Plasmas disappearing. Should this (aging 27" CRT) viewer get a 42" or 43" 720p soon? Pls comment. - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 97 Old 02-01-2014, 04:23 PM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
stillonacrt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10

New here at AVS - looks like a great place.

 

Still viewing on an aging 27" CRT (it has a 16:9 mode, but it makes for kind of a small picture). Always seated about 6-8.5 ft away. Mostly OTA viewer, with, seems to me, a pretty good PQ with any STB ever used - whether composite or component input. But as the TV is getting on in years, if it goes, I suspect I'm going to be a bit of a black-level and PQ freak when going 16:9 HDTV.

 

In the past have never liked the flatness (to me) of most LCD screens for TV/Video. (Even on computer monitors where there is little choice, I much prefer, say, the 21.5"/27" iMac glass-type screen LCD pic to (anti-glare) others, despite any reflections.) Between that and black-levels, always figured it would eventually mean a plasma HDTV.

 

But as Plasmas are disappearing, do you think it might be worthwhile to snag a "small" plasma, like a 720p Samsung PN43F4500 or Panasonic TC-P42X60, soon?

 

Would appreciate any comments to help clarify my own thoughts, and to direct what further information I should seek.

Thanks.

 

stillonacrt is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 97 Old 02-01-2014, 04:51 PM
Member
 
jasondjulian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 73

Where would you find a PanasonicTC-P42X60 except used?

 

I had a perfectly good Sony 27" SDTV CRT.. but as you mentioned, all 16:9 aspect ratio programs were impossibly small.. my sitting distance, 9-11' made even normal television a strain on my eyes.. but the tv was fantastic for what it was... as far as standard def tubes go.

 

I bought a 55" Panasonic S60.. no question about it, hands down best entertainment decision I've ever made.  

 

So if you find your current CRT is ok, but not really great.. and you think you might be missing something by continuing its use, then go buy a good Plasma.  You'll always be wondering "what if" if you dont.  Assuming its financially a sound decision for you.

 

At 6-8.5' viewing distance, a nice 42 or 50" plasma will be beautiful.  The samsung you mentioned is a great tv for price.. I'd also consider the upgrade to a 1080p set, instead of the F4500.. i think its the F5300 series.. about $100 more... but at that 6 foot viewing distance, even on a 42" I'd be concerned that you could discern the pixels.


Panasonic TC-P55S60
Sony S5100 BD-Player
RCA 5 disc DVD HTIB for 5.1 Surround
jasondjulian is offline  
post #3 of 97 Old 02-01-2014, 05:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tylerSC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Mauldin SC, 29607
Posts: 4,236
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 174 Post(s)
Liked: 97
The 43F4500 is a very nice TV and would be a good upgrade from a CRT. Put picture settings in standard mode and tweak from there. I think it is $379 right now.
tylerSC is offline  
post #4 of 97 Old 02-01-2014, 05:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fatuglyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Mars
Posts: 1,423
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 131
I would see first if you can find a later-generation 42" 1080p Panny plasma in your area used (S2, U2, G25, GT25, S30, ST30, UT50 or S60 [highly unlikely for the last 2]), provided they are in good condition.

The 43F4500 would be my second choice barring the above. The only issue I have is its sub-720p res, but that may not be an issue relative to your seating distance.

ht Panasonic 60" ZT60, Monitor Audio: Silver RX6, RX Centre, RX1; Martinlogan Dynamo 700, Marantz SR5006, PS3, Oppo BDP-103D, Panamax M-5100PM
2ch Sony 32" W650A, Sonus faber Toy Monitor, REL T3, Marantz PM8004, Sony BDP-S1000ES, JVC T-X3 tuner, Apple TV, Peachtree Audio DAC•iT, Panamax MR4300
pc Monitor Audio Radius 90HD, Audioengine D1, FiiO A1
+ Sony 65" XBRX850B, Sony BDP-S5100
fatuglyguy is offline  
post #5 of 97 Old 02-03-2014, 12:02 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
stillonacrt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10

Wow, thanks for the comments.

 

Well some stores' websites still list the TC-P42X60 as "for delivery" - but who knows if that's real stock.

 

Both the mentioned 42-43" 720s seem pretty even as far as features, and virtually identical pricing. Unlike user reviews for larger plasmas which more strongly favor Panasonics, for the 42" 720p models Samsung seems to have a bit of an edge, which surprised me.

 

As far as 1080p, from having been looking at currently advertised, didn't realize they ever made 1080p plasmas below 50+ inches. Will have to look into used more carefully. And as far as new 50+ in plasmas, the size of which sounds a bit scary, they seem to start at 1.75-2X the price of the 42s, and much more for (for me unnecessary) smart and 3D features.

 

Guess I'll also have to look into viewing distance (measured today at 7.5'-8.5'), and "full benefit" of screen resolution.  Maybe just not used to immersing, rather than viewing. And think I'd hate being close enough to see compression artifacts, more than losing some detail. Don't quite understand if a 50" 720p would be "better" than a 42" 720p at the same distances.

