DailyTech - LCDs Taking Over Plasma's 40" Stronghold

Submit News

Hardware LCDs Taking Over Plasma's 40" Stronghold
Brandon Hill (Blog) - November 27, 2006 1:02 PM

E-mail

del.icio.us

52 comment(s) - last by Enoch2001.. on Nov 29 at 11:10 AM

40" Sony BRAVIA KDL-40XBR3 1080p LCD Flat Panel HDTV

LCDs are starting to take over the 40" class

The 40" class flat-panel TV market has been dominated by plasma for quite some time now. The tide, however, is starting to change and LCD TVs are starting to encroach into traditional plasma territory.

With plasma manufacturers finding it difficult to incorporate full 1080p HD resolutions into their sub-50" TVs, LCD TV manufacturers with higher resolution displays have found an opening to exploit. Pricing in this sector of the market still plays in favor or plasma displays, but the price differential is declining quickly according to Credit Suisse analyst Wanli Wang. "This Christmas season probably is the last chance for (plasma TV makers) to promote 42-inch models. By this time next year probably there will be no price difference between plasma and LCD TVs."

Overall, the LCD TV market is still larger than the plasma TV market with demand expected to reach $75 billion USD in 2008 and $93 billion USD in 2010. The plasma TV market is expected to reach $24 billion USD in 2008 and then enter a decline in 2009. Even more telling is that 80% of R&D funding for flat-panel televisions is devoted to LCD technology with plasma and other display technologies vying for the remaining 20% according to Wang.

As the market for plasma TVs declines, manufacturers who are producing both LCD and plasma TVs are expected to bail on plasma altogether and focus solely on LCD manufacturing. Companies like Sony and Chunghwa Picture Tubes (CPT) have already turned their sole attention towards LCD technology. "We cannot focus on two different products because of heavy capex (capital expenditure). That's why we had to choose one," said CPT CFO James Wu.

With plasma seeing increased competition in the 40” class, the technology may find safer waters in the 50” and higher class where it enjoys production and image quality advantages over LCD technology. But with so much money being poured into LCD TV development, the advantages aren’t likely to last long – in fact, Samsung is already showing its LCD manufacturing prowess with a 70” 1080p LCD TV which is due to enter production next year.

Comments

Threshold

Username
Password
remember me

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

lcd = eh

By ElJefe69 on 11/27/2006 1:51:35 PM , Rating: 2

I do not know if anyone has noticed, but a high end plasma looks better than any lcd I have seen, and I sell these things. Also, the reason for less plasma's is the panasonic has taken over much of the market building more facilities last year and using much more cost efficient technology. Side to side colour loss is huge on an lcd, non existant on a plasm, also the ability to project into a well lit room is still best by plasma. The reason plasma's are on the decline is that lcd's are becomming cheaper to make, not because the LCD's look better.

RE: lcd = eh

By encryptkeeper on 11/27/06, Rating: -1

RE: lcd = eh

By Enoch2001 on 11/27/2006 2:30:02 PM , Rating: 3

quote:
You have to remember that you can't just use a Plasma forever, you have to recharge the plasma every year or so.

What imaginary world of WTF are you living on? You don't have to recharge plasmas at all! As a matter of fact, most current generation plasmas have a 60,000 hour life before half-brightness - as long as current generation CRT's. And if you can get up to 60,000 hours of life out of an average LCD's backlight, then pigs can fly.

Parent

RE: lcd = eh

By CascadingDarkness on 11/27/2006 2:49:10 PM , Rating: 2

Great research Bubba.

See guste's comment about both having 60,000 hour life. Burn out and recharge aren't an issue unless you buy from sub-par manufact.

Parent

RE: lcd = eh

By Enoch2001 on 11/29/2006 10:40:46 AM , Rating: 2

quote:
Great research Bubba.

What? I was pointing out encryptkeeper's misinformation... Did you read my reply at all?

Parent

RE: lcd = eh

By guste on 11/27/2006 2:34:02 PM , Rating: 2

Burn-in is a non-issue on the latest generation of plasmas. Before I bought my set, I did a lot of research and discovered that along with the burn-in issues, LCD and plasma sets, share the same 60,000 hour life expectancy (around 8 hours a day for 20 years) as well.

