So I'm contemplating spending some hard earned dorrahs on a plasma - no gov cash handouts for me! :(

Either a 42" 1080p (VIERA TH-42PZ80A) or a 50" 768p (VIERA TH-50PX80A). They're priced around the same ($1800 to $1900 or so).

The question is this: is the 1080p worth the drop in size to 42"? My understanding is that the only thing that comes close to using the higher resolution is blu-ray while dvds, digital tv, etc will all look just fine on 768p. Any points to consider if I hook up an xbox or apple tv later?

My living room is big enough to warrant a 50" while a 42" will still work. I suspect that the 42" will become "normal" after a short time while the 50" will still seem big for longer, or do 50" owners get used to the size just as quickly?

Thoughts, opinions, recommendations much appreciated.

And LCD fanboys: my eyes prefer plasma, so thanks but don't bother.

And LCD fanboys: my eyes prefer plasma, so thanks but don't bother.

explain?

explain?

I don't think we need yet another plasma vs lcd debate is all.

I suspect that the 42" will become "normal" after a short time while the 50" will still seem big for longer, or do 50" owners get used to the size just as quickly?

in a word, yes. 50" seems the norm to me, however 42" is fine as well when i goto other peoples places, hardly takes anytime to adjust.

go 50"
big is beautiful......i reckon the whole 1080p, 1080i, 720p, 3,654,568,987,567,456,321 i or p argument is over rated....BIG is the go....as i've said in previous debates....go look at all options in action and make your own mind up.....personal preference is the only way to go

From my (limited) understanding, 1080p only really becomes noticeable in the larger sizes, 50"+

That said your choices seem to be reversed, ideally you'd want the 1080p on the 50 inch, whereas I don't think you'd really see the benefit of 1080p on the 42".

I guess maybe go the 50" then? It'll still look awesome even if it's not 1080p at that size

You need an LED Samsung Series 9 beast with just about the best black ever. Most crystal clear, bright (and black) image you've ever seen. Pity they cost a fortune.

LED > LCD > Plasma.

Also plasma = fuzzy.

But back to the argument. While I personally would go the full HD slightly smaller one, a lot of HD content doesn't come in full HD yet (like TV) so the bigger one would be the go at the moment

Also, I tend go disagree with the 768 is enough for a tv, 1080 is overkill argument. If you have such poor vision to not notice the difference between 7xxp and 1080p then maybe you need glasses. But like I said, the problem is a lot of content doesn't show off full HD well. It's like when you see harvey Norman playing a DVD on a 1080p HDTV... Sigh.

I've got both a 42" LCD 1080p and a 42" Plasma (though only 720p)...

Both are alright though LCD WINS

If only this thread had come up a couple weeks ago, catchoftheday did a sale on Samsung 6 Series 50" 1080p screens for about $1800, I think you can still get them on ebay for around this price. LCD though, which I personally prefer anyway. I have a 42" 1080p LCDTV, I would like something bigger but I'll probably wait for the next gen tv's, whatever they end up being, laser tv's or whatever is coming. 1080p vs 720p, I don't know that you'll see a major difference in movies on a 42" or probably even a 50". The 42" might have more resale value being 1080p if you decide to upgrade in a few years time. End of the day, get whatever looks best to you now.

If you're set on Plasma and want 50" with 1080p res, why not something like this ???

60PG70FD

^ 60" is the way to go

Is it that hard to simply save money to get the best of both worlds, a 50" 1080p set? I'm sure you could find the money in a couple of months, and you'll keep the TV for far longer than that.

42"

1080p on a 42" screen will look MUCH better than a 720p reso on a 50". May aswell watch a dvd on a 80cm tv.

I don't think we need yet another plasma vs lcd debate is all.

Just get a 5" black and white fish bowl radiation box TV. I mean it's not like TV's have changed since they were first created, somehow getting better with each new model. Most people can't tell the difference between Black and White and Colour pictures anyway so Black and White is all you'll ever need.

1080p on a 42" screen will look MUCH better than a 720p reso on a 50"

Usually false unless you happen to sit close to your TV, which few people do. Your eyes can only see at a certain resolution (you cant make out fine detail at a distance) and so as you move further from the TV, you lose the ability to see the extra resolution

Have a read of http://www.carltonbale.com/2006/11/1080p-does-matter/ . According to its chart, you need be sitting within 2m of the screen to get any benefit from 1080p at 42" , and within 1.5m to get the full benefit.