 

Thanks again.

stillonacrt is offline  
post #6 of 97 Old 02-03-2014, 05:25 AM
KOF
Advanced Member
 
KOF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 813
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 114
It will depend on the quality of your OTA if you're going to benefit from 1080p or actually get worse picture than the 720p set. I used to have a 720p LG plasma and now I own Panasonic S60, but for DVDs or low bitrate HD broadcast, my 1080p Panasonic actually look a good deal worse than the 720p set. For Blurays, sure I prefer the 1080p set, but the 720p set was no slouch with BDs either with good downscaling. For high quality HD programs, I do prefer my Panasonic, but those instances doesn't seem too common for broadcast materials. My 1080p Panasonic does have sharper picture and brings out more detail. My previous 720p LG was more fuzzy and hazy in comparison with its sub-720 resolution, but felt more natural and organic with most of broadcast materials. My Panasonic feels bit too much digital in comparison. Sure I can see more details, but I also can clearly see more artifacts. If I was buying a plasma for broadcast and Netflix, I will surely go with one of the 720p sets in 50 inches size.
KOF is online now  
post #7 of 97 Old 02-03-2014, 05:46 AM
Member
 
jasondjulian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 73

at the same distances you're talking about, i'd rather have the 42" 720p set than the 50".  Details will be finer as its the same number of pixels into a smaller space.  Its just getting so hard to find plasmas under 50", not that they were ever plentiful... but unless you have a special cabinet or something that can only fit such and such a size plasma, keep in mind the biggest mistake (aside from not researching the decision at all) that people make is choosing a tv that is too small.. as opposed to too big.  40-42" widescreen is going to give you similar viewing sizes to the 27" CRT you have now in 4:3... it SOUNDS scary big.. but really isnt.  I sit 9-11' away from a 55".. i keep thinking i could have gone with a 60".. but then i do the math and realize.. no, this is perfect. 
 

Really at your seating distance, either a 42" 720p set, or a 50/51" 720p/1080p display is all going to look good.. further away than you mentioned, closer to 9" or so and 1080p at those screen sizes becomes undiscernable.. closer than the 6' you mentioned, or go larger in screen size, and 1080p starts to have its benefits. 


Panasonic TC-P55S60
Sony S5100 BD-Player
RCA 5 disc DVD HTIB for 5.1 Surround
jasondjulian is offline  
post #8 of 97 Old 02-03-2014, 03:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,434
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 809 Post(s)
Liked: 923
reasons I WOULD recommend you get a new plasma before they can't be found anymore:
-get a large screen with a native 16:9 format screen to match current broadcasting and dvd/bd movies
-get a tv with current connections that will be compatible with current and future devices(some BD players only have hdmi out...)
-get a tv with higher resolution so that you can take advantage of current and future HD materials(I'd recommend to go 1080p, 720p is already pretty old)

reasons I would NOT recommend you replace your CRT with a new plasma:
-to get better blacks and overall picture quality

honestly, maybe I'm judging too much, but when I hear 42" 720p I think cheapest of the cheap. and there are no GOOD cheap plasmas. there's only a handful of plasmas I've viewed the really compared to CRT, and they were all expensive, top end models(f8500, vt60, etc)

when I bought my first plasma, I was thinking along the same lines as you. I had a 46" CRT rptv, and figured the plasma tech had matured enough, prices were cheap enough, and my rptv only had component video inputs, so I figured it was time. I bought a mid range Samsung(b530) and it was noticeably worse in every way other than viewing angle to the crt I 'replaced' with it. it got me 1080p instead of 720p, it got me hdmi instead of component, and it got me 'stylish' design instead of a huge box, but overall picture quality and viewing enjoyment went down.

not until I bought my f8500 in the spring did I finally put the CRT behind me. there's still some things it did better(got blacker) but overall I do feel the f8500 is as good or better.

I agree with above regarding size as well. go as big as you can. obviously you aren't the type of guy to get a new tv every year, so no point in cheaping out too much. an extra couple hundred bux to go up to a 50"(and 1080p) spread out over the next 10yrs is small. I sit about 12" back from a 64" but that's tiny because it's in my theatre room designed for the 120" projection screen. everybody's tastes will vary, but it's pretty easy to get used to a larger screen imo

so anyway, if you want to update the function, size, resolution then yeah, go for it before you're stuck with LCD being the only affordable option. but don't do it because you think a cheap plasma will get you a better image than the current CRT you have.

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1018AH, 5.1 audio
Sources: HTPC(Mediabrowser), PS3, XBOX360, Wii, Sony DVP-CX995V
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is online now  
post #9 of 97 Old 02-03-2014, 08:08 PM
Senior Member
 
Josh128's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 402
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 192 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by stillonacrt View Post
 

Wow, thanks for the comments.

 

Well some stores' websites still list the TC-P42X60 as "for delivery" - but who knows if that's real stock.

 

Both the mentioned 42-43" 720s seem pretty even as far as features, and virtually identical pricing. Unlike user reviews for larger plasmas which more strongly favor Panasonics, for the 42" 720p models Samsung seems to have a bit of an edge, which surprised me.

