Hello there!

I am creating this thread because I found no other which had people discussing only about this very issue: for the same price, should I choose a smaller screen from a big name brand or a bigger screen from a second/third tier brand?

I am myself having to choose right now between a few FPs that seem to fit my needs. I bought a Samsung LN-T4061F (high end LCD of today) two weeks ago and love everything about it but two things; its black level and small size at my viewing distance (8.5 ft.).

For the same price I see that I could get a 50" Hitachi Plasma (P50H40), which would probably fix my two problems with my current TV. However I know that I would probably lose something seeing as Hitachi is not so recommended as a brand for plasmas as Samsung is for LCDs.

So I am wondering: should I take this kind of risk and go for something bigger at the same price? What do I risk? I really don't feel like exchanging my Samsung only to come back to it.

Of course waiting is another option since I already have a small 32" Samsung that is too small at my viewing distance for immersion but that could still do the job for a few months until I save more money and prices go down. But in a few months I'll probably still face the same dilemma with new models....

So, what do you people have to say about that? Did you settle for something bigger from a more generic company or for something smaller from one of the big brands? Are you satisfied with your choice? Did you try many FPs before making this choice?

Don't hesitate to talk about your own experience with particular brands because this will probably help me and others make our choices...

Ok, I'll bite.
This subject has been handled in the past by
more experienced posters than I, but here
goes:

First, I think Broc pulled the trigger too soon or
is suffering a serious case of buyer's remorse
since comparing LCD vs larger Plasma is like
comparing a Toyota Corolla to a Dodge Caravan-
they both serve two completely different purposes,
it is not just a quality issue.

For a full discussion of LCD vs Plasma you are better
off doing a forum search & read up on it. As a short
summary, LCD is only a bit more expensive than Plasma
now, is now available in larger sizes, does not suffer from
burn-in potential, is great in high light situations like
living rooms, etc.

Also, according to industry experts, LCD has a brighter
future than plasma, but others may disagree ...
LCD's trump card is that it has an entire "computer monitor"
industry behind it where as Plasma is only TV based.

Take out the plasma issue from your question and I think
it is a great thread discussion for noobs like us.

Question becomes:
Should I buy a top tier 40" LCD or a larger TV from a
2nd/ 3rd tier mfr at the same price, say a 46".

Larger is better, but at a certain point the TV becomes
TOO BIG for the room. In my case I have decided that
46" is my max size - if I won a free 50" LCD in a contest
I would have to put it in another room ! Various charts
exist via this forum to help you determine your best size.

Another important factor is viewing distance and purpose.
If you are a gamer (I am not) then I can see a larger
TV being VERY important so that you can play IN the game
rather than just watch it. If you are just a regular TV /DVD
movie watcher then large size is still important, but not
as critical.


I think the best way to answer your question is to
ask yourself "what is the one CRITICAL thing I want"
and "what is the ONE thing I can give up to get it"

For me, I am willing to give up 1080p to get what I want
since at viewing distance of 7-8 ft I will not see a
difference.
I can upgrade from a 40" to a 42" for free this year, but
pay $$ to get to a 46" size. This is now my delemma


I resist the temptation to go with 3rd tier mfrs since they
have other issues ( old technology - watch out for the
viewing ANGLES - go see the TV, don't go by the spec
sheet; lesser contrast, fewer features, and to me they
don't "look as nice" when turned off = cosmetics )

In a sense, you get what you pay for ! :)

I resist the temptation to go with 3rd tier mfrs since they
have other issues ( old technology - watch out for the
viewing ANGLES - go see the TV, don't go by the spec
sheet; lesser contrast, fewer features, and to me they
don't "look as nice" when turned off = cosmetics )

In a sense, you get what you pay for ! :)

The problem with these is that
- I have a hard time comparing them at the store (lightning conditions, settings etc.)
- I'd love to compare them home but don't like to return sets for the sake of trying them
- Both first tier brands AND 3rd tier brands get GOOD and BAD reviews on the net. You can find a thread about how great LG sets are and another about how the Sony sets suck (and vice versa). That gets confusing and sometimes has me thinking that the reviews have more to do with the expectations of the owners than with the real life performance of the set.

