Are you having a tin bath ?? plasma knocks spots off LCD for picture quality, and doesn't even need "full" HD res to do it.
For 1400 quid you can get a Pioneer PDP428 which is currently the best flat screen out there, period. To suggest a Samsung LCD for the same money is a best buy seriously dents your cred.
i have to say that after reading the review, I cant really accept the winner here. Apart from what dave says about the pioneer, there really doesnt sound like there is too much difference in the top 2 TV's.
Definatly not enough to warrent an extra 500 quid, more than 50% more than the panasonic. If anything, it sounds like you have been duped by the better looking casing of the samsung and I have to say that I wouldn't say that the panasonic's looks are bad at all, and the LG's looks are all TV screen and from the pictures, its the LG that is by far the better looking.
One other difference (although minor) is that the Panasonic Screen is Larger.
Cons of Plasma technology tends to be that its easier to become irreparable when there is a fault with it and image burn, however if you were getting a TV at this cost, your extremely likely to insure the TV or have household contents insurance. Panasonic have also implemented anti-screen burning technology into all of its plasma sets for many years and it has been fantastic.
All in all i just cannot see how the extra 500 quid warrents the samsung over the panasonic.
MMMM not the most helpful decision making review ever guys-sorry.
The Sony is almost 1/2 the samsung price; so you are not comparing sets in the same price band. This is silly. Why not compare a Merc with a Ford, wonder which is best.
I am looking to buy a set this summer. I just want the biggest bang for my limted buck possible. So price/performance ratio is key.
Also 4 sets is a relatively poor coverage of all the screens of this size available, why not cast the review net wider.
I'll keep looking for more informative reviews as I am no wiser here.
I agree with the comments about the price differences, prospective purchasers will usually have a price "band" that is at the outside around 20% up or down.
As for not including the Pioneer mentioned, I believe if it had been, the outcome of the test would be different, with the Pioneer taking first place, having said that, in those tested, I do think the Samsung deserved first place, I was very impressed with it whilst in an AV shop recently. But again, comparing sets with such a wide price difference, it actually should be the best. Then again, if it came up against the Pioneer........................
The remark about comparing a Ford to a Merc reminded me of what a cable maker said to me drawing analogies to cars and hif, he said, given that at a particular price point you could either have a "top end" Ford, or a lower end Merc, the Merc being the one to go for, as the components would still be manufactured by the same company responsible for an £88,000 model, whereby the parts on the £20,000 Ford, shared its parts bin with a £6,000 Fiesta, now what that has to do with this test I dont know, but im sure you know the point in making, well I hope you do!
I thought reviews were there to help people decide which product is best, taking into account the persons budget, but I am still confused. For the last 12 months I have been searching review sites to help me decide whether to change my Sony 36" crt for an hd tv, but there always seems to be this argument, which is best lcd or plasma. I agree with previous comments, any review to be taken seriously should include products of similar price range to gain a fair comparison. It would have been more helpful, if as suggested a Panasonic or Pioneer plasma of the same price as the Samsung had been included in the review. I was considering buying the Samsung until I read the comments, but will hang on to my crt for the time being.
I find the review of 4 flat screens of 40 to 42 in with prices ranging from £1400 to £800 quite useless. Why compare a £1400 Samsung with a bottom of the range Sony at £800.Why not compare the £1400 Samsung with a £1400 Sony. Most folk are looking for the best product for the money they have to spend and that is within a finite range of eg plus or minus £200.
Usefull info would be to list Best buys within certain price ranges , and for screens of a close size range. eg.
40 to 42 in screen and Price range £800 to £1000.
40 to 42 in screen and Price range £1000 to £1200 etc, etc
Mixing screen sizes with huge variations in price is simply confusing and of little use to a potential buyer.Comparisons should be made only with " like for like". Whats the point in comparing a Ferrari with a Fiesta when the potential buyer is only in one of the price brackets?
Could John Archer reply to the above comments, also give his opinion on whether an equal priced plasma tv, would give a better all round performance than the Samsung, as suggested in previous comments. I was all set to buy the Samsung until I read these comments, and I am now once again confused about which is best, plasma or lcd.