 

As far as 1080p, from having been looking at currently advertised, didn't realize they ever made 1080p plasmas below 50+ inches. Will have to look into used more carefully. And as far as new 50+ in plasmas, the size of which sounds a bit scary, they seem to start at 1.75-2X the price of the 42s, and much more for (for me unnecessary) smart and 3D features.

 

Guess I'll also have to look into viewing distance (measured today at 7.5'-8.5'), and "full benefit" of screen resolution.  Maybe just not used to immersing, rather than viewing. And think I'd hate being close enough to see compression artifacts, more than losing some detail. Don't quite understand if a 50" 720p would be "better" than a 42" 720p at the same distances.

 

Thanks again.

 

Dont worry about the TC-P42X60 -- go with a Samsung PN43F4500 instead.  I have the 50" and 51" versions of each TV and while the Panasonic looks good, the 1" larger

Samsung looks better, especially when watching broadcast HDTV.  The Panny has a harsher, grainier look to it ( I wouldnt call it sharper, it just doesnt look as good)

 

I still need to do some more testing, but it seems the Panasonic may have better 480i de-interlacing.  Other than that, the Samsung scores the KO punch, at least by my eyes.


Displays: Samsung PN51F5300BFXA, PN51F4500AFXA, PN51F4500BFXA

Josh128 is offline  
post #10 of 97 Old 02-03-2014, 08:18 PM
Senior Member
 
Josh128's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 402
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 192 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by fierce_gt View Post

reasons I WOULD recommend you get a new plasma before they can't be found anymore:
-get a large screen with a native 16:9 format screen to match current broadcasting and dvd/bd movies
-get a tv with current connections that will be compatible with current and future devices(some BD players only have hdmi out...)
-get a tv with higher resolution so that you can take advantage of current and future HD materials(I'd recommend to go 1080p, 720p is already pretty old)

reasons I would NOT recommend you replace your CRT with a new plasma:
-to get better blacks and overall picture quality

honestly, maybe I'm judging too much, but when I hear 42" 720p I think cheapest of the cheap. and there are no GOOD cheap plasmas. there's only a handful of plasmas I've viewed the really compared to CRT, and they were all expensive, top end models(f8500, vt60, etc)

when I bought my first plasma, I was thinking along the same lines as you. I had a 46" CRT rptv, and figured the plasma tech had matured enough, prices were cheap enough, and my rptv only had component video inputs, so I figured it was time. I bought a mid range Samsung(b530) and it was noticeably worse in every way other than viewing angle to the crt I 'replaced' with it. it got me 1080p instead of 720p, it got me hdmi instead of component, and it got me 'stylish' design instead of a huge box, but overall picture quality and viewing enjoyment went down.

not until I bought my f8500 in the spring did I finally put the CRT behind me. there's still some things it did better(got blacker) but overall I do feel the f8500 is as good or better.

I agree with above regarding size as well. go as big as you can. obviously you aren't the type of guy to get a new tv every year, so no point in cheaping out too much. an extra couple hundred bux to go up to a 50"(and 1080p) spread out over the next 10yrs is small. I sit about 12" back from a 64" but that's tiny because it's in my theatre room designed for the 120" projection screen. everybody's tastes will vary, but it's pretty easy to get used to a larger screen imo

so anyway, if you want to update the function, size, resolution then yeah, go for it before you're stuck with LCD being the only affordable option. but don't do it because you think a cheap plasma will get you a better image than the current CRT you have.

 

 

I have to disagree with the "cheap plasma vs. CRT" bit here.  I have had two HD direct-view CRTs, a Hitachi Ultravision Digital 36" and a Philips 32" and while both had incredible pictures with deep blacks and great 480p and 1080i, (especially the Hitachi) the PN51F4500 I got last year destroys them both in almost every way.  The only thing either set had the upper hand over this plasma was 480i deinterlacing-- the Philips CRT still has the best I have ever seen. 

 

All plasmas and LCDs have another advantage over CRTs and that is they lack the edge image distortion/color bleed that all

tube TVs exhibit to some extent.

 

As I mentioned in the previous post, the set produces better images than the competing Panasonic, IMO.  For the money the set can't be beat.


Displays: Samsung PN51F5300BFXA, PN51F4500AFXA, PN51F4500BFXA

Josh128 is offline  
post #11 of 97 Old 02-04-2014, 03:27 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
stillonacrt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10

Great stuff!

 

Well, around here ABC/Fox 780p; NBC, CBS, CW and PBS 1080i. And yes that most broadcast content is 16:9 (even if they cut off the top and bottom of a 4:3 TV program to fit), is a factor.

 

As far as big-ness, looking at the screen area comparison at displaywars, and the total dimensions of the models, see that the 51"s are almost 2 ft wider than my current CRT, and the 43"s are about 10" wider - a space factor which I'll have to consider.