As for needs, I totally understand what you mean and I am at a point where I can get a bigger set and it will fit in the room and improve immersion. HOWEVER I don't feel like sacrificing picture quality and performance for size, hence why I was trying to get an answer here about how the first tier LCD brands like Samsung compete picture wise with the less popular plasma brands like LG and Hitachi. Usually posters here seem to think that plasmas are the way to go but they all buy the top-of-the-line Panasonics and the Pioneers (just take a look at the "Your plasma! Got a new one?" thread).

Thanks for the insight!!!

I think Broc27 needs to narrow down the field a bit.
Suggest you decide LCD vs Plasma first -

Please reply with more specifics about your room conditions
(bright vs dark ; controlled lighting yes/no; daytime vs
nighttime viewing only)
intended usage (TV or DVD or Computer or Gaming, divide
into primary vs secondary usage if possible saying that
you want to have it all is not very helpful ...
max viewing angle is also important - Plasma angle goes
to basically 180 degrees, but with LCDs the top tier sets
max out at about 45-55 degrees when they fade in color
and/or brightness (3rd tier LCD sets fade at much lesser
angles)
This way we we go down a branch rather than discuss the
entire decision tree which would take forever.

Even though I have decided that LCD is best for me,
plasma may actually be your "best bang for the
buck" in your given situation. In doing this you will one
way or another cut your choices in half !

If LCD is your best bet, I can help further; if Plasma is
for you, I have lost track of the details but can help with
the basics ...

I think Broc27 needs to narrow down the field a bit.
Suggest you decide LCD vs Plasma first -

Please reply with more specifics about your room conditions
(bright vs dark ; controlled lighting yes/no; daytime vs
nighttime viewing only)
intended usage (TV or DVD or Computer or Gaming, divide
into primary vs secondary usage if possible saying that
you want to have it all is not very helpful ...
max viewing angle is also important - Plasma angle goes
to basically 180 degrees, but with LCDs the top tier sets
max out at about 45-55 degrees when they fade in color
and/or brightness (3rd tier LCD sets fade at much lesser
angles)
This way we we go down a branch rather than discuss the
entire decision tree which would take forever.

Even though I have decided that LCD is best for me,
plasma may actually be your "best bang for the
buck" in your given situation. In doing this you will one
way or another cut your choices in half !

If LCD is your best bet, I can help further; if Plasma is
for you, I have lost track of the details but can help with
the basics ...

Ok, I'll go more in depth, and I guess you'll understand why LCD AND PLASMA are both good choices for me.

I live in a bright apartment but I have no windows that are directly shining on the TV, so glare is not the biggest issue (both LCD and plasma would do)

My living room is of medium to small size compared to some of you here but I can place my furniture to accomodate anything from a 27" CRT to a 70" plasma; I can remove or add some of the pieces of my furniture at will (both LCD and plasma would do)

I thought my viewing distance was 8.5 ft but it is more like 7.5 ft. The 40" feels a little small to me when playing my Xbox 360 or watching 2:35:1 DVDs but it feels big enough when watching TV (bigger would be better for gaming and DVDs while smaller would do for TV - both LCD and plasma would do)

Viewing angle depends if I am alone with my girlfriend (90% of the time) or if friends are over (10% of the time). With two on the couch typical LCD viewing angles are more than enough while when I have friends over the angle is more extreme - up to something like 120 degrees (both LCD and plasma would do since I won't buy a TV just for when friends are over)

My time with the TV is approximately divided as follows:
30% HD Gaming - 15% HD Movie Watching - 25% DVD Watching - 15% HDTV Watching - 15% SDTV Watching (strenghts and weaknesses of both LCD and plasma come into play considering my many uses for this TV)

I usually use the TV when coming back from work (in full daylight) and before going to bed (in the dark) - my typical use is about 2 hours a day (LCD looks better in daylight, plasma in the dark - and my time is evenly split between night and day)

So, I guess this is the long way to say: plasma or LCD, it doesn't matter to me!

That's why my question wasn't plasma or LCD; my question was more like "what will I lose in picture quality going from a 40" Samsung LCD to a 50" LG or Hitachi plasma ?" My first criteria would now be to get something more immersive but with sacrificing as little as possible of my PQ. If that is impossible, I am just going to wait.

It is hard to get an answer for this as people on these boards usually use the Pioneer and Panasonics plasmas which are in their 50" sizes out of my range for now. I couldn't find someone yet who could compare a good LCD to an average plasma. That's the kind of comparaison I'd like to hear about (comparing in the stores helps but not much).

