Video Question: Plazma or LCD???


Hi, I know we mainly enjoy talking about audio, but I may have to buy a TV soon. I am confused. I feel I am very knowledgeable on audio (thanks to many helpful people on this site), but I don't know squat about video.

I thought I had made up my mind to get a Sony LCD. But I recently saw a Pioneer Plazma and the color looked better than anything I had looked at in LCD's.

Which is better? I have been told that Pioneer is making the best HD TV's on the market today. Any opinions will be appreciated. Has anyone compared the Pioneer Plazma to the Sony LCD?
slowhand
I think Swampwalker may have gotten the pricing reversed. In my experience plasma tends to be less expensive for a given size than LCD. LCD is less sensitive to reflections and, I believe, more energy efficient; the top end Pioneer plasma has the best black levels I've seen in flat panels. The best of either technology seems very good.

db
At this point in time, no LCD's can compete with plasma's superior black level (especially the Pioneer Kuros). Even the best LCD's look flat and somewhat washed out by comparison.

LCD has made great strides recently in improving refresh to reduce motion artifacts, but still doesn't come close to plasma in this regard.

The resolution advantage that LCD once had over plasma has also disappeared with so many 1080p plasmas available today. Frankly, I would take a 768p Kuro over any 1080p LCD anyway because superior black level is much more important than the slight resolution difference at reasonable viewing distances.

LCD screens do have less reflectivity than plasma screens, which can be helpful in rooms with lots of windows and lights behind the viewing position. LCDs are also brighter, which is why regular consumers are so drawn to them in the super stores.
Plasma is really heads and tails better then LCD, yes LCD is catching up but it has not yet, cheap LCD units have blurry motion when watching sports it can be very frustrating and blacks simply cant compete. If you have a bright room where it cant be easily controlled Plasma may annoying you with its hi-glare screen surface but other then that single issue there are no other serious objections to Plasma......it is simply that much better at this point in time.
For what it's worth, I live with both a 50" Panasonic Plasma and a 52" Sharp Aquos LCD and, yes there are differences but mostly of the "apples vs. oranges" variety rather than "better vs. lesser". Maybe the single issue that's become apparent to me is the presence of some amount of moire' pattern type distortion when displaying jpeg images from my digital camera on the LCD. Then again, I can't compare this to the plasma because I don't want to subject my plasma to static images so it becomes six of one and a half-dozen of the other. If I could keep only one of these sets, I'd complain bitterly about having to part with one........and then flip a coin.
I've looked and looked at both. To me LCD is too perfect. Plasma is lifelike. I think I would never tire of a Pioneer Plasma but a LCD could wear on me after a period of time. I know they are both digital but this is the way I would put it. The plazma is like tubes and the LCD is like solid state. So if you are a tube lover like me you would want the plazma and if you like solid state musical gear go for the LCD. Two types of people, two types of gear.