 

So higher-end 51"s like the 8500 model mentioned offer different/better display tech for about 2x the $ of other 51"s (and 3-4x the 42"s)?  Considering an initial higher cost over the usable lifetime as alluded to, can a buyer really expect a full decade out of a currently-built electronic display device? Extrapolated screen-life-expectancy aside, guess I'd worry more about failed power supplies, deteriorating pcbs with bulging caps, etc. Wonder if earlier buyers still use the same plasma units they purchased in 2003 or 2004.

 

Thanks again for the further discussion, and personal experiences. Just what I had hoped to find here, and very much appreciated.

stillonacrt is offline  
post #12 of 97 Old 02-04-2014, 05:11 AM
Newbie
 
Tatti Titti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 14
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12

take a look at the samsung 51f5300. its a great tv with good blacklevel and fullhd.

gus738 likes this.
Tatti Titti is offline  
post #13 of 97 Old 02-04-2014, 02:48 PM
Senior Member
 
Josh128's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 402
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 192 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatti Titti View Post
 

take a look at the samsung 51f5300. its a great tv with good blacklevel and fullhd.

 

Agree.  I love my 4500 but I almost pulled the trigger on a 5300.  In November you could get them for $529.  The only reason I went with the 4500 was that I was able to test it in store with some retro- game systems and it handled both 240p and 480p (best Ive ever seen) video game output extremely well, which was very important to me.  I wasnt sure that the 1080p set would be able to match the crispness of the 41F4500 at 480p, and I saved $100, so I went with it.

 

I am extremely impressed with the 4500 in every way but 480i de-interlacing, but looking back, the 5300 at $529 was a stellar deal.

 

As far as panel life goes, I have no clue.  I now have a Panasonic Viera 50x60 and the PN51F4500, and I can only hope they last as long as the CRTs they replaced.


Displays: Samsung PN51F5300BFXA, PN51F4500AFXA, PN51F4500BFXA

Josh128 is offline  
post #14 of 97 Old 02-04-2014, 03:15 PM
Newbie
 
nick-s-f's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I wouldn't hesitate; having owned a PN43F4500 since july, I have found it to be a terrific set.

I made a thread on it a while back.

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1474305/samsung-pnxxf4500-owners-thread

I recommend you get one while they're still for sale.
nick-s-f is offline  
post #15 of 97 Old 02-04-2014, 03:42 PM
Advanced Member
 
RodK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 663
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Personally, I would not buy a 720p plasma now. My old plasma was 1366 X 768 but now all the new ones are 1024 X 768 which is a 4:3 resolution. That means that the pixels are not square, they are rectangular. the new 720p plasmas do not look great to my eye because of this. Prices are low enough now that I would recommend a 1080p plasma in whatever size you are comfortable with. 50" does now look that big after a while.

RodK is offline  
post #16 of 97 Old 02-05-2014, 02:52 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
stillonacrt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10

Thanks again. If only the snow around here would let up, I'd be able to drive to a few stores to see if they have any of the aforementioned models on display, or in stock. (They do have a little corner somewhere for plasmas, don't they?)

 

After measuring, it looks like a room rearrangement would be necessary to fit a 51" (at 47" W) and maybe even a 43" (at 40" W) where the 30" wide CRT fits now.

 

The link is very informative on both sizes of Samsungs. And well I'll be darned, that is interesting; scanning 720p specs over the past few days, my eyes just assumed they were reading 1280x, when they were seeing 1024x768 XGA.

 

All your experiences have been valuable to this HD newbie.

stillonacrt is offline  
post #17 of 97 Old 02-05-2014, 08:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,434
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 809 Post(s)
Liked: 923
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh128 View Post


I have to disagree with the "cheap plasma vs. CRT" bit here.  I have had two HD direct-view CRTs, a Hitachi Ultravision Digital 36" and a Philips 32" and while both had incredible pictures with deep blacks and great 480p and 1080i, (especially the Hitachi) the PN51F4500 I got last year destroys them both in almost every way.  The only thing either set had the upper hand over this plasma was 480i deinterlacing-- the Philips CRT still has the best I have ever seen. 

All plasmas and LCDs have another advantage over CRTs and that is they lack the edge image distortion/color bleed that all
tube TVs exhibit to some extent.

As I mentioned in the previous post, the set produces better images than the competing Panasonic, IMO.  For the money the set can't be beat.

that's ok. plasmas do some things better than CRT, no denying that, so there's definitely room for preference here.

all i know is from my experience, watching movies on my 10yr old Hitaching RPTV was so much more satisfying(if you could sit center) then on any flat screen i've viewed before this year(there's a lot of really good plasmas that came out 2013). note i never saw the kuro's, sharp elite, or a couple other high end displays. i have seen many low end samsung and LG's though.

i still think the crt's have a more natural look to them. you can't see the 'steps' of gradation like you do in a plasma/lcd. don't get me wrong, there's a huge list of cons to crt as well, i just wanted to make sure the OP didn't make the same mistake i did, thinking that i could replace a high end CRT with a low end plasma and get a 'better' picture. especially when unlike me, he likely won't get the chance to fix that mistake as the plasmas will be gone soon. at least i got a chance to buy a high end plasma that actually does look better than the high end CRT i used to love

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1018AH, 5.1 audio
Sources: HTPC(Mediabrowser), PS3, XBOX360, Wii, Sony DVP-CX995V
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is online now  
post #18 of 97 Old 02-05-2014, 08:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,434
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 809 Post(s)
Liked: 923
Quote:
Originally Posted by stillonacrt View Post

Great stuff!