If you're sitting at say 3m away, then according to that site 50" at 720p is perfect; to get "full benefit" of 1080p at 3m you need to be 70" or more.

Balls.

^^ Interesting.

Guys, thanks very much for all the info and opinions.

Is it that hard to simply save money to get the best of both worlds, a 50" 1080p set? I'm sure you could find the money in a couple of months, and you'll keep the TV for far longer than that.

I've got the cash, it's a matter of how much I choose to spend is all. If I was planning on hooking a pc up to it, I'd definitely go the 1080p for the higher pc res, but as I won't be it's not an issue.

If you're sitting at say 3m away, then according to that site 50" at 720p is perfect; to get "full benefit" of 1080p at 3m you need to be 70" or more.

I had forgotten about that point! Screen to head distance is around 3.5m, so 720p 50" should be fine. And further to that, it probably means buying a 1080p 42" would be a waste at that distance and I could save even more money by buying a 768p 42".

Oh and a word to the wise, according to a few articles, a number of manufacturers have flagged a price increase in the new year as they can't keep the current prices with the falls the AUD's had in the last year (even though it's rising again, albeit slowly). Which is one reason why I've decided to buy now.

As for why I'm after Panasonic, a few of my friends have them and I like the way they look. I haven't spent much time looking at the Samsung range (and staring at them in a store trying to compare isn't exactly accurate).

Depends what you'll be using it for.

If you mostly watch Blu-Ray spend the extra on Full HD.

If not just save your cash and get normal HD. The difference is cost in no way reflects the difference (if any) in picture.

If your spending around 2 grand plus seriously consider LCD, they are better at that price level. If you're spending under 2 grand plasma is better value as you'll get a bigger screen per dollar. Get Panasonic plasma too btw.



last edited by mission at 09:53:20 24/Dec/08

42" if you plan on keeping it for a few years. you know youll get blu ray soon.

I suspect I'll get an xbox and then apple tv before a blu-ray player.

u should definately go 1080 lcd!

Well, job done. Strolled into Clive Peeters and they had the 50" for $1499! After chatting to the manager at JB last night the best they could do was $1800. So I'm quite surprised at the price CP was selling it for.

Thanks for the assistance guys.

Oh and a word to the wise, according to a few articles, a number of manufacturers have flagged a price increase in the new year as they can't keep the current prices with the falls the AUD's had in the last year (even though it's rising again, albeit slowly). Which is one reason why I've decided to buy now.

Yeah I've read that too. Seems like a scam to me. But that's just IMO, well done on making the purchase though, that's a really good price you got there. Really pays to shop around :)

I dont remember the prices of things coming down heaps when the dollar went up, so why do they need to go up when the dollar comes down?

PC games never went down to the prices americans pay when the dollar was almost parity.

Unless you watch only blu-ray films , it hardly makes a difference, I think many people confuse high definition with high resolution, most broadcast tv is encoded for reduced bandwidth anyway, so the definition is reduced and sometimes is awful (yea, that's you foxtel...)

^ Um yeah, any broadcast tv in HD is 720p, i thought that was well known?

I hate the argument "if you're not really watching blu-ray.." Then what the f*** is the point in buying a big screen hd?

^ Um yeah, any broadcast tv in HD is 720p, i thought that was well known?

I'm not talking about resolution, you can have high resolution of really crapy encoded (low definition) video

I hate the argument "if you're not really watching blu-ray.." Then what the f*** is the point in buying a big screen hd?

since when does "hardly makes a difference" of his choice equate to what you are saying?

PC games never went down to the prices americans pay when the dollar was almost parity.

That's because there were enough chumps still willing to pay the same price.

Regarding the price increase: the guy at the store (relaxed guy, not pushing for a sale, I had already paid) confirmed the price increases are coming. As soon as they sell out of their current stock, prices are going up. The only two brands mentioned in the conversation were Panasonic and LG, but my impression was it's pretty much across the board.

tee hee. stop measuring your screen in inches. man up, buy a projector, paint a wall with dulux ceiling white (or similar) and start measuring in meters.

