Flatscreen tv - Plasma or LCD. Which one is better?

[PJ S]

Well if that's the size you're looking for, your question doesn't exist unless they've old stock of the only 32" Plasma made - by LG.
In real world terms, due to the difference in how the two technologies produce an image on the panel, they are pretty much on a par with one another, even though the headline figures for power consumption would make you think LCD is a good bit more efficient.

[PJ S]

No difference there either - both are rated for 60,000 hours until the screen is only half as bright as it can be, and iirc, the NEO plasma panels in the G/V/Z range from Panny, are 100K hours.

[PJ S]

Only on link though, so no idea what the second one is, but nonetheless.....
The Hitachi uses a very good LCD panel, but you'll gain nothing from it having a full compliment of pixels for Full HD, unless you sit about 4' from it while watching a Blu-Ray movie.
They also make a bit of noise about being so thin, they can't fit a tuner in it - okay, it's not LED backlit like the new Samsung LED TV's are, but if they can manage to design a tuner for Freeview, LG could've if they wanted to!
So, this makes the TV a bit limited, if you pipe the output of the Sky/Virgin box upstairs, since you'll be stuck watching the same channel.

For not much more, go with the Panny Plasma -http://www.richersounds.com/product/plasma-tv/panasonic/viera-txp37x10/pana-txp37x10 - which does have a Freeview tuner in-built, and a better picture too.

[PJ S]

Then surely she's worth the extra £50 for the Panny?

[Simpo Two]

When I eventually upgrade, I'm going for LED.




Then you'll all be sorry, plasmaboys