation of the Kuro plasma television range. While quite expensive, the TVs have received rave reviews from both critics and home users alike. But while the Kuro range is undoubtedly the finest on the market at present, LCD panels have also improved spectacularly over the last few years.
Pitch black failure
Viewing angles have been enhanced, contrast ratios are up too. Prices have come down and general quality is up. But Feeney says that the fundamentals of the technology involved mean LCD screens will always be inferior to plasmas.
At the heart of LCD’s problems is the fact that the panels are transmissive, which means each pixel is actually a shutter blocking out an ‛always on’ white backlight. Colours are then filtered out from that white light. And because the pixels cannot shut out all the light, blacks come out more like dark greys.
"LCD tech was originally developed many years ago as a technology for displaying static images on devices such as the pocket calculator and digital watch," Feeney says.
"But in more recent times it’s been adapted by the PC industry again primarily for display of static images. It's only in very recent times that LCD technology has been transferred into televisions and this is down to one simple fact: it's cheaper to make an LCD TV than a plasma one."
However this looks set to change with future LCD TVs which use LEDs rather than fluorescent backlights. LEDs will enable LCD TV makers to properly turn off the backlight, leading to a dramatic increase in contrast, as individual pixels will effectively be off when no image is being displayed on the whole or a particular part of the screen.
Emissive beats transmissive
Modern plasma TVs on the other hand work completely differently. They’re emissive displays, so each pixel is made up of a red, green and blue phosphor pocket. When the phosphor is excited by an electrode it emits red, green or blue light. And because there is no backlight, black colours are able to be displayed much more accurately.
"Different intensities and mixtures of these elements create the colours and display the imagery," Feeney says. "It was developed about 10 years ago and has been developed from the ground up as a TV device to display moving images with rich colour and contrast. For these reasons, LCD panels will never be able to rival PDPs."
It’s not just PDP manufacturers who advocate plasma technology, either. A report published last year by researchers at Synovate sought to reveal consumer attitudes towards both kinds of TV technology.
Plasma has the edge
The results revealed a strong preference for the contrast, black tone, resolution, image depth, sharpness, colour and response speed of plasma. And opinions among those who had some prior knowledge of the two technologies swung dramatically toward plasma once they viewed the content side-by-side in an environment similar to their homes.
However, one area where LCD certainly does rule over plasma is in the small panel market. It’s impossible to make decent plasma screens smaller than about 37 inches, something the Pioneer man readily admits.
"Each pixel of a plasma panel is precision sandblasted into a glass sheet. For a 1080p resolution 50-inch plasma, each individual pixel is about the size of a pin prick in a sheet of paper. To try and replicate this resolution on an even smaller piece of glass, the pixels would have to be minuscule," he says.
"It's impossible to do this and still retain structural integrity of the glass, not to mention the reduced amount of phosphor in each cell having a detrimental effect on overall brightness and colour purity."
So which television technology should you plump for? It’s certainly not as clean cut as it may seem. While Pioneer’s Kuro plasma range is astonishing, a 50-inch panel costs around £3,500 which is well out of the price range of many people.
In contrast, a similarly sized Sony Bravia LCD TV may not be as good, but would cost around £2,000 less. So, as always in cases like these, it comes down to what you can afford.
http://www.techradar.com/news/television/why-you-shouldnt-buy-an-lcd-tv-318328
Pioneer technician describes the frivolities of LCD technology
If you bought a large LCD television this year, you may have made a big mistake. At least, that’s what Pioneer technician, Dominic Feeney, says. He thinks LCD technology is so vastly inferior to most plasma screens that it makes no sense to buy a large LCD TV from the likes of Sharp and Sony."Plasma TVs have a larger and more accurate colour range, a higher contrast ratio and better black level for improved depth of field," Feeney told TechRadar.
Is plasma better than LCD?
"LCD manufacturers often quote wide viewing angles but don't mention that although the picture is still visible at a wider angle, the quality of picture decreases dramatically off axis. Plasma viewing angles are comparable yet maintain the full picture quality at all times.
"Motion response times are also better in plasma TVs. That’s because they typically have less than a millisecond response time; LCDs are just about hitting 4 milliseconds [although Philips' new 9000 series LCD TVs have a response time of around 2 miliseconds - ed]. This is too slow for fast moving action and results in blurred edges especially in fine detail areas. Ironically, LCDs only hold a 1080p resolution with a static image. When the image moves fast, the perceived resolution your eye resolves from a 1080p LCD is actually less than standard definition. Hilarious!"
