Ben's Bargains Serving Fresh Deals 24/7

cant believe i paid $1640 bucks for a panny 50" 720p about 2 years ago.

1.5 year ago, i paid $1918 bucks for a sammy 50" 720p.

now its so el cheapo. probably wont be surprised if these 50" 720p hit as low as $499. lol

Do you still prefer plasma or do you think the LCD and LED TVs are better "bang for the buck".

I picked up the Sammy PN50B450 720P from fry's for $734 free s/h and no tax, I'm sure black friday will have deals for these sub-600 by then...

"Panny" and "Sammy."
Calling Dr. Toddsucks.

I still favor the look and feel of plasma over LCD for my media room. I happen to own this tv and it is a fantastic device.

When i upgrade to 1080p, i will still be seeking plasma.

Reasons:
1. my media room is dark and i don't have to worry about reflections.
2. lcd looks like a bunch of line-drawn shapes instead of images.
3. 120 refresh looks absolutely ghastly.
4. plasma has no ghosting.
5. plasma color is rich and more 'true'.
6. plasma is better for gaming (opinion, of course). my PS3, Xbox360 and Wii all look great on it.
7. there is no such thing as pixel-burn anymore- that went away with horse-drawn wagons.
8. plasma eats a bit more electric, but not enough to make lcd appealing.

I have no opinion on the LED tvs as yet.

Plasma rocks, i have a G10. i hear mixed reviews on newegg shipping of TVs, i went with amazon. Also, newegg's return policy on TVs is rather scary. Look into it.

#5 I thought Plasmas used less electricity than LCDs because they don't need to light up black areas (which increases contrast ratio, as well). Maybe it uses more vampire power?

Yo #7, you the real sugarbear?

here's a chart. I don't know which part of plasma's process consumes the electricity, but they seem to eat more than lcd. but, like I said, not enough to get me into an lcd.

http://reviews.cnet.com/green-tech/tv-consumption-chart/

(i hope the bacon filter doesn't care)

There is no one universal answer. I recently got a Sammy LCD LN52B750 and like it a lot. The Panny G10 was runner up. There is a newer model X10 that may be better than the G10.

Sammy
Pros: Brighter punchier image (absolutely stunning IMHO), less reflective, 240Hz adds a more 3 dimensional effect (I like most of the time), uses less juice, no burn in issues, 2 inches bigger than the Panny.
Negs: 240hz can cause artifacts or undesirable effects but is very tunable (blur and dejudder are separate) and can be turned off altogether if desired, some like some don't, narrower viewing angles but not a prob for me, network related things can be sluggish, some complain of IR remote interference for some other devices depending on back lighting levels (I don't experience this).

Panny (never owned so may be missing some things)
Pros: was cheaper by $500, has wider viewing angles, higher contrast, deeper blacks.
Negs: Plasma whites aren't very white, not good in bright rooms or with windows or bright lights behind the viewing location due to reflections, Some feel the colors are washed out, I find plasma pictures to be noisy, Burn in is still an issue although improved (the initial break in period is crucial), plasma repairs tend to cost twice as much as LCD, use more juice throw off more heat, altitude sensitive (if you move to the mountains), many companies are getting out of plasma and focusing exclusively on LCD.

Both are good choices but LCD won me over. YMMV

Plasma power consumption depends on contrast/brightness levels, mostly contrast. At my picture settings on last year's model of this TV, power consumption is about the same as the same sized LCD.

In a dark room plasma blows LCD away. Which to buy really depends on environment and how you like your TV picture to look.