Plasma or LCD TV?

Two years ago, the choice was clear. Just by comparing their response times, Plasma television sets won hands down, never mind the burn-ins. LCD TVs were simply too slow and left streaks of image blurs when viewing action movies. Fast forward to today. Have things changed?

The response time problem for LCD television is no longer an issue, with some models (in particular Sharp Aquos) even boasting a remarkable 4ms in their specifications. Although Plasma TVs still have more vivid colors, LCDs have surpassed them in terms of viewing angles. Some LCD models even have wider viewing angles than the typical 170 degrees that Plasmas offer. The Sony Bravia, for example, offers a 178-degree viewing angle.

LCD models have a longer lifespan of 65,000 hours, almost twice longer than that of Plasmas. To be fair, a few Plasmas also claim to have a 60k-hour lifespan, but these are the exception rather than the norm. Moreover, LCD TVs have replaceable fluorescent tubes, allowing for even longer extended operation. In contrast, there's nothing in Plasmas that can be easily and affordably replaced.

Finally, Plasma TVs are in general a lot heavier than LCD TVs, and Plasmas still suffer from burn-ins (images get permanently etched on the screen when left displayed for too long). Price-wise, both are on par. LCDs have the added advantage of being more energy efficient. So, all other things equal, I will definitely go for an LCD. Won't you?



Post a Comment

Related Posts with Thumbnails

Wallpapers And News Blog Copyright © 2010 Designed by Imran Yousaf, Sulman Yousaf