Unless you watch only blu-ray films , it hardly makes a difference, I think many people confuse high definition with high resolution, most broadcast tv is encoded for reduced bandwidth anyway, so the definition is reduced and sometimes is awful (yea, that's you foxtel...)

You realise this is a gaming forum yeah?

Sure there might not be a massive difference for casual broadcast tv watchers (still more than enough to justify imo though), but the difference between SD-ass graphics and Hi-def for a PS3 or Xbox 360 on a 50" screen is night and day.

well, with any tv i buy, i want to hook my pc up to it, so first of all, id go lcd and then secondly id definately want the highest res i can get

There's not enough LCD trolls in this thread.

1% is too many, although stupid lcd lovers aren't going to get me to start posting again. If your stupid enough to base a buying decision off this forum you and your lcd will be happy together :)

If you like how it looks, who cares whether it is cowdung, plasma or lcd.

Zealots be they religous or plasma ... are morons.

cowdung... for the discerning rural viewer.

How have you found the bew tv Eu4ia? Thinking of buying the same one.

lcd

How have you found the bew tv Eu4ia? Thinking of buying the same one.

I'm very happy with it - at that price it's a steal. I see JB is also selling them at that price now so if clive peeters sells out, go there.

Watching the cricket has been brilliant on the 50"

Jave lcd 1080p. Sony is the way to go, dont waste your time with plasmas, unless you want to spend 10k or more. Jb is a rip off.

JB is not a rip off. Thats just plain stupidity. I work for JB in TV Sales.

I know for a fact not a single person has ever been able to point out the difference between a 1080p and a 720 running blu ray along our TV Gondola display.

I rarely sell a Full HD unless they are a Home Cinema fanatic.

I could say a dozen places are absolute rip offs, but it all comes down to the sales person :)

Imo - buy for what you watch mostly. If its free to air tv with sport and some dvd action - go plasma. Save ur $$. If its mainly dvd's and console gaming or to be used as a pc monitor of some sort - go LCD, if its a mixture of both go LCD in 100hz. Honest opinion - Samsung series 6 owns all, not a fan personally of series 9 (LED).

NEVER listen to the sales person on what to buy. Buy the tv that looks best to your eye. Consider your room requirements (what size tv) and what you watch mainly (lcd vs plasma) for picking your tv. Then consider if your going blu ray now or possibly in the future to determine if you want HD or Full HD.

If u got a 10k 60" Pioneer plasma vs a $3k samsung 46" lcd and the lcd looks better to you - save the money and buy the lcd. Dont waste ur money on s*** that makes no difference to you.

Hope that helps :)

Adam

also imho - Sony is a great TV, but you pay FAR too much for what you get. Compare samsung to sony in lcd, review response times in the panel and contrast ratios, warranty and then check out the price. I wont bother expalining it cause i have already admitted to being a samsung groupy and this may seem bias, so i urge you to do some research before jumping on the sony bandwagon :)

Also i see no difference between 100hz and 200hz (z series sony) to warrant the humungous price difference. I wish i did though.

hey XaltD:

1. Which JB do you work for?
2. Don't suppose they're open today?
3. Can you hook me up cuz!?@!


last edited by MatchFixer at 09:29:16 01/Jan/09

I got a series 6 50" Samsung plasma from Clive Anthony at Kedron, for $2,270 on Boxing day including delivery and extra 3 years extended warranty. Pretty good deal because it was their last one or something.

All I could see is HOLY f*** it's awesome watching blu-ray on it. Saw Hell Boy 2 on it yesterday and oh man... it's so awesome.

Was gonna only get the 46" but thought, screwed it get a 50" inch!. Plus we're sitting about 2 metres away from the TV so according to that char Nathan posted it's about optimal distance. :)

last edited by Opec at 11:32:31 02/Jan/09

2m away from a 50"? Nice. Be sure to stock up on neck braces though - you may feel like you're at a tennis match! :)

2m away from a 50"? Nice. Be sure to stock up on neck braces though - you may feel like you're at a tennis match! :)

hehe nah it's not really that bad, you can actually see 90% of the screen without moving your eyes around. We're probably sitting more like 2.2 / 2.5 metres away from it anyway so it's all good :)

Toowoomba store :)

Toowoomba store :)

Now we know who to speak to for 60cm CRT's.