By odd fortune, my Sharp 52" panel (LC52LE700UN) has a minor defect that my extended Sharp warranty says it's not cost effective to repair. So they are giving me two non-repair options of either replacing mine with their comperable model out now (LC52LE820UN), or giving me the cash equivalent of $1300. After reading up on it, I figured what the hell, why not just take the cash and upgrade. I'm locked into getting a size no bigger than a 55" for our entertainment center, and I'm not looking to spend any more then $1500-$1600. With that in mind, I decided to just go ahead and get a 3D. So I'm looking at these models, and I wanted to know if anyone has any of these, or if you had the choice, which way you'd go. I was jotting notes, and this is what I found. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
- Sony BRAVIA KDL55HX800 - (02/19/10), great customer comments but over a year old model
- Samsung UN55C7000 - (02/15/10), cloudy picture, motion judder issue from one comment
- VIZIO XVT3D554SV (10/29/10), great comments
06-15-11, 06:40 PM
I would take the Panny because it is plasma.
06-15-11, 06:50 PM
The LG looks fantastic on 2D HD, and has a ton of stuff built in (netflix, web browser, etc). It uses a passive 3D system that uses the same cheap glasses that the theaters use, and comes with 4 pair. The 3D resolution is reduced, but it looks pretty cool...(I'm not a fan of 3D at all)
06-15-11, 07:07 PM
Thanks. I am thinking about that Panny, but I'm still on the fence about plasma in general. I game a lot, so I'm worried about any kind of burn-in. Are those kinds of issues still going on? And no, I do not leave stuff frozen on TV for a long time. Just wondering what the drawback is about plasma, and how long they last in comparison with LED/LCD. In regards to the LG, that one looks nice as well, but I know for a fact I wouldn't ever use those widgets, so those aren't a big draw for me.
And can anyone shed light on the whole active/passive thing? I read up and as far as I can tell, active uses those shutter glasses and the picture is better than passive, which uses the glasses we use in the theaters. Am I sacrificing a lot in terms of PQ with a passive set?
06-15-11, 10:19 PM
Shouldn't be an issue anymore about burn-in. The cells on both LCD and plasma will outlast the electronics.
Plasma was going to die and be replaced by the cheaper LCD. Burn-in, large pixels* preventing smaller TVs, and some other issues were to be its end. Then, it was like a tech explosion. They cut the pixels in half, then did it again. They made them more resistant to phosphor burn-in (and designed electronics modes to help), and made the TVs thinner. During all this they managed to drop the price below that of LCD and cut electricity use way down, too. All while improving the picture quality, which was already better than almost anything. It was like, "Where the fuck was all this before?!!??"
So, now we like plasma again. Or still. Although it's sad that Kuro went away. I still haven't seen an LCD that can match a good plasma.
* Did you know the early 42" models were 1024x768, with rectangular pixels to fake widescreen? I can't believe they survived that.
06-15-11, 10:32 PM
Dammit, you tempt me now. I just may go with the Panasonic now. Thanks for all your thoughts. Very interesting about the 1024x768 and the rectangular pixels.
06-16-11, 10:16 AM
I see image retention sometimes on my plasma if I leave the cable guide static for a few minutes and then have a completely black screen after, but it goes away as soon as a new image is displayed. No burn-in problems at all.
06-16-11, 11:45 AM
my Panasonic 50" plasma i picked up early this year has been great. it has a better picture than my 32 inch sony 1080p set
06-16-11, 02:13 PM
I would think size has something to do with the improved picture, ha. I have a question for you, what are your thoughts on the active shutter glasses? Are they a pain in the ass? Work well? This has become a bigger issue for me than the issue of the TV being a plasma now. I was also pondering a passive 3D set because of the glasses.
06-16-11, 09:25 PM
From my experience, you can get some ghosting and cross-talk of images using active 3D, none of that with the passive. Most all sets currently use the active 3D, and the glasses can run up to $180 a pair, vs keeping the ones from the cinema. Tech says that there is less resolution to the passive 3D, but I don't really see it.
06-17-11, 04:21 PM
If you plan to connect a PC, you'll need to step the Panny up to the TC-P55GT30, as the STs don't have a PC input. It's less than $200 more.
06-17-11, 10:16 PM
Thats good to know, but I think I'm passing on the Panasonic only because of the active 3D. With my daughter and multiple family members wanting to see 3D movies, I'm not sure I want to invest in a few hundred additional dollars just to buy the shutter glasses. I had actually decided to buy the Toshiba 55TL515U, but Fry's had the LG Infinia 55LW5600 on sale for $1199, but they sold out of them by the time I got there. I think I'm going to wait for the July 4th sale to see of they have anything else that may be on my list. If not, I think I'm going for the Toshiba.
06-20-11, 01:57 AM
I also own the panasonic tcp50gt25. I dont really game that much. I have to agree with the others that plasma make a better tv in both 2d and 3d picture. the prices for the glasses are coming down. there is a rumor that panasonic is going to release a pair of glasses for 50 bucks or closer to that price in august.
if you live near an rc willeys they are selling the panasonic glasses for 50 bucks for large and a kids size for 30 bucks.