Well, around here ABC/Fox 780p; NBC, CBS, CW and PBS 1080i. And yes that most broadcast content is 16:9 (even if they cut off the top and bottom of a 4:3 TV program to fit), is a factor.

As far as big-ness, looking at the screen area comparison at displaywars, and the total dimensions of the models, see that the 51"s are almost 2 ft wider than my current CRT, and the 43"s are about 10" wider - a space factor which I'll have to consider.

So higher-end 51"s like the 8500 model mentioned offer different/better display tech for about 2x the $ of other 51"s (and 3-4x the 42"s)?  Considering an initial higher cost over the usable lifetime as alluded to, can a buyer really expect a full decade out of a currently-built electronic display device? Extrapolated screen-life-expectancy aside, guess I'd worry more about failed power supplies, deteriorating pcbs with bulging caps, etc. Wonder if earlier buyers still use the same plasma units they purchased in 2003 or 2004.

Thanks again for the further discussion, and personal experiences. Just what I had hoped to find here, and very much appreciated.

i can't predice the future, but my samsung pn50b530 has lasted me 5 or 6yrs now with no problems.

the only time i've ever had a tv 'die' before it was 'obsolete' was with an old tube tv that never got taken out of the store display settings. although, after the tech said the 'picture tube was shot' we continued to use the tv for the next 6yrs... so i'm not sure even that was a total failure.

the only thing i would personally worry about, is if somehow 4k actually does catch on, having a 1080p set won't be so cool anymore. i really don't expect that to happen for at least a decade

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1018AH, 5.1 audio
Sources: HTPC(Mediabrowser), PS3, XBOX360, Wii, Sony DVP-CX995V
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is online now  
post #19 of 97 Old 02-07-2014, 08:04 AM
Member
 
Broadus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 121
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by stillonacrt View Post
 

Thanks again. If only the snow around here would let up, I'd be able to drive to a few stores to see if they have any of the aforementioned models on display, or in stock. (They do have a little corner somewhere for plasmas, don't they?)

 

After measuring, it looks like a room rearrangement would be necessary to fit a 51" (at 47" W) and maybe even a 43" (at 40" W) where the 30" wide CRT fits now.

 

The link is very informative on both sizes of Samsungs. And well I'll be darned, that is interesting; scanning 720p specs over the past few days, my eyes just assumed they were reading 1280x, when they were seeing 1024x768 XGA.

 

All your experiences have been valuable to this HD newbie.

 

I'm having a similar debate with myself (hate it when that happens!) over getting a PN51F4500 or the stepped up 1080p PN51F5300 that is $150 more. The only spec difference is 720p v. 1080p. I keep coming back to something Geoff Morrison wrote in his "Best $500 TV" article on Wirecutter:

Quote:
 

This set isn’t 1080p. No big deal. (Plus, who actually needs 1080p?)

The PN51F4500 has a resolution of 1,024 x 768. Yes, that is HD. And yes, that is also 16×9 (the pixels are more rectangular). The question that matters: can you see individual pixels from a normal seating distance? While reviewing the Samsung, I sat roughly 8 feet away. I have 20/15 vision, and I couldn’t see pixels. I could see, along some diagonal white lettering, some jagged steps. I doubt most people would notice this unless they were looking for it. From about 6½ feet away, I started to see some noise, and I could just make out the pixel structure in bright images. If you’re sitting this close to your TV, I recommend checking out one of our step-up 1080p options mentioned at the end.

Check your seating distance. For most people, it’s around 9-10 feet. If this is the case, you’d be hard pressed to notice the difference between this and a 1080p TV of the same size. Not once did the image look “soft” to me, and I’ve been watching/reviewing 1080p displays of all sizes since their first availability. The PN51F4500 looked more detailed than the TC-P50X60, possibly due to better processing, which leads us to…

 

I'm close to 60, not into gaming, and don't have the greatest vision. I realize an argument can be made that questions the hesitation to spend a mere (to many people) $150 for the 1080p, but if it doesn't make a difference in viewing, why spend the extra? Were I interested in a Smart TV, I would spend the extra money for a P51F5500, but I had rather buy an Apple TV or Roku. If Morrison is right, and I've read similar opinions from tech writers who make their living with this stuff, I still wouldn't be getting a better viewing experience with the F5500. I realize this is probably the minority position among many forum members here, but I'm just a casual viewer who likes a good picture.

Broadus is offline  
post #20 of 97 Old 02-07-2014, 09:08 AM
Member
 
jasondjulian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 73

Before I bought my S60.. I looked at the 51F4500 and F5300.. I sit 9-11 feet away... and when i stood 6-7 feet from both displays.. I could tell a difference.. not a huge one.. but it was there and noticeable.. the F5300 at 1080p was a cleaner, sharper image.  If I sat 10-12 feet from the tv, ok.. 720p would be alright.. but to MY eyes and MY sitting distances (which are quite average and not excessive one way or the other) the 720p panel wasnt going to make me happy. 