Hi again Broc27:
From the details you have just posted:
Plasma will get you better blacks, better contrast,
& much faster response time.

According to my May/07 Consumer Reports mag both
LG and Hitachi build great quality Plasmas , at least great
for the first 2 years which is their data so far, just as good
as Panasonic. Thus I would personally consider LG and
Hitachi as pretty close to top tier ...

For Plasma, watch out for its weight (very heavy) , but only
matters during transport & install - especially if you want
to wall-mount it .

Also, I think Plasmas "play around with" the resolution spec:
a 720P plasma may not have the expected 1360 but only
1024 lines - thus you may buy a set with a lesser resolution
than you thought.

Personally, in your situation, I would seriously consider buying
a Plasma. If you feel your new TV is too small after only a couple
of weeks, it will only get worse as time goes by.

Suggest you go to a local specialty shop to get more
info and/or go to the Plasma threads with your above post and
ask "Should I buy Plasma X or Plasma Y to get the biggest
bang for buck." The Plasma experts should accept that not all
forum people want the "best of the best".

In addition, with your last post there is a good possibility that
a Plasma expert will contribute to this thread :)

Good Luck !

I feel duty-bound to correct a mistake in my last
post:

Consumer Reports rates Hitachi up there
in quality with Panasonic, but Philips
is in the Category of "needs more repairs"

Note that Philips is actually "LG/Philips Inc"

Also, if you want to stay with LCD and
are OK with panel/bezel reflections then I would
suggest you look at Samsung products -
especially their 46" sizes.

Regards !

In the last two days I went to 2 stores to compare the sets that I'd want to upgrade to.

In both stores I could closely compare and tweak the Hitachi and Panasonic 50" plasmas. In the first store the Panasonic beat the Hitachi hands down, to the point where I wouldn't consider buying the Hitachi ever again, no matter at which price. The blacks were grey, the picture was very soft, it looked like an old SD CRT. Really really bad.

In the second store they looked very similar (both good). The Panasonic was better in black levels while the Hitachi did show some more detail in dark areas.

All in all, I don't think I'd like to take my chances with the Hitachi. I may be able to afford a Panasonic though, the seller was willing to cut the price by a good amount. I'll wait a bit to make my mind, I'm off on vacation far away from any kind of HDTV.

The Panasonic, Samsung and Pioneer plasmas all have excellent black levels. The Hitachi definitely comes up short in that department. (The Pioneers will give you good black levels along with all the shadow detail of the Hitachi's - and way less false contouring than any of them - but I realize they're probably more than you want to spend - although, last year's models can be found for as good a price as this year's 768p Pannies. They're also very good with SD material.)

You said you wanted a comparison of LCD and an "average" plasma - but I'm not sure what you would consider an "average" plasma. Actually, Pannies and Sammies are about as average as they come. Most panels costing less can be considered "budget brands" (Vizio, HP, Maxent) - except for LG/Philips, which are often cheaper than the average-priced ones, but are known to have reliability issues. You'd probably get about the same reliability with the budget brands. (Consumer Reports does rate the HP's pretty well, though - at least on picture quality. I think there's a thread here somewhere on it.)

I don't think you'll be disappointed with a 50" Panny plasma at all. It should do a lot better than an LCD with SD, too. Even if you only go with a 42", the overall picture quality should be better than on anything but the smallest LCD's. The only issue is that a 50" 768p screen at 7.5 feet may not seem as sharp as a 1080p one would, and you may see the SDE. You'd just have to test this out in the stores with the particular models being considered.

As long as ambient light isn't an issue for you, it mostly comes down to whether you want a set that's slightly better for gaming vs one that's all-around better for "watching". A plasma's generally fine unless you've got light coming directly at it, where you'll see the source directly in the reflection. The Pannies have advanced, "anti-glare" technology, which also helps. It should at least make non-direct, ambient light less of a potential issue.

Another point to weigh would be if less "motion blur" on the plasma with gaming will offset the potential of burn-in - but there are ways to minimize burn-in, and newer plasmas are much harder to do it with anyway. The Pannies are known to have image retention, but it always goes away completely in a few minutes time. (For the record, my Pio exhibits none whatsoever.)

I say go for the plasma, especially if viewing source content of all resolutions other than gaming is important to you.