Panasonic LCD or PLasma ?

[admin_exported]

Okay, I know this subject is probably the most boring subject imaginable to most of you, but does anyone know if there's a review of the merits / other of the new Panasonic 37" LCD ( LX37LZD70) and the 37" plasma ?

My viewing is very conservative ( boring ! ) - freeview, sky, the odd movie, and plenty of rugby league....or even the odd episode of the Jonny Wilkinson show.....swing low sweet chaaaarrrriiiioooootttt......etc...(LOL)

So the simple question is.....Panny - LCD or plasma ? Any views / experience appreciated.

Ray

 

[Anonymous]

Plasma is better for motion and contrast which equates to Rugby and watching England kick either Argentina or South Africa in the final. Your choice to make! Don't worry about panel life. They'll both outlive you! By the one you prefer. I'd buy the plasma.

 

[Clare Newsome]

We've seen both sets. The plasma's better value, and much better- as Will so rightly points out- with sport and movies, due to superior motion-handling and contrast.

However, that isn't to say some superb LCDs aren't better than some bad plasmas - it's still more to do with the sets in question than the technology involved.

 

[Anonymous]

That rounds it off! I always forget the key bits, such as a little qualification in the comment. Nice one Clare!

 

[Anonymous]

Hi, I am also trying to make the decision between the two 37" Panasonics right now. I was edging towards the plasma, but yesterday I had the opportunity to view them both side by side displaying the same content, both via component feed. Admittedly it was in Currys (Rochdale branch), so they weren't setup well, and the ridiculous placement of other shelves meant I couldn't get further than 5 feet away from them, but...

I looked for, in particular, black levels and motion handling. Given that the Samsung and Sony LCDs make me go slightly cross-eyed when viewing fast-moving images, I expected the same from the Pana LCD. Not so. Using the demo feed (cycling through an assortment of SD and HD content) I honestly could not see a difference in terms of motion handling. CAVEAT: Those demo feeds suspiciously avoid anything that moves really fast, whereas Clare and Will have no doubt viewed all sorts on it. Nonetheless, the 100hz appeared to make a huge difference in that regard over other LCDs I've looked at. The black levels were also really good - much more detail. More generally, the LCD just made the plasma look washed out - the LCD did proper black and proper white, the plasma didn't. When the harsh Currys screen came up (bright red with a white box) the difference in the definition of the edges of the box was noticeable, the LCD again looking sharper. I did turn down the settings on both, but couldn't get the plasma to look much better. I'll look forward to the head to head test, but right now I'm leaning towards the LCD, even taking into account the fact that it will have to wait an extra month or so due to the higher cost.

EDIT: Seen it for £867 online. Woohoo! http://www.digitaldirect.co.uk/products_moreinfo3/index.asp?product_id=13917#Scene_1

 

[Anonymous]

How do the new generation of LCDs compare (100Hz)? For example, Philips 42PFL9632/9732, Sony X3500, Samsung LE40F86BDX, Toshiba Z series? I know they've put a lot of work into motion handling and better blacks. The gap between LCD and Plasma seems to be narrowing, though I would need to be convinced on SD... I saw a 9632 yesterday and it made all the other displays (including Plasmas) look a little more 'washed out'. I didn't see fast-moving action of any kind, though, and the blacks were not quite as dark as the M86 and F86 (I haven't seen the F86, but its predecessor the M86 has awesome blacks).