 

Take that for whats worth.. and I should note that I am 31 with rather poor eyesight, corrective lenses are pretty thick. With my glasses I am close to 20/20.

 

I'd recommend you go and find a store with both those models, stand at your viewing distance and see which you prefer.  


Panasonic TC-P55S60
Sony S5100 BD-Player
RCA 5 disc DVD HTIB for 5.1 Surround
jasondjulian is offline  
post #21 of 97 Old 02-07-2014, 09:14 AM
Member
 
Broadus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 121
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasondjulian View Post
 

Before I bought my S60.. I looked at the 51F4500 and F5300.. I sit 9-11 feet away... and when i stood 6-7 feet from both displays.. I could tell a difference.. not a huge one.. but it was there and noticeable.. the F5300 at 1080p was a cleaner, sharper image.  If I sat 10-12 feet from the tv, ok.. 720p would be alright.. but to MY eyes and MY sitting distances (which are quite average and not excessive one way or the other) the 720p panel wasnt going to make me happy. 

 

Take that for whats worth.. and I should note that I am 31 with rather poor eyesight, corrective lenses are pretty thick. With my glasses I am close to 20/20.

 

I'd recommend you go and find a store with both those models, stand at your viewing distance and see which you prefer.  

 

Thanks. The aggravation with some stores (and maybe they're all like this) is that their feed changes scenes so quickly that it's hard to make a good comparison from one TV to the other. BTW, I think I know what your vision will be like in 25 years. ;)

Broadus is offline  
post #22 of 97 Old 02-07-2014, 11:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,434
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 809 Post(s)
Liked: 923
i agree, that in many cases 720p is good enough, and extra pixels are only that, extra.

but i also realize that my viewing tastes and habits change, and while i was totally happy with a 720p 46" RPTV 10yrs ago, a 720p 46" plasma or LCD in my room now looks tiny. haven't changed viewing distance or rooms, just changed personal preference. also, i watch a lot more 2.35:1 movies than 16:9 content now.

what spending 150bux extra does, is give you more room to grow. 1080p allows you the option to sit closer if you want a more immersive screen.

if you're buying a tv to use now and will upgrade soon, save the money. if you're buying a tv you intend to use for many years to come and you're not sure of where(might move, or move the tv to a different room), then spend the extra money now and save hundreds later by not upgrading as often.
Broadus likes this.

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1018AH, 5.1 audio
Sources: HTPC(Mediabrowser), PS3, XBOX360, Wii, Sony DVP-CX995V
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is online now  
post #23 of 97 Old 02-07-2014, 12:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mailiang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Springsteen Country
Posts: 6,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 241 Post(s)
Liked: 347
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broadus View Post

I'm having a similar debate with myself (hate it when that happens!) over getting a PN51F4500 or the stepped up 1080p PN51F5300 that is $150 more. The only spec difference is 720p v. 1080p. I keep coming back to something Geoff Morrison wrote in his "Best $500 TV" article on Wirecutter:

I'm close to 60, not into gaming, and don't have the greatest vision. I realize an argument can be made that questions the hesitation to spend a mere (to many people) $150 for the 1080p, but if it doesn't make a difference in viewing, why spend the extra? Were I interested in a Smart TV, I would spend the extra money for a P51F5500, but I had rather buy an Apple TV or Roku. If Morrison is right, and I've read similar opinions from tech writers who make their living with this stuff, I still wouldn't be getting a better viewing experience with the F5500. I realize this is probably the minority position among many forum members here, but I'm just a casual viewer who likes a good picture.

I recently replaced my 2010 720p 46'' Panasonic plasma with a 50'' 1080p S60 in my small media room. Both TV's were in the exact same location. I sit 8 feet from the screen and I could see the pixels on the older set. However, depending on the quality of the content, it would be barely noticeable or very distracting. In either case, the S60's smaller pixels produce a much smoother picture, and it is one of reasons why I upgraded.


Ian
Broadus likes this.

The best way to succeed in life is to act on the advice you give to others

mailiang is offline  
post #24 of 97 Old 02-07-2014, 02:06 PM
Member
 
Broadus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 121
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by fierce_gt View Post

i agree, that in many cases 720p is good enough, and extra pixels are only that, extra.

but i also realize that my viewing tastes and habits change, and while i was totally happy with a 720p 46" RPTV 10yrs ago, a 720p 46" plasma or LCD in my room now looks tiny. haven't changed viewing distance or rooms, just changed personal preference. also, i watch a lot more 2.35:1 movies than 16:9 content now.

what spending 150bux extra does, is give you more room to grow. 1080p allows you the option to sit closer if you want a more immersive screen.

if you're buying a tv to use now and will upgrade soon, save the money. if you're buying a tv you intend to use for many years to come and you're not sure of where(might move, or move the tv to a different room), then spend the extra money now and save hundreds later by not upgrading as often.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mailiang View Post


I recently replaced my 2010 720p 46'' Panasonic plasma with a 50'' 1080p S60 in my small media room. Both TV's were in the exact same location. I sit 8 feet from the screen and I could see the pixels on the older set. However, depending on the quality of the content, it would be barely noticeable or very distracting. In either case, the S60's smaller pixels produce a much smoother picture, and it is one of reasons why I upgraded.


