I bought a Panasonic Plasma TV
Since a lot of hours has went into this decision I thought I'd use this post to outline my reasons for settling on this particular TV.
First, the TV is this one: Panasonic VIERA Plasma TC-P42ST30 42" 3DTV
Amazon link Panasonic web site
First, I mostly use a TV for video games. I occasionally watch TV but this is so infrequent that I didn't really consider it heavily.
Second, I mostly use my TV late at night. My significant other works during the day so presumably she'd use it more in the evening as well. I guess we might use it during the weekend days.
Based on what we know about the rooms (I'm moving a lot right now), the living room will be about 12' long, so, after you take into account the furniture, we can sit around 5-6' from the TV. This apparently is a decent range for a 42" TV so that's what I settled on. Unfortunately I don't know how the lighting is going to be, but since my partner is learning to sew hopefully we can use curtains if it's really too bright.
The first decision really was LCD vs. LCD w/ LED backlighting vs. plasma.
A friend of mine really swears by plasma because it has good refresh rates, good colours, and really good black levels. Going to the store, I basically got the same from most of the salespeople, but I have a feeling that people at Best Buy or Future Shop are a little bit bound by selling certain models and thus push particular types of TVs over other ones. Most of the hardcore home theatre Internet forums appear to generally agree that plasma TVs have better colours, better refresh, less ghosting, and better black levels.
That said, LCD/LED TVs are coming very close with respect to black levels, and many have really low refresh - but it sounds like this is a bit of a compromise.
LCD/LED TVs are really thin and they are light. Much lighter than plasma. No argument. They also use less energy. This was a little bit of a factor but not a massive one.
LCD/LED TVs are much, much brighter than plasmas. This was a consideration but considering our patterns of use, I think that we can settle with the darker levels. Apparently plasmas are basically meant to be used in a dark room - having sunlight shine on the screen makes it really really annoying to watch. Most people therefore recommend LCD or LED screens if your living room is very bright. My friend joked that since Corvallis is cloudy all the time, we don't have to worry about that anyway.
Plasma TVs are cheaper than LED TVs and are similar to LCD TVs. This wasn't ever a main motivating issue but it's a nice bonus.
Plasma TVs are somewhat susceptible to burn-in issues. However, I hear that this is mostly a thing of the past, and that newer models of the TVs basically don't suffer from this anymore.
As for colour calibration, apparently, there's about a 100-150 hour break-in period that the hardcore plasma TV watchers recommend that you do when you get the TV - you grab some solid-colour slides and then play them on the TV for 100 hours or more. Then, you can calibrate the set according to this one expert's recommendation (D-Nice's Panasonic Settings). It basically makes the plasma TV look nice and prevents uneven colour settings.
So, the basic summary of LCD vs LED vs Plasma:
0) Note that LCD and LED are basically the same display technology with different backlighting. LED tends to be a little brighter, thinner, and more energy-efficient. They are also occasionally susceptible to "light-bleeding" issues if you're using local dimming, where parts of the screen aren't really as dark as they should be. Still, overall they're really good sets but it's less LCD vs LED and more CCFL LCD vs LED LCD.
1) Plasmas are cheaper than LCDs (usually).
2) LCDs are brighter than plasma and are therefore easier to set up in bright rooms.
3) Plasmas have overall better colour quality, refresh rates, and black levels than LCDs.
4) Viewing angle for both types is a non-issue.
5) Plasma TVs are bigger, thicker, and heavier than LCDs.
6) Plasmas require a 100-hour break-in period to prevent image burn-in.
As a consequence (mostly regarding picture quality) I've decided to go with Plasma.
Once this decision is made the brand and model become relevant. Basically, there are only two manufacturers that you would consider for plasma TVs: Samsung, and Panasonic.
I went with the Panasonic TV because they have a better reputation throughout the Internet, and also a lot of customer support according to forums. They are also reasonably inexpensive. Also, my friend's TV is a Panasonic, and my existing TV is a Panasonic (though my LCD monitor is a Samsung) so I have some brand loyalty going on here.
In the 42" range, there's two Panasonic TVs: the S30 and the ST30. The models are very similar but there are a few differences.
1) ST30 is 3D tv enabled. S30 is not.
2) ST30 has a newer panel, the "Infinite Black 2" panel. This is the same panel that was used in the 2010 VT30 series - VT is one of the premium Panasonic TV lines. Basically, there's a light filter on the front of the TV that reduces glare and reflection and improves black levels. It also has reduced cross-talk, is more energy efficient, and has better phosphors.
3) ST30 has fewer ports
4) ST30 has more calibration settings
5) ST30 is about $50 more expensive than the S30.
6) Both of them are Internet-enabled and have applications and stuff. This isn't really that important, but apparently it's handy to have Netflix built into your TV.
Considering that you get a newer, better panel with the ST30, that was what made me decide to go with it instead of the S30 which is more of an introductory TV set. The $50 overall was really much too small to make a fuss over. I don't know why the ST30 is so cheap. Its MSRP is $1250 or so, whereas the MSRP of the S30 is roughly $800. The percentage discount was something like 43% for the ST30 and about 26% for the S30. I don't really plan to use the 3D feature on the TV so that might end up going to waste (I won't buy glasses) but $50 for a better light filter on the front of the TV to ensure that you have better blacks is probably worth it.
I read recently that with the way that TVs are going now, 2D TVs are becoming entry-level and that you won't be able to get a quality TV nowadays that's only 2D. They're putting all of the new technology into the 3D sets. Therefore, even if you're not going to be using 3D, the 2D image is still going to benefit. Personally, since the difference in price was minimal ($50) I figured that the panel + 3D was worth the price.
So that's what led me to the Panasonic VIERA TC-P42ST30. I'll see how the TV works when I actually get it, I hope I'll be home since I do have a bunch of meetings early next week when the TV is supposed to arrive.
First, the TV is this one: Panasonic VIERA Plasma TC-P42ST30 42" 3DTV
Amazon link Panasonic web site
First, I mostly use a TV for video games. I occasionally watch TV but this is so infrequent that I didn't really consider it heavily.
Second, I mostly use my TV late at night. My significant other works during the day so presumably she'd use it more in the evening as well. I guess we might use it during the weekend days.
Based on what we know about the rooms (I'm moving a lot right now), the living room will be about 12' long, so, after you take into account the furniture, we can sit around 5-6' from the TV. This apparently is a decent range for a 42" TV so that's what I settled on. Unfortunately I don't know how the lighting is going to be, but since my partner is learning to sew hopefully we can use curtains if it's really too bright.
The first decision really was LCD vs. LCD w/ LED backlighting vs. plasma.
A friend of mine really swears by plasma because it has good refresh rates, good colours, and really good black levels. Going to the store, I basically got the same from most of the salespeople, but I have a feeling that people at Best Buy or Future Shop are a little bit bound by selling certain models and thus push particular types of TVs over other ones. Most of the hardcore home theatre Internet forums appear to generally agree that plasma TVs have better colours, better refresh, less ghosting, and better black levels.
That said, LCD/LED TVs are coming very close with respect to black levels, and many have really low refresh - but it sounds like this is a bit of a compromise.
LCD/LED TVs are really thin and they are light. Much lighter than plasma. No argument. They also use less energy. This was a little bit of a factor but not a massive one.
LCD/LED TVs are much, much brighter than plasmas. This was a consideration but considering our patterns of use, I think that we can settle with the darker levels. Apparently plasmas are basically meant to be used in a dark room - having sunlight shine on the screen makes it really really annoying to watch. Most people therefore recommend LCD or LED screens if your living room is very bright. My friend joked that since Corvallis is cloudy all the time, we don't have to worry about that anyway.