Pioneer is responsible for the creation of the Kuro plasma television range. While quite expensive, the TVs have received rave reviews from both critics and home users alike. But while the Kuro range is undoubtedly the finest on the market at present, LCD panels have also improved spectacularly over the last few years.
Pitch black failure
Viewing angles have been enhanced, contrast ratios are up too. Prices have come down and general quality is up. But Feeney says that the fundamentals of the technology involved mean LCD screens will always be inferior to plasmas.
At the heart of LCD’s problems is the fact that the panels are transmissive, which means each pixel is actually a shutter blocking out an ‛always on’ white backlight. Colours are then filtered out from that white light. And because the pixels cannot shut out all the light, blacks come out more like dark greys.
"LCD tech was originally developed many years ago as a technology for displaying static images on devices such as the pocket calculator and digital watch," Feeney says.
"But in more recent times it’s been adapted by the PC industry again primarily for display of static images. It's only in very recent times that LCD technology has been transferred into televisions and this is down to one simple fact: it's cheaper to make an LCD TV than a plasma one."
However this looks set to change with future LCD TVs which use LEDs rather than fluorescent backlights. LEDs will enable LCD TV makers to properly turn off the backlight, leading to a dramatic increase in contrast, as individual pixels will effectively be off when no image is being displayed on the whole or a particular part of the screen.
Emissive beats transmissive
Modern plasma TVs on the other hand work completely differently. They’re emissive displays, so each pixel is made up of a red, green and blue phosphor pocket. When the phosphor is excited by an electrode it emits red, green or blue light. And because there is no backlight, black colours are able to be displayed much more accurately.
"Different intensities and mixtures of these elements create the colours and display the imagery," Feeney says. "It was developed about 10 years ago and has been developed from the ground up as a TV device to display moving images with rich colour and contrast. For these reasons, LCD panels will never be able to rival PDPs."
It’s not just PDP manufacturers who advocate plasma technology, either. A report published last year by researchers at Synovate sought to reveal consumer attitudes towards both kinds of TV technology.
Plasma has the edge
The results revealed a strong preference for the contrast, black tone, resolution, image depth, sharpness, colour and response speed of plasma. And opinions among those who had some prior knowledge of the two technologies swung dramatically toward plasma once they viewed the content side-by-side in an environment similar to their homes.
However, one area where LCD certainly does rule over plasma is in the small panel market. It’s impossible to make decent plasma screens smaller than about 37 inches, something the Pioneer man readily admits.
"Each pixel of a plasma panel is precision sandblasted into a glass sheet. For a 1080p resolution 50-inch plasma, each individual pixel is about the size of a pin prick in a sheet of paper. To try and replicate this resolution on an even smaller piece of glass, the pixels would have to be minuscule," he says.
"It's impossible to do this and still retain structural integrity of the glass, not to mention the reduced amount of phosphor in each cell having a detrimental effect on overall brightness and colour purity."
So which television technology should you plump for? It’s certainly not as clean cut as it may seem. While Pioneer’s Kuro plasma range is astonishing, a 50-inch panel costs around £3,500 which is well out of the price range of many people.
In contrast, a similarly sized Sony Bravia LCD TV may not be as good, but would cost around £2,000 less. So, as always in cases like these, it comes down to what you can afford.
http://www.techradar.com/news/television/why-you-shouldnt-buy-an-lcd-tv-318328
Last edited:
ΔΕΝ ΞΕΡΩ
ΕΙΠΑ ΝΑ ΠΑΡΩ TV, ΑΛΛΑ
ΟΣΟ ΔΙΑΒΑΖΩ ΤΟ FORUM ,ΜΠΑΙΡΔΕΥΟΜΑΙ ΟΛΟ Κ ΠΕΡΙΣΣΟΤΕΡΟ!!!
ΠΑΛΕ ΓΟΥΡΟΥΝΙ ΣΤΟ ΣΑΚΙ ΘΑ ΠΑΡΩ.,,,
ΞΕΚΙΝΗΣΑ ΜΕ LCD 40 A-RA ΜΕΤΑ ΠΗΓΑ ΣΕ PLASMA 42 Κ ΤΩΡΑ ΞΑΝΑΓΥΡΙΖΩ ΣΕ LCD
O ΕΠΟΜΕΝΟΣ ΠΟΥ ΘΑ ΓΡΑΨΕΙ ΣΤΟ THREAD ΘΑ ΜΟΥ ΑΛΛΑΞΕΙ ΓΝΩΜΗ ΞΑΝΑ!
Yperion
AVClub Fanatic
Tα πραγματα ειναι σχετικα απλα.
Θελει καποιος να ....
Bλεπει τηλεοπτικο σημα και DVD -> HD Ready plasma
Βλεπει Blu Ray και ΗD , και χρηση PC/κονσολα -> Full HD LCD
Oι Full hd plasma ειναι καλυτερες στο blu ray αλλα χειροτερες στο τηλεοπτικο σημα.
Θελει καποιος να ....
Bλεπει τηλεοπτικο σημα και DVD -> HD Ready plasma
Βλεπει Blu Ray και ΗD , και χρηση PC/κονσολα -> Full HD LCD
Oι Full hd plasma ειναι καλυτερες στο blu ray αλλα χειροτερες στο τηλεοπτικο σημα.
Αν καποιος εχει τελειο τηλεοπτικο σημα και βλεπει μονο ταινιες μεσω HTPC σε HD, τι θα του προτεινες να παρει (που οι plasma ειναι λιγο σκοτεινες σε σχεση με τις αντιστοιχες LCD)...?
Εχω παει σε καταστημα που ειχε τελειο τηλεοπτικο σημα και οι plasma φαινοντουσαν λιγο σκοτεινες σε σχεση με τις LCD... δε μπορω να βλεπω ΤV σε pitch black για να γουσταρω το μαυρο τους (οπως κανω με τον projector)...
TV συνηθως βλεπουμε με τα φωτα ανοικτα... Ετσι η ερωτηση μου ειναι, αφου εχω τελειο τηλεοπτικο σημα σε τι θα υπερτερησει μια plasma απο μια LCD? (στις 37")
Εχω παει σε καταστημα που ειχε τελειο τηλεοπτικο σημα και οι plasma φαινοντουσαν λιγο σκοτεινες σε σχεση με τις LCD... δε μπορω να βλεπω ΤV σε pitch black για να γουσταρω το μαυρο τους (οπως κανω με τον projector)...
TV συνηθως βλεπουμε με τα φωτα ανοικτα... Ετσι η ερωτηση μου ειναι, αφου εχω τελειο τηλεοπτικο σημα σε τι θα υπερτερησει μια plasma απο μια LCD? (στις 37")
underdog
Supreme Member
To περιβάλλον σε ένα κατάστημα είναι υπερφωτισμένο. Κι εγώ νόμιζα ότι οι πλάσμα είναι "σκοτεινές", αλλά είναι υπεραρκετά φωτεινές για να βλέπεις στο σπίτι. Αν δε η πηγή του φωτός δεν πέφτει πάνω στην τβ δεν έχεις και θέμα αντανακλάσεων.
Εκει που ηταν οι 37αρες δεν ειχε και πολυ φως... οποτε ηταν ενα κανονικο περιβαλον απογευματινης παρακολουθησης στο σαλονι...
underdog
Supreme Member
-Γιώργος-
Supreme Member
Επειδή στις 37'' ίντσες υπάρχει μόνο μία επιλογή σε πλάσμα ας μιλήσουμε συγκεκριμένα για την 37PX80 η οποία θα υπερτερεί από οποιαδήποτε LCD σε μαύρο, κίνηση, γωνίες θέασης και θα κοστίζει σημαντικά φθηνότερα. Η ποιότητα του τηλεοπτικού σήματος δεν παίζει ρόλο στην σύγκριση, και τέλειο να είναι αποτελείται από 576 γραμμές και αυτές μισές (interlaced), οπότε για την πλάσμα θα είναι πιο εύκολο να την προσαρμόσει στην ανάλυση της.
Από την άλλη οι LCD (αν είναι FullHD) θα υπερτερούν στην ευκρίνεια 1080p υλικού αφού δεν χρειάζεται να το τροποποιήσουν και το παίζουν όπως έχει. Επίσης με τις LCD δεν θα έχεις κανένα άγχος για στατικές εικόνες με το PC συνδεδεμένο. Μπορεί οι πλάσμα να είναι βελτιωμένες και να μην έχουμε πολλά κρούσματα burn in, αλλά σχεδόν όλοι οι κάτοχοι λίγο πολύ το έχουν στο πίσω μέρος του μυαλού τους. Οι LCD από την άλλη είναι fire and forget. Όσον αφορά το θέμα της φωτεινότητας δεν υπάρχει πλάσμα που να μην είναι αρκετά φωτεινή για θέαση σε σπίτι κι ας έχεις όλα τα φώτα αναμμένα. Το πρόβλημα δεν είναι στην έλλειψη φωτεινότητας αλλά στις πιθανές αντανακλάσεις ανάλογα με την χωροταξία. Πάντως και σε αυτό τον τομέα η Panasonic τα πάει αρκετά καλά σε σχέση με τις άλλες πλάσμα. Τέλος στην ακρίβεια των χρωμάτων δεν παίζει ρόλο η τεχνολογία οπότε έχουμε ισοπαλία.
Έχουμε ξαναπεί πως τέλεια τηλεόραση δεν υπάρχει οπότε απλά αποφασίζεις τι είδους υποχωρήσεις θα κάνεις. Με βάση αυτά που αναφέρεις οι μόνες LCD που θα εξέταζα είναι οι 9603, LZD85.
Last edited:
Chrisostomos
New member
Να μην ξεχνάμε πως οι τηλεοράσεις Plasma επηρεάζονται ΜΟΝΟ από το φυσικό φως και από δυνατούς λαμπτήρες αλογονου (προβολείς) το οποίο ανακλούν και όχι από το τεχνητό (φωτισμός λαμπτήρων). Για αυτό και στα καταστήματα αναψυχής δεν τις συνιστούμε. Όσον αφορά την TH 37&42 PX80 εδώ και δυο εβδομάδες που της έχω στο κατάστημα και της δοκιμάζω είναι εξαιρετικές και από δυνατότητες προβολής και από δυνατότητες συνδέσεων και λόγο του κόστους είναι η καλύτερη επιλογή αυτή την εποχή στην κατηγόρια τους. Μέσα του αλλού μήνα περιμένουμε και σε FULL HD αντίστοιχα μοντέλα τα οποία θα έχουν και SRS surround. Από το στρατόπεδο τον LCD μέσα του μήνα περιμένουμε και την νέα σειρά Panasonic αλλά όλοι φέτος έχουν στραμμένα τα μάτια τους στο Αύγουστο και στην Pioneer που θα παρουσιάσει για πρώτη φορά LCD από 26’’ μέχρι 37’’.
Είμαι ο λιγότερο ειδικός να κρίνω (και να σε κρίνω
) αλλά δεν θα συμφωνούσα με αυτό. Η plasma είναι στα 16bit ενώ οι LCD στα 10bit, καλύτερη.Είμαι ο λιγότερο ειδικός να κρίνω (και να σε κρίνω
Ουτε εγω ειμαι ειδικος αλλα το παραπανω μου φαινεται λιγο αοριστο...
Μιλας για επεξεργαστες ή για panel? Και αν μιλας για panel... για ποια μοντελα και απο τα δυο στρατοπεδα αναφερεσαι...? :drummer:
Chrisostomos
New member
Το ξανάλεω. Plasma ή LCD και οι δυο τεχνολογίες την ίδια δουλεία κάνουν. Φέρνουν στα μάτια μας εικόνα. Απλά το καύσιμο αλλάζει.. Όλα τα αυτοκίνητα το ίδιο πράγμα κάνουν μεταφέροντας ανθρώπους ζώα και αντικείμενα απλά κάποια δουλεύουν με βενζίνη και κάποια με πετρέλαιο . Η συμβουλή μου για κάποιον που θέλει να αγοράσει τηλεόραση είναι : 1ον. Να παει σε μια επώνυμη εταιρία που έχει χρόνια στο παζάρι με καλό όνομα και μεγάλο showroom για να έχει επιλογές. 2ον . Να επιλέξει ένα επώνυμο προϊών που να υποστηρίζετε από μια μεγάλη και αξιόπιστη αντιπροσωπεία στον τόπο του. 3ον . Να αγοράσει αυτό που θα δει και θα του αρέσει και που θα είναι στα μετρά των αναγκών του και της τσέπης του και να μην επηρεασθεί από τον κάθε ξάδερφο και φίλο που λεει ότι γνωρίζει.