Ian

 

Good points. I appreciate your perspectives. I may be talked into an F5300 yet.

Broadus is offline  
post #25 of 97 Old 02-07-2014, 04:01 PM
Senior Member
 
Josh128's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 402
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 192 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broadus View Post
 

 

 

 

Good points. I appreciate your perspectives. I may be talked into an F5300 yet.

 

 

I have the PN51F4500 and love it.  We have it in our bedroom and watch from about 9 to 10 feet away.  Pixels are not  visible from that point and the set looks great.  I play video games on it from about 4-5 feet away and while you can see pixels, it looks spectacular for 240p and 480p content with which you would see pixels anyway on a

1080p set.  720p on up to 1080p (downscaled) looks even better.

 

That said-- there is one major difference other than resolution between the 4500 and 5300.  The 5300 is a series 5000 panel, which supposedly has a 100,000 hour

panel life as compared to 60,000 for the 4000 series.  I read this from a Samsung site somewhere, but now can no longer find it.  So while its very unlikely you'll ever

watch either set for more than even 40,000 hours before you upgrade or die (lol) perhaps the 100,000 hour span can be taken to mean its generally a bit better built/less

likely to have an issue?

 

I would recommend either set, and if you are even slightly on the fence get the 5300, so you won't have any regrets later.  I do love my 4500 but its a bedroom TV.  If I were to purchase another for my living room, it would be the 5300, if for nothing else to play around with it and compare the two!!

Broadus likes this.

Displays: Samsung PN51F5300BFXA, PN51F4500AFXA, PN51F4500BFXA

Josh128 is offline  
post #26 of 97 Old 02-07-2014, 04:09 PM
Member
 
Broadus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 121
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh128 View Post
 

 

 

I have the PN51F4500 and love it.  We have it in our bedroom and watch from about 9 to 10 feet away.  Pixels are not  visible from that point and the set looks great.  I play video games on it from about 4-5 feet away and while you can see pixels, it looks spectacular for 240p and 480p content with which you would see pixels anyway on a

1080p set.  720p on up to 1080p (downscaled) looks even better.

 

That said-- there is one major difference other than resolution between the 4500 and 5300.  The 5300 is a series 5000 panel, which supposedly has a 100,000 hour

panel life as compared to 60,000 for the 4000 series.  I read this from a Samsung site somewhere, but now can no longer find it.  So while its very unlikely you'll ever

watch either set for more than even 40,000 hours before you upgrade or die (lol) perhaps the 100,000 hour span can be taken to mean its generally a bit better built/less

likely to have an issue?

 

I would recommend either set, and if you are even slightly on the fence get the 5300, so you won't have any regrets later.  I do love my 4500 but its a bedroom TV.  If I were to purchase another for my living room, it would be the 5300, if for nothing else to play around with it and compare the two!!

 

Very helpful insight, Josh. Thanks. The only thing that would be more helpful is if you owned both so you could give more hands on insight. The difference in the panels, though, is something I had not come across. I understand your conclusion on that matter.

 

And I owe an apology to stillonacrt. I didn't mean to hijack your thread. I hope the input from others has been helpful to your thinking.

Broadus is offline  
post #27 of 97 Old 02-07-2014, 05:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,434
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 809 Post(s)
Liked: 923
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh128 View Post


I have the PN51F4500 and love it.  We have it in our bedroom and watch from about 9 to 10 feet away.  Pixels are not  visible from that point and the set looks great.  I play video games on it from about 4-5 feet away and while you can see pixels, it looks spectacular for 240p and 480p content with which you would see pixels anyway on a
1080p set.  720p on up to 1080p (downscaled) looks even better.


I hate to be the guy getting all anal about vocabulary, but you wouldn't see 'pixels' become more or less obvious based on the source resolution. it's a fixed pixel display, and even when fed 240p, it will display a 1080p or 720p image(upscaled of course)

so, even though it wouldn't make the image more detailed, a 1080p display would still have less visible pixel structure.

to be fair, when I bought my first plasma I did a side-by-side comparison of a 720p and 1080p Panasonic plasma playing hd cable(720p feed), and the 720p tv looked sharper to me. not doing any scaling and having a 1:1 pixel mapping is always best imo. so there is an advantage to using 720p tv if you have 720p sources. but the pixel structure itself is always more noticeable on a 720p tv than a 1080p tv. and the advantage is really small. imo, it's worth going with a 1080p display to get the most out of today's 'full' HD video, and you still get nearly the most out of 720p or lower stuff.

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1018AH, 5.1 audio
Sources: HTPC(Mediabrowser), PS3, XBOX360, Wii, Sony DVP-CX995V
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is online now  
post #28 of 97 Old 02-08-2014, 04:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
igreg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 2,954
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 198 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by KOF View Post

It will depend on the quality of your OTA if you're going to benefit from 1080p or actually get worse picture than the 720p set. I used to have a 720p LG plasma and now I own Panasonic S60, but for DVDs or low bitrate HD broadcast, my 1080p Panasonic actually look a good deal worse than the 720p set. For Blurays, sure I prefer the 1080p set, but the 720p set was no slouch with BDs either with good downscaling. For high quality HD programs, I do prefer my Panasonic, but those instances doesn't seem too common for broadcast materials. My 1080p Panasonic does have sharper picture and brings out more detail. My previous 720p LG was more fuzzy and hazy in comparison with its sub-720 resolution, but felt more natural and organic with most of broadcast materials. My Panasonic feels bit too much digital in comparison. Sure I can see more details, but I also can clearly see more artifacts. If I was buying a plasma for broadcast and Netflix, I will surely go with one of the 720p sets in 50 inches size.

Perhaps that is why my 10 year-old 1376 x 768 commercial Panasonic plasma has a better picture with DirecTV than the ZT? I have read where the new sets don't do a great job of converting 1080i to 1080p; therefore, the ZT is only superior with Blu-Ray sources.

Disclaimer: The BB ZT was hooked up via component, but so is my Panasonic. For me, the PQ looks better via component with DirecTV.
Broadus likes this.
igreg is offline  
post #29 of 97 Old 02-08-2014, 11:12 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mailiang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Springsteen Country
Posts: 6,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 241 Post(s)
Liked: 347
Quote:
Originally Posted by igreg View Post

Perhaps that is why my 10 year-old 1376 x 768 commercial Panasonic plasma has a better picture with DirecTV than the ZT? I have read where the new sets don't do a great job of converting 1080i to 1080p; therefore, the ZT is only superior with Blu-Ray sources.

Disclaimer: The BB ZT was hooked up via component, but so is my Panasonic. For me, the PQ looks better via component with DirecTV.

Not the case with me. I also have DTV and my S60 performs better then my 720p Panny in almost every category. I have found that using HDMI and setting my DVR to native provides the best picture quality.


Ian

The best way to succeed in life is to act on the advice you give to others

mailiang is offline  
post #30 of 97 Old 02-08-2014, 02:11 PM
Senior Member
 
Josh128's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 402
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 192 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by fierce_gt View Post


I hate to be the guy getting all anal about vocabulary, but you wouldn't see 'pixels' become more or less obvious based on the source resolution. it's a fixed pixel display, and even when fed 240p, it will display a 1080p or 720p image(upscaled of course)

so, even though it wouldn't make the image more detailed, a 1080p display would still have less visible pixel structure.

to be fair, when I bought my first plasma I did a side-by-side comparison of a 720p and 1080p Panasonic plasma playing hd cable(720p feed), and the 720p tv looked sharper to me. not doing any scaling and having a 1:1 pixel mapping is always best imo. so there is an advantage to using 720p tv if you have 720p sources. but the pixel structure itself is always more noticeable on a 720p tv than a 1080p tv. and the advantage is really small. imo, it's worth going with a 1080p display to get the most out of today's 'full' HD video, and you still get nearly the most out of 720p or lower stuff.


Yes, you would and most certainly do.  You are mistakingly taking the term "pixels" to mean only the rectangular (in the case of the 4500) RGB plasma cells of the screen.  The term "pixel" actually means picture element and can consist of literally anything making up the composition of a given picture.  When speaking of being able to see pixels in 240p and 480p games from 5 feet away, regardless if your display is 720p, 1080p, or even 2160p in the case of 4K displays, Im speaking of the pixels drawn by the input device (in this case, an older video game system).  Regardless of upscaling, a pixel of a 320x240 image is exactly 4 times larger than a pixel of a 640x480 image, which in turn has pixels exactly 1.5 times larger than a pixel of a 1280x720 image (960x720 in 4:3) and it is of this type of pixel I that am describing.

 

When the set upscales a very low res image, it lights multiple plasma cells to make up a single pixel of the source image.  In the case of a 240p game system like the N64, the pixels drawn and sent by the N64 to the set are almost 9 times larger than the plasma cells of the 720p screen (not exactly though, because the screen is 1024x768).  You can most certainly see these pixels regardless of the resolution of your set.  They actually are even more pronounced on higher res displays.  

 

*Edit - changed some of the figures relating to the pixel sizes, as I didnt account for the 4:3 to 16:9 screen ratio change when comparing 320x240 and 640x480 to 1280x720.  960x720 would be the 4:3 equivalent to 720p.


Displays: Samsung PN51F5300BFXA, PN51F4500AFXA, PN51F4500BFXA

Josh128 is offline  
Reply Plasma Flat Panel Displays

Tags
Panasonic Tc P42x60 42 Inch Plasma Hdtv , Samsung Pn43f4500 43 Inch Plasma Hdtv
Gear in this thread - P42x60 by PriceGrabber.com

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off