DLP vs Plasma/LCD


I was just about ready to plunk down $4k for a Panasonic 42" plasma. I was at my brother's tonight watching the Olympics on his 42" Pioneer plasma (HD transmission,) when he tells me that I should go with a DLP for my bedroom, rather than the plasma. He claims the picture is much better and they cost less. I wasn't even considering a DLP because I didn't think it would fit in my bedroom. (being to deep) He says they make some, now, that are only a few inches deeper/wider than a plasma. Any takers? Is the DLP the way to go? If so, can anyone recommend one with killer picture quality, and relatively thin? thanks in advance. warren
128x128warrenh

Showing 3 responses by tonyp54

My understanding is that LCD is the future of television, not plasma. LCD is lighter, doesn't burn in, and has a much longer "life expectancy". Unfortunately, right now large flat screen LCDs are very expensive compared to DLP and plasma. Both DLP and plasma are transition technologies until LCD becomes the standard, which will probably be in the next 2-4 years. If you can't wait, a DLP is probably your best bet.
Darryl...my guess is the 50 inch LCD you see is probably an LCD projection tv, not a flat panel. LCDs larger than 37 inches are very expensive right now while you can pick up 42 inch plasmas for $2500 these days. Don't compare the least expensive lcds to the most expensive plasmas.

http://www.videodirect.com/panasonic/lcdprojectiontvs/panasonic-pt-50lc14.html
Darryl, we agree on your point of crt vs. dlp if space is not an issue. That's exactly what I did getting a large widescreen rptv for half the cost of the Samsung dlp for a large basement rec room. The link was to point out that the 50" you mentioned is probably a projection lcd, not a flat panel. I have not even seen one larger than 37 inches yet, let alone 50. Where did you see one for $5000?