Those old arguments against plasma don't really apply anymore.

Parent

RE: lcd = eh

By GoatMonkey on 11/27/2006 3:27:03 PM , Rating: 2

Burn in is not an issue during normal television viewing, I can agree with that. What happens when you plug in your HTPC and are using it in Windows mode? Do you get a little "Start" icon burned in there after a couple of hours?

Parent

RE: lcd = eh

By Zirconium on 11/27/2006 5:21:53 PM , Rating: 3

Supposedly, new plasmas shift the display over a pixel periodically in order to prevent static logos from burning in. And using grey bars on the side will help with the burn-in when watching SDTV.

However, the idea that burn might happen with a HTPC or with certain types of TV viewing (i.e. if you watch a lot of news channels with a ticker), combined with true 1080p resolution, I ended up settling on an LCD TV this holiday season.

Finally, the colors aren't bad with LCDs. As long as you don't have dead pixels, backlight bleeding through, or some other glaring defect, I figure you will be happy with whatever you get. It is one thing when you are in a store and comparing TVs, but when you take it home, the colors look just fine.

My reason for saying this comes from personal experience and also from reading reviews on AVSForum and other sites. It seems like unless someone's TV breaks or has a major issue, everyone will rate their TV highly, whether it is a bargain LCD like a Westinghouse or a Sceptre, or a really expensive one, like a top end Sony Bravia.

Parent

RE: lcd = eh

By guste on 11/28/2006 12:22:10 AM , Rating: 2

Just as a follow up, I have my plasma (a panasonic 50" commercial display) hooked up to an MCE HTPC, as well as to an HD cable box. I use the display not only as my television, but also as my computer monitor. Additionally, I also play FPS games, like F.E.A.R., where screen information remains in place for long periods of time.

I've never experienced any burn-in issues. Burn-in isn't an issue with 8th and 9th generation plasmas. Have no fear, watch Closing Bell, on CNBC... That ticker won't burn in.

Parent

RE: lcd = eh

By kmmatney on 11/28/2006 12:49:03 AM , Rating: 2

I have a recent plasma and it does get burin-in. My son left the gamecube on for half a day, and there it was. The TV has a screen washer utility that does an OK job of getting rid of burn-in, but it still can happen. I probably won't get another plasma.

Parent

RE: lcd = eh

By othercents on 11/28/2006 5:42:22 PM , Rating: 2

Do you have the model information for your screen? I'm sure that some people would like to know which manufacturers might have burn in issues and which don't. Also there are some screens that will develop a slight hum when in higher altitudes. If you live up in the mountains near Denver look for a high altitude Plasma. Some manufacturers have standard Plasmas that work just fine, but other manufacturers don't even think about this issue.

Other

Parent

RE: lcd = eh

By cochy on 11/27/2006 3:38:34 PM , Rating: 2

quote:
recharge the plasma every year or so

Ya well that's wrong. My buddy has a 43'' Elite and has never "recharged" it.

Parent

RE: lcd = eh

By Viditor on 11/27/2006 6:32:16 PM , Rating: 2

quote:
you have to recharge the plasma every year or so

I still have no idea where this silly myth came from (I've even heard it from salesmen trying to sell plasmas), but a plasma is a sealed unit and CAN'T be "recharged".
As has been stated, plasmas have a 60,000 hr lifespan to half brightness...this means that after 60k hours, the screen will be half as bright as it was when new.

Parent

RE: lcd = eh

By RamarC on 11/27/2006 2:20:25 PM , Rating: 2

true, plasmas are great for the "movie experience" but if your big screen is also your everyday tv, lcd/dlp rear projection is still the best balance between cost, resolution, and size. imho, plasmas still can't handle brightly lit rooms like a rp. and plasmas have much higher power draw and heat output than either rp or lcd.

viewing angle issues are becoming less relevant since who really watches a tv standing beside it? most consumers can live with weaker black level/contrast rather than pony up another grand for a plasma. and LCD manufacturers are still advancing the underlying tech to improve display quality and lower cost... plasma is almost at a plateau for both.

But sets using LED or SED will probably obsolete all the current display technologies anyway so it won't matter what tv you have now since it'll be completely passe 4 years from now.

Parent

RE: lcd = eh

By Davelo on 11/27/2006 3:28:32 PM , Rating: 2

Isn't it "Laser" TVs that are supposed to take over the market next year?

Parent

RE: lcd = eh

By Viditor on 11/27/2006 6:37:36 PM , Rating: 2

quote:
imho, plasmas still can't handle brightly lit rooms like a rp

Plasmas are the brightest picture available, so they are actually the very best in brightly lit rooms. I have watched a plasma screen outside in the middle of the afternoon, and the picture was fantastic...

quote:
sets using LED or SED will probably obsolete all the current display technologies anyway so it won't matter what tv you have now since it'll be completely passe 4 years from now

Actually, I think that OLEDs will take over...they also are emmittive like plasma (LCDs use masking tech), and should be significantly cheaper and sharper while using much less power.

Parent

RE: lcd = eh

By kmmatney on 11/28/2006 12:46:02 AM , Rating: 2

I've bought both a 50" plasma and a 50" LCD rear projection TV this year, and although the plasma is pretty cool, the LCD rear projection is a better overall TV. I only bought the LCD RP becuase the bezels were smaller and I couldn't find a 50" plasma that would fit in my TV nook in the family room (my plasma is in the basement). However I was pretty surprised when the LCD RP became the better looking TV at home. It looked crappy compared to the plasmas in the store. So yeah - DLP and LCD rear projection TVs are foten overlooked, but provide great bang for buck.

Parent

RE: lcd = eh

By bunnyfubbles on 11/27/2006 2:28:32 PM , Rating: 2

If they could make make sub 50" plasmas that can display full 1920x1080 HD content, and make the price competitive with LCD, then I certainly would seriously consider it over LCD.

However other disadvantages with plasma such as display life might still push me towards LCD where I won't have to worry as much if I use the screen extensively not just for HD playback (TV/videos/games) but using it as a computer screen as well.

Parent

RE: lcd = eh

By Enoch2001 on 11/27/2006 2:45:23 PM , Rating: 3

quote:
other disadvantages with plasma such as display life might still push me towards LCD

Again, this is a constant mistruth in current generation plasma technology. Plasmas last no less than LCD's or CRT's, and frankly provide a much better color palette (detailed inky black levels), smoother motion during fast action (a refresh rate comparable to a CRT), consistant brightness from all angles, and many plasmas (especially those from Panasonic) are enviromentally friendly (no lead or mercury in their panels - unlike most LCD's wich are rich in mercury), and they (the Panasonics) also have glass screens making them much more resistant to damage and cleaning.

Ever have a $2K LCD 50" get poked in the screen with junior's toys? Can anyone say leaky LCD... D'oh!

Parent

1080 anything

By CascadingDarkness on 11/27/2006 3:03:38 PM , Rating: 2

I've been looking for one on market recently and must agree with loss having to do with 1080i/1080p support. No plasmas in 40" or even higher are True 1080 anything support. They may be able to play from sources with this but none have anywhere near 1920 X 1080. Considering I wanted to hook my PC up to any display I would buy LCD was obvious choice, even if contrast may not be on par with plasma.

After tons of comparing the only bonuses I found for plasma were black levels and contrast.

Note: I went with a Sony KDL-40v2500. Hope it will be right choice after I have it delivered.

RE: 1080 anything

By quiksilv3r on 11/27/2006 3:37:41 PM , Rating: 2

That's a really good choice. I just recently purchased a KDL 40XBR2. And I must say, although it's only 40", 1080p looks GREAT on it.
I'd strongly suggest the 46" KDL 46XBR3 if your pocket can handle it. :)

Parent

RE: 1080 anything

By Viditor on 11/27/2006 6:56:31 PM , Rating: 2

quote:
1080p looks GREAT on it

Ummm...there are still no 1080p sources yet. What you are seeing is 1080i or 720p, converted to 1080p. When you upconvert, you don't gain any resolution at all...resolution is only as good as the lowest level the video has existed at.

I have worked with 1080p in the studio (direct film transfers for editing), and you're right that it's most excellent. However for most eyes, you really won't see much difference between it and 1080i.

