i am torn between the 2. i know the differences between the two. i just want to know which is best overall. i mostly will be using standard cable for now and a ps3. i want smooth picture quality for the blue ray movies and nice details.
to me the panny seems like a good deal because it is a quality image, crisp colors and great details. plasma response time is fast and i dont have to worry about 60/120hz. but the burn in with the ps3 is holding me back. does this "pixel wobble" thing help prevent burn and help give a longer life time? and how realistic are people about burn in time? 5mins? 20mins? 1hour? 3 hours? for example i watch tons of soccer and score board is constant for 45-50 mins.will that be ok? or too much? and obviously the video games obviously have static parts? will it be that much of a matter? i know there is amazing picture quality and pictures seem smooth and clear and crisp. a little dark but it could be the settings at the store. obviously everything requires tinkering. and also there is initial break in period. is there even more vulnerability for burn in then?
the samsung seems flawless and is amazing. but i heard that that the blacks and whites are a little exaggerated to give better visuals, therefore lack a little detail. everything about samsung seems awesome to me. i is 60/120hz that big of a deal? is it worth waiting for the price of the 120hz to fall when im already making such a big investment? will they fall to around the 1500 range sometime soon? or is the 4061 good enough and will i be happy with it?
the guy at best buy told me that plasmas dont use 60/120hz measurement. he then said but when compared the plasmas outperform the 120hz lcd tvs. is this true? are plasmas better than 120hz? how do you compare?i see the difference between 60/120hz, but is there one between a plasma and 120hz? is one better than the other?
also for my burn in issue. i watch a lot of soccer and play a lot of soccer on my ps3. lots of green grass is shown. i watch soccer 1-2games a day 2-3 times a week atleast, all year long. i know there is movement and screen changes, but there is an overwhelming amount of time the green grass will be shown on the screen. also static scoreboards and clocks that dont move for 45-50 mins at a time. even when there is scene changes the score is still there. for example setanta channel. static images and symbols. LOTs of soccer on that channel, my favorite channel. i also play soccer on my ps3 1 hour or so a day almost everyday. will this exhorbent amount of green on thne screen have a burn in effect of sort of 1 year or 2? or am i just over paranoid?
now the question which is better the panny or the samsung for my situation? panny plasma is great for everything, just burn in issue i think. samsung just awesome, a little exaggerated colors therefore a little lack in details, and only 60hz. is the panny worth the little extra cash?
to me the panny seems like a good deal because it is a quality image, crisp colors and great details. plasma response time is fast and i dont have to worry about 60/120hz. but the burn in with the ps3 is holding me back. does this "pixel wobble" thing help prevent burn and help give a longer life time? and how realistic are people about burn in time? 5mins? 20mins? 1hour? 3 hours? for example i watch tons of soccer and score board is constant for 45-50 mins.will that be ok? or too much? and obviously the video games obviously have static parts? will it be that much of a matter? i know there is amazing picture quality and pictures seem smooth and clear and crisp. a little dark but it could be the settings at the store. obviously everything requires tinkering. and also there is initial break in period. is there even more vulnerability for burn in then?
the samsung seems flawless and is amazing. but i heard that that the blacks and whites are a little exaggerated to give better visuals, therefore lack a little detail. everything about samsung seems awesome to me. i is 60/120hz that big of a deal? is it worth waiting for the price of the 120hz to fall when im already making such a big investment? will they fall to around the 1500 range sometime soon? or is the 4061 good enough and will i be happy with it?
the guy at best buy told me that plasmas dont use 60/120hz measurement. he then said but when compared the plasmas outperform the 120hz lcd tvs. is this true? are plasmas better than 120hz? how do you compare?i see the difference between 60/120hz, but is there one between a plasma and 120hz? is one better than the other?
also for my burn in issue. i watch a lot of soccer and play a lot of soccer on my ps3. lots of green grass is shown. i watch soccer 1-2games a day 2-3 times a week atleast, all year long. i know there is movement and screen changes, but there is an overwhelming amount of time the green grass will be shown on the screen. also static scoreboards and clocks that dont move for 45-50 mins at a time. even when there is scene changes the score is still there. for example setanta channel. static images and symbols. LOTs of soccer on that channel, my favorite channel. i also play soccer on my ps3 1 hour or so a day almost everyday. will this exhorbent amount of green on thne screen have a burn in effect of sort of 1 year or 2? or am i just over paranoid?
now the question which is better the panny or the samsung for my situation? panny plasma is great for everything, just burn in issue i think. samsung just awesome, a little exaggerated colors therefore a little lack in details, and only 60hz. is the panny worth the little extra cash?
I had it narrowed down to the 4071, xbr, or the 42pz77u. I think the determining factor, like you said, was the 120hz marketing non-sense. Plasmas don't need this because there isn't a response time like with lcds. Ghosting and motion blur is non-existent on my Panny and yes, I do game quite a bit with the PS3 on it as well
