Replacing Panasonic plasma ?

[Spanglepants]

I know theres a similar thread but thought my request is slightly different.
Heres my situation - as part of our divorce agreements my ex wife gets to keep a tv and dvd player (she walked out and i have the boys)
My current set up

Living Room -
Panasonic PZ800 50"
Sony Blu Ray home cinema
Sony DVD HD Recorder
Toshiba HD player
Imac (connected to Panny plasma for films and net)

Bedroom-
Panasonic 32" LED
Toshiba HD player

Id like to keep the bedroom gear first off, it will do for when i move

I don't want to get rid of the Blu Ray and dvd players in the living room as I bought them specifically for their use.
Im actually thinking , as much as i love it and the PQ is fantastic, of giving her the plasma. I also think its the main cause of my high electricity bills. Maybe then get a cheap £50 blu ray player to give her as well and I look for a replacement for the living room.

Ive seen Sonys mentioned- -it would be 50-55" - and I don't think Id want to go over £1000

As mentioned i watch a lot off the iMac and also an external hard drive so what tv would i need to do all of this.
Is a smart tv agood idea or should I carry on with the iMac connected?
Popped into John Lewis and they kept pushing LG sets, Id go for a Panasonic but not sure if they're better than the new Sonys?

Sorry its a bit convoluted, hope it makes sense.

[belleair302]

Samsung H 6400 at 48 inches in a great TV and at £700 ticks all of your boxes. Also the Samsung 46 inch F 7000 at a shade under £1000.

[jas xjr]

some recent sony tv's do not seem to be well thought of .

[Defcon5]

Do plasmas really use that much power?

My gf is on maternity leave at the moment and my tv (42in Panasonic Plasma TH42PX80b) is on pretty much all day.

Would man maths justify me buying a new larger LCD? I was looking at the Samsung UE48h6400

I'm also scared I would notice a reduction in image quality/flickering during motion too

[Spanglepants]

Thanks, Im reading some reviews now, haven't heard of the F7000 ill check that one out.

belleair302 said:

Samsung H 6400 at 48 inches in a great TV and at £700 ticks all of your boxes. Also the Samsung 46 inch F 7000 at a shade under £1000.

[Spanglepants]

Oh ok, I saw a Sony W829 (?) in Costco that didn't seem bad for the price.
What was it about them?

jas xjr said:

some recent sony tv's do not seem to be well thought of .

[Spanglepants]

Im going by my electricity bills which seem to be very high seeing as theres only 3 of us in the house now.
Admittedly the computers always on and oldest boy has his X Box on to watch youtube but the Panasonic puts out a lot of heat so Im sure its using more power than than LED

Defcon5 said:

Do plasmas really use that much power?

My gf is on maternity leave at the moment and my tv (42in Panasonic Plasma TH42PX80b) is on pretty much all day.

Would man maths justify me buying a new larger LCD? I was looking at the Samsung UE48h6400

I'm also scared I would notice a reduction in image quality/flickering during motion too

[jas xjr]

Spanglepants said:

Oh ok, I saw a Sony W829 (?) in Costco that didn't seem bad for the price.
What was it about them?

jas xjr said:

some recent sony tv's do not seem to be well thought of .

i read a review on one , an ex display that was for sale at an auction , so a current model. the review totally slated it . it is fairly easy to read up on most things now and i do realise its not always unbiased but if you look at a few review sites or maybe amazon its a useful way to choose things. the auction site was john pye auctions if anyone fancies a look

[varsas]

Defcon5 said:

I'm also scared I would notice a reduction in image quality/flickering during motion too

If anything, an LCD will have less flicker than a plasma, the 'sample and hold' method used to drive LCD's means there should be no flicker at all. An image is displayed until the pixel needs to change. By contrast, Plasma screens light up each pixel for milliseconds at a time. The pixels switch on and off very rapidly, even if the screen image is static so actually it's plasma screens that flicker, LCD's do not. In theory the flicker on a plasma is so fast (up to 600 times/second) you don't notice it, but it depends on the person and the conditions.

Partly due to the sample-and-hold method, and partly because of the slow response of an LCD to switch between on/off (or whatever is required), LCD's do suffer from motion blur. The manifests as reduced resolution during moving images, typically as low as 300 lines. Plasma screens do not suffer this motion blur, but OLED TV's do, despite their pixels being instant, because they also use 'sample-and-hold'

Of course various methods have been designed to fight the inherent weakness of either display, but generally speaking plasma's have a better picture for motion.

[StuH]

If you want LED and can find an ex-dem go for the previous high-end model the w905 - I have a 55" version used primarily for gaming and for LED its about as good as it gets. The more recent 829 took a step backwards as Sony cut corners on the panel. BUT, it's still an LED with the inherent issues compared to plasma such as backlight uniformity, motion blur, poor blacks and local dimming (which can often be perceived as flicker by some people).

I would personally stick with plasma and go for one of the final-gen Panasomic plasma's if you can find one, and yes they do use a lot more power. You only have to stand next to my Panasonic to feel the heat coming off it! But the image really does spank that of an LED. I'm not sure LED will ever match plasma image quality (i had a recent dem of the latest Sammy 4k 8500 and it was still a long way short of plasma for HD) so hopefully LG will persevere with OLED development.

http://www.techradar.com/reviews/audio-visual/tele...

http://www.techradar.com/reviews/audio-visual/tele...