Large Format TV Options? 118
pipingguy asks: "I'm planning to purchase a large screen TV and I'm leaning toward DLP at this time. After doing research on-line, I'm more confused than before. One thing I don't like about DLP is the relatively limited vertical angle for best picture viewing. LCDs don't seem to be as bad in this regard, but my understanding is that LCD is more expensive per inch. What is the current state-of-the-art for DLP? I'd rather buy a smaller TV with a better picture than one with a larger picture that is less appealing to the eye. And what about the thousands of tiny mirrors in DLP units? If these are mechanically moving parts, isn't that a likely source of failure (so says a Sony rep who wanted to sell me a LCD projection TV). Thanks for any advice/experience you can provide."
Consider a Projector (Score:1, Informative)
LCoS (Score:4, Informative)
I bought a Samsung DLP unit, but had to return it due to strobing rainbow effect. It was a really great image, though that was in part because Samsung was doing a very high level of algorithmic sharpening, which can cause halos around some images. But I really couldn't move my eyes across it without seeing the trailing rainbows.
I didn't see this effect in the store at all, but at home the awareness of it really did build up. If you are interested in DLP, you might look at the new units that use high speed LED arrays instead of a high intensity white light bulb to handle the color.. these new ones still flash the colors in sequence, but the sequencing is much faster, and it really and truly is supposed to be below the perceptual threshold for everybody.
I wound up getting a Sony SXRD LCoS set swapped out for the Samsung DLP.. the SXRD was more expensive, but the resolution was higher (true 1920x1280p), with more digital connectors, and better firmware. The SXRD sets are similar to DLP in that they are digital microdisplay projectors, but they use three LCoS color panels instead of a color wheel spinning in front of a micromirror array.
If you want a good place to read heated and informed opinions about the various choices on offer, check out http://www.avsforum.com/ [avsforum.com].
Good luck!
it all depends (Score:2, Informative)
if you are only going to be using this TV as a TV, picture quality is best by far on a plasma. if you might use it with a home theatre PC I would go with an LCD tv. if you want a tv that is going to last a long time i would still go with CRT, or perhaps DLP. if you want a huge screen and dont mind spending hundreds a year on a replacement bulb, go with a projector. if you are going to be watching in the dark and close to the screen all the time an LCD is best on the eyes. if you are going to be watching a TV station with the logo in the corner of the screen all the time or with a bar at the bottom like a newsfeed, then you dont want a plasma screen because of image burn in. if you want something you can carry and move around all by yourself then you want either a projector or an LCD.
my $.02 (Score:3, Informative)
After a ton of research I bought a Sony KF-E50A10 (Score:3, Informative)
I skipped plasma due to the cost and the fact that I felt the picture had the most pronounced screen door effect of any HDTV technology. I liked DLP, but since most HDTVs use a single chip DLP solution there can be a noticable shimmering rainbow effect on the edges of objects during movement as a color wheel must be used to display the full range of colors. I noticed it on several models and decided to skip DLP for the time being and noted that DLP sets will also require costly replacement of their high brightness lamps, just like LCD. Three chip DLP sets, one DLP chip for each of the primary colors, red, gree and blue, would eliminate the rainbow edge effect, but don't expect anything like that for less than $30,000. At some point three chip DLP will be standard, but it will be a while. I really liked the CRT rear projection sets I looked at and they were several hundred dollars less than LCD, plasma or DLP, but everyone I talked to that had one found that picture convergence was a problem (more so than SD rear projection TVs) and that static picture burn-in could be an issue (although I am told that doesn't happen anymore). Also, CRT rear projection TVs are heavier and bulkier than LCD or DLP.
I don't know about the overall reliability of DLP, but I do have a DLP projector that is a few years old and haven't noticed any loss of picture quality or missing pixels. If the quality of the SD picture wasn't as good as it was on the Sony, I would have bought a DLP TV, but nothing I saw with the DLP technology matched the quality of the SD picture from Sony. I don't think that's a limitation of the DLP technology itself so much as Sony finding the best method to display an SD quality picture on a HDTV.
I went DLP... (Score:2, Informative)
My friends that went with plasmas are now on their second TVs and a couple have had heat issues with their newer units ($5k Pioneer & Toshiba units, vintage 2005, no less). Anyone that recommends plasma needs to get one and use it as a computer monitor for a few months. What you end up with is an image that is no longer as bright, and lovely screen burn in which isn't covered by the manufacturer's warranty (Remember that you're bombarding phosphorus on a plexi/glass plane).
As for LCD, I have heard a number of complaints about the viewing angle in mixed lighting. Colors morph as you rotate about the unit in a sunlit room. DLP too has issues with this sort of motion, but they are limited to the luminosity and not the hue of the picture (This is much less annoying and needs some getting used to).
LCD also has issues with bad pixels - It is bound to happen on any size screen based on the number of transistors that are backing the viewing pane (Usually 3 per pixel). The latency of LCD technology also causes a "ghosting" effect to manifest itself with fast-paced action shots. Manufacturers have put out displays that are much faster in the past couple of years but they are still a ways from making the overall problem disappear.
If I were chosing a TV today, I would go with DLP again.
I am looking forward to OLEDs being used in big screens: They're thin, much brighter, lighter, more flexible and less intrusive...
What I found out... (Score:1, Informative)
LCD pixels burn out - a few aren't a big deal, more get annoying.... LCDs are thinner. (4-5 inches) Typically a 180 degree viewing angle.
Plasma is best for larger screens - 60 inches plus, but Plasma gas leaks over time causing dulling - replace your TV time.
I have a 42 inch SONY WEGA - retails around $1500-$1800 right now - I love it and am happy to have saved over $800 over an LCD or Plasma.
Good Luck.
AVS Forum (Score:4, Informative)
Re:DLP (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Conventional tube TVs (Score:3, Informative)
dlp latency for games (Score:1, Informative)
Providing a digital input signal cut that by half, but it can be still hard to play fast-reaction time games, and requires component video cables and progressive-scan output support from your game and console.
It seems that DLP technology necessarily lags video processing, the additional lag for analog is for deinterlacing which affects all HDTVs, although some HDTVs provide "game modes" which cut out deinterlacing lag. Not this Samsung DLP however.
Be aware that the audio is "artificially" delayed to match the video in these TVs, which you can tell by hooking your game console audio directly to a stereo. Doing this can help play music games, even though what you hear will be out of sync with what you see, it will be in sync with the game console which is judging you.
Projection LCD warning (Score:1, Informative)
Re:What I found out... (Score:3, Informative)
What? No [howstuffworks.com]. Plasma displays use phosphors to generate color, just like a CRT. Also, just like a CRT, those phosphors decay over time. They're prone to burn-in, just like a CRT. Think of a plasma display like a mix between CRT and LCD. You have a grid of individual subpixels just like an LCD, but those sub pixels are are made up of light-emitting phosphors just like a CRT. How those phosphors are energized is different (that's where the plasma comes in to play), but the ultimate effect is the same -- the set is generating color through the use of a consumable substance, and over time that substance will be consumed. ("consumable" isn't the right word, but it gets the idea across.)
If plasma displays use the same technology as CRTs, why do they have a much shorter half-life? I don't know, but I would suspect the main culprit is user error. You'll get very long life with no risk of burn-in if you properly calibrate a CRT (get it out of the factory-default torch-mode contrast, if nothing else), and I suspect you'd get the same from a plasma. However, proper calibration tends to mute brightness and colors (actually bringing them down to correct, realistic levels), and that's the last thing a new plasma owner wants if he was sold on the "vibrant" and "rich" color of the display (never mind that it's all way overblown and needs to be adjusted down to look good, never mind for the health of the display).
Re:After a ton of research I bought a Sony KF-E50A (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Went through this myself (Score:3, Informative)
I don't plan on buying a TV in the traditional sense next - I'm going to get a projector instead. They're portable, the viewing angle is never a consideration (since all the light is reflected to the viewer) and you can get as big a picture as you could possibly desire. There's nothing quite like watching a Monday night football game on the side of your neighbor's house!
Re:After a ton of research I bought a Sony KF-E50A (Score:2, Informative)
If you can afford it, the Sony LCos is even better, but at $3300 in 50", I could not justify it.
No 1080p inputs yet (Score:3, Informative)
Save your pennies until this fall if this feature is of value to you.
Video compression (Score:3, Informative)
If you're getting blocking artifacts during periods of high motion, then it probably has 0 to do with your TV. It's more is likely to be a video compression problem. It takes more bits to represent a rapidly changing scene, and if there aren't enough bits, you get blocks. Are you watching digital cable, satellite, or cheap DVD? Some channels, especially less popular ones, tend to be sent overcompressed.
I'm guessing that a lot of people who get a plasma TV tend to upgrade to digital cable or satellite at the same time and find that HDTV compression isn't a mature technology yet.