What a deal!!

[mbucari1]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16889102183

What do you guys think, a steal for $1500?

[Skiz]

Doesn't seem all that to me.

Plasmas are notorious for having easy burn-in. A friend of mine bought one and left his running overnight on the news channel just shortly after purchasing it. He now has a burned in line across the bottom where the news flashes go across the bottom.

Plus, they get pretty bad reflection since they have a glass front as opposed to the diffused look of the LCDs.

That price also isn't that rare. Their original listing of $2500 is the highest on the net.

I'm kicking around the idea of buying this - http://www.target.com/Philips-1080P-LCD-HDTV-47PFL3603D/dp/B0018MANWE/sr=1-1/qid=1236418325/ref=sr_1_1/182-3403700-8142802?ie=UTF8&frombrowse=0&index=target&field-browse=1038598&rh=k%3Aphilips&page=1

[mbucari1]

Burn-in can be fixed. In fact, most plasmas have a function for that built in to them.

The link you posted is 3" smaller (granted, that's not much) and has a much lower contrast ratio. I've seen 30000:1 and 1000000:1, the difference is staggering.

[Skiz]

Really? I've read on several HD type websites that unless you'll be viewing your TV in absolute darkness, contrast ratio is the one statistic that should be completely ignored.

[mbucari1]

Go to a place like hifibuys or frys and look at the TVs. They're usually setup in dimmed rooms, not completely dark, but you can still see a very big difference.

[Skiz]

I've done all that, but I really don't see the big difference in the contrast ratios with closely priced TVs. TBH, I'll prolly end up buying one of the $800 Vizios or something. They seem too good to pass up and the majority of reviews around the web are positive. :)

[Broken]

I own a Vizio plasma.

Had it about a year, no complaints.
Lots of compliments from company on the picture quality.

[Detale]

I'd still stay away from Plasma's for now. It is a good deal though.

[colt45joe]

plasmas are the best tho.

[KFlint]

Sounds like a good deal to me

It hurts a bit when i remember paying 2000$ 3 years ago for my samsung 50'' plasma (720p), these units are found for less than 1000$ now :dabs:

But when I look at it closer, I'm not sure I would enjoy an 1080p plasma much more. I read couple review saying the difference with 720p was not easily noticeable on less than 52'' TV.

As for the burning, after 3 years, mine is nearly immune to stamping, I never have to clean the screen... Of course, keeping it open all night would be hurtful.

In the end, I like my TV

[lynx]

There's no defined standard for contrast ratios, so they can claim almost anything they want.

In fact, there are so few panel manufacturers you can probably find the same panel on different brands with contrast ratios of 10000:1, 20000:1 and 30000:1.

Samsung's equivalent European model is advertised as having a contrast ration of 30000:1, probably because they can't get away with quoting "Dynamic" contrast ratio here.

[Sanka113]

Burn-in is basically non-existent on todays plasmas under normal use. Now, if you have something static on your screen for 24 hours, then, burn-in could take place. Even, then it's highly fixable. A good plasma easily beats an lcd across the board. Kepp in mind i said good plasma. I don't think Samsung is as good as the Panny's or LG's yet when it comes to plasma.

[brotherdoobie]

I bought a 42 inch Panasonic plasma in Feb of this year for $750.00 dollars. I love it.

I haven't had an issue with burn in. Burn in is so 2000 and late, ffs.

My neighbor Ron bought a Sony 40 inch lcd for twice the price I paid for my plasma. He swears by it. It's Okay.
I prefer plasma over lcd; however, I've seen good quality televisions produced by both technologies. To each their own, and stuff.


-doobs

[vivitron 15]

The link you posted is 3" smaller (granted, that's not much)

I always find this an interesting concept - the difference in area between screens of diagonal size A and B is:
(A/B)^2

So, the difference between a 50" and a 47" is an increase in screen area of 13% - which I think is quite a lot

[brotherdoobie]

The link you posted is 3" smaller (granted, that's not much)

I always find this an interesting concept - the difference in area between screens of diagonal size A and B is:
(A/B)^2

So, the difference between a 50" and a 47" is an increase in screen area of 13% - which I think is quite a lot

Agreed. It's nice to see you're still alive, man.


FFS, where have you been?


-doobs

[vivitron 15]

Howdy.

I've been around a little bit. Spent a good year or so awol (ventured into the real world - scary!), and been reading but not really posting for a few months now. Rarely get time to dl anymore, let alone talk about it!

[SelfMadeMMAn]

Hey skiz, I used to work at Target [2nd job] and in electronics, thus I got to play with all the TVs, DVD/BR players, game consoles, Ect. Me personally, I think this http://www.target.com/Sony-Bravia-1080p-LCD-KDL46S4100/dp/B001762JDC/qid=1246334566/ref=br_1_12/177-7747947-4598123?ie=UTF8&node=14071091&frombrowse=1&rh=&page=1 is better as far as picture, sound, ease of and more features. Not to mention, I became so impressed with it, my game room is home to one.