The following users like this post: McRib
I upgraded my theater room with a UN55es8000 Samsung LED about 6 months ago...the most amazing picture I have ever gotten from a flat panel.
And whomever was trashing the DLP selection earlier doesn't know what they are talking about...while having a much narrower viewing angle, the picture is generally top notch. My friend has a Mitsubishi diamond DLP that has a phenomenal picture.
The reason hey are less expensive/less desire able is primarily due to size. I would be curious to see what a CRT could produce these days....
The following users like this post: oucub23
That was the problem. Led and plasma displays put out way more light...more than is ever really necessary in a home (this is why magnolia and media stores are dim, if not dark, environments.
You're accusing others of not knowing what they're talking about. You just need to stop talking.
Plasmas hardly suffer any burn in. And if it does get burn in from a ticker or something similar, it will be gone pretty quickly if you just switch channels. It's not permanent burn in. Plasmas don't have native 600Hz refresh either. That's a made up number because plasmas don't actually refresh. They've come up with that number through dubious math so that they can put a number on the spec sheet. It's a different technology than LCD and thus really has no true refresh rate. That's why plasma is best for cinephiles because it doesn't have the soap opera effect and will show a movie in the most true format.
As far as DLPs, size is only part of their problem. Since it's a projection the image suffers from wash out. Especially over a period of time. Sure you can turn all the settings up to make it brighter but it'll make your bulb life shorter. They just don't have images that look as good as other technologies.
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7...what-is-600hz/
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-...-in-a-problem/
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-...r-lies-to-you/
It explains it in this article: http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7...-refresh-rate/
I'll explain a bit more about it later when I have time.
Well...I will say this:
A plasma can have a permanent burn in.
A plasma does "refresh" in the sense that the images given it are done so in this format. It is also only capable of changing pixels a maximum (in general) of 600 times per second.
If the device providing the image to the display is doing so without a pull down, for things originally recoded on celluloid, it will still have an interpolation problem regardless of display. Most digital media is native at 24p, but there are instances where the native rate is mastered onto digital media (primarily DVD, but some BluRays are done at 60p...it is rare.
Unless a "Cinephile" has a projector, they are NEVER going to get the "most true" in addition most LED and LCD displays are now native at 120 or 240 hz making 24 fps look as accurate as a plasma.
As to DLP the greatest difference is price. There is simply very little technology that can produce a better image for 100" and above LCoS being one. If I was set on getting something 80" viewable, a DLP is, by far, the most reasonable overall possibility.
The following users like this post: SiggyPoke
It is still an issue comparative to LED/LCD.
Energy ratings are based upon 10hr/day usage, so these numbers should be divided up depending upon your actuals.
60" LED Samsung series 8 UA60ES8000M uses 508 kWh/annum
60" Plasma Samsung series 8 PS60E8000GM uses 837 kWh/annum
Figuring a cost of $.10 per kWh a top of the line LED costs $50.80 per yer while the comparable plasma costs $83.70 a difference of $32.90/year.
This is based upon factory settings. A calibrated LED in this range will typically use half of the wattage at factory settings, while a calibrated plasma will generally use double the wattage needed for factory settings.
Here's a decent review of mine. The Samsung SAM-UN60ES6500.
http://m.digitaltrends.com/tv-review...es6500-review/
I've had one about a month and love it. Picture is better than LCD. The secret is to put it in one spot and leave it alone. I've had a 55 mitsubishi for 10 years with the factory bulb. 3D is awesome also. I bought thru Paul's off amazon and they set it up and made sure it worked before leaving. Be warned though the free shipping is slow.
One thing to keep in mind if you are looking at the Mitsubishi, dm is that they announced this year would be the last year they make those DLP rear-projection TVs. Might want to go ahead and buy a couple of replacement bulbs for later on in case they are hard to find later. I read somewhere you can get them pretty cheap on Amazon.
Good friend of mine has both the 73" and the 82". He had the 73 in his mancave and when he upgraded to the 82 moved the 73 to his living room for his wife. Both are great tv's. I almost bought the 92" to put in my new sunroom but they do struggle a bit with glare from direct sunlight. Especially the new 92". I am looking at Sharp LED 80" for the sunroom now. I wouldn't hesitate on the 73" for the price if you can avoid a lot of direct glare right on the tv.
The following users like this post: McRib
Bottom line plasma technologies is cheap for a high quality product. That being said, "don't be poor".
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
, when are you going to come over and lay out next to this?
[IMG][/IMG]
The following users like this post: Aurora
we have a DLP....kinda annoying when we have to replace the bulb and color wheel. overall from the lifetime of having to replace those we could have just bought a new TV. We have a samsung 55" i believe DLP and had to replace the bulb probably 3 times and the colorwheel twice. Expensive ****
The following users like this post: McRib