Ah - you've not seen the 103" Panasonic in action then.

Even ignoring the sheer size of the thing (which is tricky) the picture is astounding. Even standard def video looks great on it.

I reckon OLED is worth keeping an eye on. SED appears to be dead in the water, unfortunately - it showeda lot of promise.

i think we saw that in john lewis a little while back(?) and whilst it was bloody massive and did look good, it didn't impress me as much as when we saw the pioneer a couple of weeks ago

Having seen the Pioneer in action, that isn't true; LCDs are getting good, but Plasma is better.

Having seen my Sony in action, and directly compared it to many other sets in the shop, I can say that LCD is better!

It's all down to personal opinion at the end of the day, and for me the Sony LCD was superior in every respect.

Then Sony are deluded. LCD does not match plasma for image quality. Not even close.

Sorry, but b*ll*cks, 5 years ago I'd have agreed with you but technology moves fast.

As above, I directly compared many sets in the same price range (2-2.5k) and for me, the Sony LCD provided a better picture than anything else, I didn't care what name the set had on it, I just wanted the best picture, obviously this is subjective as people look for different things, but LCD can be as good, or better than plasma.

Then Sony are deluded. LCD does not match plasma for image quality. Not even close.

Sorry, but b*ll*cks, 5 years ago I'd have agreed with you but technology moves fast.

As above, I directly compared many sets in the same price range (2-2.5k) and for me, the Sony LCD provided a better picture than anything else, I didn't care what name the set had on it, I just wanted the best picture, obviously this is subjective as people look for different things, but LCD can be as good, or better than plasma.

As I said, the technology is rapidly moving on and yesterday's common beliefs on the pros and cons of each type of screen are no longer necessarily true

It's very good having competition on different standards - it drives the industry and promotes technological advancements which can only be a good thing

What if I were to say "Toshiba, NEC, Microsoft and Universal Studios are deluded. HD-DVD is :pants: and cannot match blu-ray for image quality nor features. Not even close [to Sony's offering] :P

i wish i had'nt asked now!!

from the ones i have seen in the stores here i prefer the LCD units, plasma looks a little too synthetic an image IMHO. but as was mentioned that could be down to the settings of the unit and not the unit itself.

Thanks for all your comments guys, my eyes have been opened to the scale of the decision thats for sure, i shall let you know what i buy in due course!

Mark

Sorry, but b*ll*cks, 5 years ago I'd have agreed with you but technology moves fast.

Which is why at work I do a screen shoot-out every 6 months.

LCD has improved enormously but plasma still wins overall. 'Course, a great LCD is better than a crap plasma.

Having seen my Sony in action, and directly compared it to many other sets in the shop, I can say that LCD is better!

It's all down to personal opinion at the end of the day, and for me the Sony LCD was superior in every respect.

Sorry, but b*ll*cks, 5 years ago I'd have agreed with you but technology moves fast.

As above, I directly compared many sets in the same price range (2-2.5k) and for me, the Sony LCD provided a better picture than anything else, I didn't care what name the set had on it, I just wanted the best picture, obviously this is subjective as people look for different things, but LCD can be as good, or better than plasma.

which shop? what brand were they making the most profit on and pushing at the time?

which shop? what brand were they making the most profit on and pushing at the time?

Izzactly.

LCD has bigger margins than plasma; that's why the shops push it. It's very easy to make one screen look better or worse than another in a shop demonstration if you know which you get more commission on.

Handbags away - here's the biggest and best TV anywhere, anytime:

what. the. ****. :eek::confused:

what. the. ****. :eek::confused:

Devine

HTH

I bought a Tosh 42X3030D a couple of months ago, LCD 1080P playback and absolutely unbelievable picture on HD inputs. SD not so good but that may be due to my sources.

AVForums Home is a good place to look up TV's. I was set on a 42 LCD 1080p and was looking at a Philips, LG and Tosh with a budget of 1k. The Philips and LG was mostly slated and although the Tosh isn't perfect it got favourable reviews.

A new 42Z3030D model is coming (already??) out that has 100hz refresh and true 24fps playback. My model was adveretised as 24fps playback but this was amended to say *accepts* 24fps input after many complaints about judder on Blu-Ray discs. Some notice it more than others!

which shop? what brand were they making the most profit on and pushing at the time?

It was a small independant A/V store, the ONLY place to buy your A/V equipment, feck the internet or comet, you cant beat the service a good independant with a dedicated viewing room will give you!

He basically left me alone for 3 hours to play with the various sets on my list, only disturbing me to bring me a cup of tea and biscuits occasionaly:thumbup:

Whatever you decide to buy, be it LCD, Plasma or CRT (if you want the absolute best picture;)), I'd highly recommend spending a few extra quid and buying from a proper independant, who's enthusiast knowledge far outweighs that of some Comet/Currys/Dixons disinterested spotty oik who's been sent on a 'course' to tell him what 1080p and 24fps mean.

On the subject of 24fps, I have to concede that watching blu-ray on the Sony LCD through the PS3 is fecking annoying due to the juddering, in my defence, blu-ray wasn't about when I bought my set, but you'd think that pushing both technologies, Sony would have got that right:rolleyes: