View Single Post
05-12-2012, 05:14 PM
Registered User
hockeyball's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 19,187
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Stickmata View Post
LCDs are all the rage because they are much cheaper to make and sell at every quality level. Plasma died not because of quality, but primarily because of price competitiveness. For the most part, the only plasma's remaining are lower quality models that can be made cheaply to compete with LCDs. Not fair to really compare those units to the best LED/LCDs.

There are a few, just a few, high end plasma TVs still out there that offer picture quality that is equal to or better than the best LED/LCDs.
Couple other small reasons. Plasma's 'refresh' rate (which is an inaccurate statement in itself, it's really phase change) can not match LCD's (LED is still LCD, its just LED backlighting instead of fluorescent). So you don't see 120hz/240hz stuff on plasma's (which many do not like anyway). Also, for the same reason, 3d is generally better on LCD (not that I care).

The main reasons plasma is superior in pure picture quality though is simple:

1) LCD's use a square pixel grid, plasma cells are round (or more complex polygons), so curves and so forth look more natural on plasma.

2) Plasma's create their own light. Each cell produces light, whereas LCD's have a backlight. So even when an LCD pixel is 'off' light is still leaking through from behind. When a plasma cell is 'off', its off. This makes for dramatically improved contrast and black levels.

They both have their advantages for different reasons, but if you are looking for pure image quality (especially still frame) you can't beat plasma.

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote