Originally Posted by Bill13
Introduction: I made a similar posting prior to this posting (see below) back in May 2009 in another forum, wherein several LCD advocates disagreed with my findings.
Anyway, back in April/May 2009, I purchased a Samsung UN46B6000 LCD TV (new LED backlight technology) and finally decided to return it.
It was not an easy decision to return the Samsung LCD because it didn't exhibit obvious defects such as flashlighting, uneven backlighting, clouding, etc. (I evidently got an exceptionally good LCD TV, UN46B6000 !).
I decided to return the UN46B6000 LCD because the Panasonic G10 plasma TV displayed a more natural picture, and the G10 was much better in dark scenes where shadow details are important.
After getting the Panasonic 42" G10 in my house, I noticed that the G10 excelled with the science fiction series Startrek Voyager DVD which has dimly lit scenes where the characters wear black uniforms.
The G10 series plasmas have the new "Neopanel" which offers peak brightness comparable to many LCDs as well as the great dark shadow detail.
Note: the cheaper X1 and U1 Pannys are not as good as the new Neopanel plasmas.
After a few days in my home watching the Samsung LCD, I had to conclude that the LCD generated eye-fatigue to due its inaccurate, un-natural rendering of black levels and lack of shadow detail (I also have a Pioneer Elite 60" 151 plasma which was used to make further comparisons). Somehow the eye-brain 'processor' has to work much harder when viewing dim science-fiction scenes on the UN46B6000 LCD.
The Samsung LCD represents significant progress in LCD technology, but the best plasmas are still preferable to LCDs, IMO. When the price of the G10 plasma series was factored in, the choice was obvious. I suppose the 'S1' series (also Neopanel) might be an even lower-cost alternative...
BTW, my preference for the G10 plasma was stronger after making some picture adjustments - I still don't use the G10's THX mode -- waiting for D-Nice to post G10 service-menu calibration numbers.
I was pleasantly suprised to see the 42" G10 (after picture adjustments) did not suffer comparison to my Pioneer Elite 151 plasma -- sure, the Elite is better overall, but really not that noticeable, except for the size difference ('bigger is better' in the world of television).
It's unfortunate that the public perception typically is that LCD is obviously better than plasma technology. '--- its fact the LCD has a better , clearer, brighter picture and the general public can see it ---'.
Yes, I initially had that typical "general public" reaction to LCD in the video-store setting. My initial reaction to the UN46B6000 LCD when I saw it at the store was 'WOW !' (indeed, the picture seemed better, clearer, sharper, brighter, and so forth) - and so I bought it.
Only after carefully viewing the LCD in my home environment with my usual video material, & making comparisons to high-quality plasma TV(s), did I regretfully decide that my initial (superficial) impression was very misleading.
I tried my best to like the new Samsung LCD, but that just did not happen in my home environment. If
If I'm a 'plasma fan', it's based on fair & reasonable evaluation.
Dynamically adjusted local-LED backlighting schemes for LCD displays introduce their own problems (a gimmic), and don't look natural IMO.
Like the general public, I made an impulsive LCD buying decision -- lucky I was able to return it to the store, after making in-home comparisons.
LCD technology still needs refinement -- and as a temporary member of the 'general public' who learned the hard way (by unbiased personal experience), I can say that plasma technology is generally getting a bum rap. Video magazine reviews of the Pioneer Elite Plasmas seem to support this conclusion.
I really wanted to keep the LCD TV, especially since I had an exceptionally fine UN46B6000 to evaluate - and the LED/thin styling was great looking.