I have also watched it on a native 1080p plasma screen (Pioneer's PDP 5000-EX, called the PRO-FHD1 in the US)...

Parent

RE: 1080 anything

By bplewis24 on 11/28/06, Rating: 0

RE: 1080 anything

By Viditor on 11/28/2006 3:28:30 AM , Rating: 2

quote:
What are Blu Ray players currently outputting 1080p BD-ROMs in?

The movies can be upconverted to 1080p, but none of the movie houses are producing actual 1080p source material...
The best you will see today is 1080i that has been upconverted. (Upconverting does not improve the picture BTW...)

Parent

RE: 1080 anything

By anonymo on 11/28/2006 7:25:33 AM , Rating: 2

FYI...1080i and 1080p have the same pixel count, so will look exactly the same...that is until the camera shot starts flailing around...

the p doesn't stand for pixels...

Parent

RE: 1080 anything

By Viditor on 11/28/2006 8:58:21 AM , Rating: 2

quote:
the p doesn't stand for pixels...

Glad you cleared that up...:)

My nick stands for video+editor...I have 2 decades experience, and I've been working on HDTV for 8 of them.

i stands for interlaced, and p for progressive scan...
What that means is that instead of 2 interlaced fields making up a single frame (interlaced), each field is a full screen scan...

While the pixel count is the same, the actual resolution is slightly better on progressive...but the data rate is almost double (60 full frame fields per second instead of 60 half frame interlaced fields per second).

Parent

RE: 1080 anything

By bplewis24 on 11/28/06, Rating: 0

Sony Plasma

By Oregonian2 on 11/27/2006 2:05:48 PM , Rating: 2

I recall Sony's exit from Plasma also had a lot to do with they being behind so far in the technology that they were beaten and gave up. Even in LCD's they had to OEM Sharp LCDs. Stuck to their trinitron CRTs too long. Sony used to be the consumer technology leader, now they're a large has-been with a big name trying to catch up. Or so it seems anyway. At least their Alpha digital SLR looks real good (albeit including technology bought from Konica-Minolta).

RE: Sony Plasma

By jtvang125 on 11/27/2006 2:41:24 PM , Rating: 2

I'm not sure what the reason was for Sony pulling out of the plasma market but as far as current display technology goes they're still up to date. Their SXRD (similar to LCoS)delivers very a very impressing picture. Their higher end XBR2 and XBR3 LCDs have gotten many positive reviews as well. Of course price is another thing.

As far as screen size, PQ, and price is concerned you probably can't beat DLP.

Parent

RE: Sony Plasma

By cochy on 11/27/2006 3:46:05 PM , Rating: 3

We have a 40'' Sony LCD in the house. I must say there is way too much pixelation present, even while viewing high def. For commercial use or computer/gaming use, LCD is the best solution. However for TV and movie viewing, LCD falls way behind plasma in terms of picture quality. Also I must agree that the best bang for your buck is DLP.

Parent

Sony / Samsung / Panasonic

By psenechal on 11/27/2006 4:28:19 PM , Rating: 2

I believe Panasonic is making a 50" 1080p plasma display for release in 2007. It's supposedly part of their new Blue Ray suite of products.

I also read that the Sony Bravia LCD displays are using Samsung panels. Although the reviews said that Sony had applied their own electronic tweaking to the displays to make the picture more adjustable than Samsungs. Not sure if that justifies the additional $500-$700 for a Sony vs. the same size Samsung.

RE: Sony / Samsung / Panasonic

By ElJefe69 on 11/27/2006 4:55:45 PM , Rating: 1

Yes, that is true. The problem is for many companies is that only a few of them actually make any of these flat panels. Samsung has two plants for lcds. America has one of them :) Panasonic has 2 plants (or three I forget) for Plasma's. Other companies do not have plants for any of these. I think philips has an lcd plant. So, if sony wants to make money it has to make: SXRD !

that's about that. Plasma's are on the decline because 6 out of 8 of the major labels do not make them for themselves anymore and panasonic's new plant makes them much cheaper than ever. People sell what they make money on and what they have in stock, not what is better.

Parent

RE: Sony / Samsung / Panasonic

By Viditor on 11/27/2006 7:00:13 PM , Rating: 2

quote:
The problem is for many companies is that only a few of them actually make any of these flat panels

This is true...for example, Sony has never made their own plasmas (they purchased the screens from NEC and added their own electronics).

Parent

RE: Sony / Samsung / Panasonic

By animedude on 11/28/2006 1:56:50 AM , Rating: 2

Yes, Sony uses Samsung panels, but with more advance chips. These chips definitely make Sony displays superior.

Parent

Hostile takeover

By TimberJon on 11/27/2006 1:39:33 PM , Rating: 3

Sounds good to me. Im curious to see how they may incorporate solid state memory into TV's of a flat-panel nature.

And I still want to see that credit-card-thin technology take off so that I can install TV panels on all my bedroom walls, and have murals of nebulas or rain forests slowly rotating around my room.

RE: Hostile takeover

By L1NUXownz1fUR1337 on 11/27/2006 10:56:55 PM , Rating: 3

I'm going to have bikini chicks jumping with a jump rope.

Parent

1080P in relation to HD Broadcast TV?

By EglsFly on 11/27/2006 6:49:32 PM , Rating: 2

If your only watching HD Broadcast TV, is their any advantage to 1080P? It is my understanding that the standard for HD broadcasts is either 720P or 1080i. I'm a newb at some of this HD info, so please explain. Again, I am only referring to Broadcast TV, not Blue Ray or Video Gaming, etc.

RE: 1080P in relation to HD Broadcast TV?

By Viditor on 11/27/2006 7:03:39 PM , Rating: 2

quote:
If your only watching HD Broadcast TV, is their any advantage to 1080P? It is my understanding that the standard for HD broadcasts is either 720P or 1080i.

Exactly correct...1080p will likely never be a broadcast standard because it requires far too much bandidth (almost double that of 1080i) for very little gain.
Where it does come in handy is for film transfers.

Parent

RE: 1080P in relation to HD Broadcast TV?

By Xavian on 11/27/2006 7:05:46 PM , Rating: 2

there is no advantage at all and 1080P broadcasts will not be coming anytime soon, its just too much data to be sent via broadcast. It would severely restrict the amount of channels a provider would be able to broadcast.

Parent

a few tidbits

By techhead97 on 11/27/2006 6:53:42 PM , Rating: 2

There are a couple 1080p 50" or so tvs now. Very pricy. Personally I dont like the glare problem on plasmas. All Hdtvs should be calibrated once you get it home. Its not too hard using one of the dvd disks available. Colors are getting better on lcds as well as black levels. Viewing angle is not much of a problem on most lcds now. Burn in is almost non existent on plasmas now. However I dont know if it has been tried to leave a tv on say a media center screen every day for years on end(off at nite) and not start to have a problem. I know about the screen movement they use but it only moves it a little(small than many graphics thicknesses). Plasmas are great for movies in a dark room. Laser or LED DLP might end up the best. Well have to see. SXRD sony lcos sets are very good. LCD sets are in the works with 16x the pixels of 1080p for very large screens showing multiple hd football games for example. Or pip with a small computer window with still good readability on that part of the screen.

RE: a few tidbits

By Xavian on 11/27/2006 7:08:16 PM , Rating: 2

Personally i've noted on my Panasonic 42" plasma, that if the plasma detects a static image on a signal over a long period of time, it will automatically switch on its screen saver to prevent burn in.

So i really doubt burn-in is a problem on the latest plasmas.

Parent

RE: a few tidbits

By Enoch2001 on 11/29/2006 11:05:52 AM , Rating: 2

quote:
Personally i've noted on my Panasonic 42" plasma, that if the plasma detects a static image on a signal over a long period of time, it will automatically switch on its screen saver to prevent burn in.

So i really doubt burn-in is a problem on the latest plasmas.

Do you have a commercial Panasonic? The regular consumer models have less than stellar screen saving functions, but the commercials have automatic as you describe.

I have the TH-50PHD8UK and it's a commercial Panasonic. The screen saver automatically shifts the pixels every few minutes. It's not noticable unless you are staring at it when it happens during a still (like the Dashboard of my Xbox 360). Quite brilliant actually.

Parent

LCD = the suck

By slash196 on 11/27/2006 4:28:43 PM , Rating: 4

LCDs have always looked like crap for videos, and they always will. It's a basic technological limitation. LCD can't get kicked to the curb too soon.

RE: LCD = the suck

By ElJefe69 on 11/27/2006 4:50:11 PM , Rating: 1

ever wonder where OLED and all that went? Those looked amazing. plain old lcd even with LED backlighting is a hack job of an attempt at high quality video.

Parent

Plasma > LCD

By BillyBatson on 11/27/2006 4:11:52 PM , Rating: 2

This news sucks. Plasma is far better than Plasma in picture quality, colors, depth of realisim, gray scale, etc. Also SD picture looks MUCH better on a plasma than lcd. Yes it is true to view true 1080 i or p you need a 50" screen or larger, however. Of course if you want anything less than 42" you have to go with LCD and that is fine since a 32" lcd is too small for the living room anwyay it is more of a bedroom tv. One thing is true though, i wanted to upgrade to a 50" Plasma this year but it is impossible to find a model that does 1080p. I just hope plasma hold out long enough for LCD's to be replaced with differnt sed/fed/laser tv's

RE: Plasma > LCD

By DLeRium on 11/27/2006 5:57:58 PM , Rating: 2

You know, I took forever staring at the Pioneer Elite HD-1130? or was it the 1140? Basically, I was deciding between the 50" Pioneer Elite vs. 46" Sony LCD.

I took the XBR2 finally.

Now I kinda regret it, but no doubt the XBR2 kicks butt. To whoever recommended the XBR3, that's a dumb idea. Pay $300 for a black bezel + black remote? Save your $300 and if you really wanna spend it, go upgrade your XBR2 bezel.

The reason SD looks better on Plasma is due to pixellation in LCDs. I know the XBRs are terrible at SD and other panels are better, but if you're viewing from a distance, so what? Plus since so much content is going HD, you realize that SD picutre quality may no longer be an issue soon enough. Considering many of us don't replace TVs for like 5 years, imagine the amount of HD content in 5 years.... Do you think you'll be watching that much SDTV by then? Even if it's Digital SD, the picture is a huge improvement.

If you want to jump now, I say get LCD or Plasma. DLP is fine too, but just don't get those POS projection sets just because you want some 60" monstrosity. I've seen 56" LCD projection TVs. You might as well get a freaking tube TV. Looks like total crap.

Parent

Plasma life = greater than LCD

By ElJefe69 on 11/27/2006 4:42:33 PM , Rating: 1

60,000 hours of life is just one reason not to worry about plasmas in these generations.

The LCD is the thing to worry about if it is not LED backlit. THe brightness on an lcd decreses dramatically with normal use after 2 years. It is hard to notice it right away as you are getting used to it. Brightness can be turned up then to compensate, but 5 years and its dull.

I hear the plasma's also can fade. I have not ever seen one fade like I have an LCD so it just must not be as much. (I have seen several hundred sets of all different ages of both)

RE: Plasma life = greater than LCD

By ElJefe69 on 11/27/2006 4:47:49 PM , Rating: 1

I have to add to this something of status:

The wealthiest of people in manhattan and on long island only get plasma's. They get the 10k dollar ones or higher types. None of them get lcd's. Status item is the plasma screen 100% so. It's a factor tech people do not see, yet it's a huge push for the market.

Parent

RE: Plasma life = greater than LCD

By Enoch2001 on 11/29/2006 11:10:11 AM , Rating: 2

quote:
The wealthiest of people in manhattan and on long island only get plasma's. They get the 10k dollar ones or higher types. None of them get lcd's. Status item is the plasma screen 100% so. It's a factor tech people do not see, yet it's a huge push for the market.

That's a good point and backs up the latest figures: plasma screen televisions are only popular in the US. Everywhere else in the world it's LCD...

Makes us wonder how long the US market will hold out for big screen plasmas when the rest of the world are pushing (and buying) LCD's - a more mature technology. My guess is not long, and that's a shame - I prefer Hi-Def on a quality plasma than any LCD...

Parent