Plasma TVs are cheaper than LED TVs and are similar to LCD TVs. This wasn't ever a main motivating issue but it's a nice bonus.
Plasma TVs are somewhat susceptible to burn-in issues. However, I hear that this is mostly a thing of the past, and that newer models of the TVs basically don't suffer from this anymore.
As for colour calibration, apparently, there's about a 100-150 hour break-in period that the hardcore plasma TV watchers recommend that you do when you get the TV - you grab some solid-colour slides and then play them on the TV for 100 hours or more. Then, you can calibrate the set according to this one expert's recommendation (D-Nice's Panasonic Settings). It basically makes the plasma TV look nice and prevents uneven colour settings.
So, the basic summary of LCD vs LED vs Plasma:
0) Note that LCD and LED are basically the same display technology with different backlighting. LED tends to be a little brighter, thinner, and more energy-efficient. They are also occasionally susceptible to "light-bleeding" issues if you're using local dimming, where parts of the screen aren't really as dark as they should be. Still, overall they're really good sets but it's less LCD vs LED and more CCFL LCD vs LED LCD.
1) Plasmas are cheaper than LCDs (usually).
2) LCDs are brighter than plasma and are therefore easier to set up in bright rooms.
3) Plasmas have overall better colour quality, refresh rates, and black levels than LCDs.
4) Viewing angle for both types is a non-issue.
5) Plasma TVs are bigger, thicker, and heavier than LCDs.
6) Plasmas require a 100-hour break-in period to prevent image burn-in.
As a consequence (mostly regarding picture quality) I've decided to go with Plasma.
Once this decision is made the brand and model become relevant. Basically, there are only two manufacturers that you would consider for plasma TVs: Samsung, and Panasonic.
I went with the Panasonic TV because they have a better reputation throughout the Internet, and also a lot of customer support according to forums. They are also reasonably inexpensive. Also, my friend's TV is a Panasonic, and my existing TV is a Panasonic (though my LCD monitor is a Samsung) so I have some brand loyalty going on here.
In the 42" range, there's two Panasonic TVs: the S30 and the ST30. The models are very similar but there are a few differences.
1) ST30 is 3D tv enabled. S30 is not.
2) ST30 has a newer panel, the "Infinite Black 2" panel. This is the same panel that was used in the 2010 VT30 series - VT is one of the premium Panasonic TV lines. Basically, there's a light filter on the front of the TV that reduces glare and reflection and improves black levels. It also has reduced cross-talk, is more energy efficient, and has better phosphors.
3) ST30 has fewer ports
4) ST30 has more calibration settings
5) ST30 is about $50 more expensive than the S30.
6) Both of them are Internet-enabled and have applications and stuff. This isn't really that important, but apparently it's handy to have Netflix built into your TV.
Considering that you get a newer, better panel with the ST30, that was what made me decide to go with it instead of the S30 which is more of an introductory TV set. The $50 overall was really much too small to make a fuss over. I don't know why the ST30 is so cheap. Its MSRP is $1250 or so, whereas the MSRP of the S30 is roughly $800. The percentage discount was something like 43% for the ST30 and about 26% for the S30. I don't really plan to use the 3D feature on the TV so that might end up going to waste (I won't buy glasses) but $50 for a better light filter on the front of the TV to ensure that you have better blacks is probably worth it.
I read recently that with the way that TVs are going now, 2D TVs are becoming entry-level and that you won't be able to get a quality TV nowadays that's only 2D. They're putting all of the new technology into the 3D sets. Therefore, even if you're not going to be using 3D, the 2D image is still going to benefit. Personally, since the difference in price was minimal ($50) I figured that the panel + 3D was worth the price.
So that's what led me to the Panasonic VIERA TC-P42ST30. I'll see how the TV works when I actually get it, I hope I'll be home since I do have a bunch of meetings early next week when the TV is supposed to arrive.