Could John Archer reply to the above comments, also give his opinion on whether an equal priced plasma tv, would give a better all round performance than the Samsung, as suggested in previous comments. I was all set to buy the Samsung until I read these comments, and I am now once again confused about which is best, plasma or lcd.
Flip
No need for confusion mate. For watching movies, sports and SD broadcasts, you will find that a Pio or Panny Plasma will wipe the floor with any LCD. The only time I would consider buying an LCD would be for heavy gaming use.
Me too ! Let's hope that F1 is transmitted in HD next year - it will look fantastic !! Trust me mate you won't regret going Plasma - you will find it gives you a much more natural "CRT like" picture than an LCD would.
I see my article has rustled up a little controversy! Excellent - debate is always a healthy thing.
In response to some of the points raised here, first of all I totally reserve the right to pick an LCD over a plasma as my favourite TV in this group test. Regular readers of my reviews will know that I generally prefer plasma to LCD, especially at large screen sizes. But that doesn't mean that I should automatically always put a plasma first. In fact, I wouldn't be doing my job properly if I did.
I honestly feel that the advances Samsung has made with its 656A generation in terms of black level and motion clarity together with other advantages in resolution, connectivity, design and features made it more desirable than the Panasonic. Have all the people in this thread who just say 'plasma is the best, so this review must be wrong' actually sat there and compared the Samsung LCD and Panasonic sets side by side like I have, or are they just going with their own preconceptions of what they believe must be true? In the majority of cases, I have to say I suspect it's the latter...
I hope this doesn't sound rude or patronising, but then I have been accused in this thread of losing my credibility just because I dared to say I preferred an LCD to a plasma just for once! It's probably a good idea here to say that in my career I've reviewed HUNDREDS, possibly thousands of TV, so without blowing my own trumpet, I'd like to think I've got a far wider frame of reference and wealth of experience than anyone else chatting in this thread.
Moving on to the complaints about the price range of the article, I do have more sympathy with this point. My thinking behind choosing a wide range of prices was simply that as we only cover a particular size level of TV every couple of months or so, I'd try and include a model to suit all budgets, rather than just going for, say, all budget, or all premium and thus alienating a section of the buying public.
But I appreciate that this does reduce the comparative aspect of the review somewhat, so we'll try and bear that in mind in the future, either by covering more TVs (budgets and equipment availability permitting), or by narrowing the price banding down.
I have to say, though, that there is a little bit of a 'wanting the world and everything in it' attitude running through this thread that I don't feel fairly appreciates the practicalities from our end of putting group tests together. Big collections of TVs don't just fall off trees, you know!
MORE IN NEXT COMMENT BOX - RUN OUT OF SPACE IN THIS ONE!
As for the mentions of the Pioneer PDP-428XD that have crept into this thread, I didn't include that in this group test because I've already covered it - and loved it to bits - in a previous group test for this website. And as a general rule of editorial thumb, we try to avoid reviewing products more than once as if we do we invariably get complaints!
I could have mentioned it somewhere in the conclusion to this group test, perhaps; it is, certainly, as its advocates suggest, an absolutely awesome TV. Indeed, I've actually bought one myself.
But it's generally considered most helpful to consider a group test as a self-contained entity, containing a closed snapshot of a selection of products at a particular moment in time, rather than start referring to all sorts of other models we've looked at in the past, or which we're simply aware of in the wider TV world.
Once you start referring to other things that you haven't reviewed within the group test, you invariably get people saying 'well, why haven't you got a review of this product you mention included in the group test?'. And in the case of this group test, I've already said that the Pioneer wasn't included as we've already done it before.
It's probably also worth adding that the Pioneer 428XD is soon to be replaced with Pioneer's '9' series, due for launch this summer...
Anyway, I hope this answers some of your concerns/complaints, and where possible I will bear some of your points in mind with future group tests.
Thanks for your reply, and I understand some of what you say, TV's don't grow on trees, but as an owner of a 36" CRT, thinking of changing to an HD tv, is the Samsung as good as the Pioneer mentioned, or is there a better tv, whether plasma or lcd around for £1400.00, or would it be better to spend a few more pennies. I would like your opinion before I spend my hard earned cash.
Thanks for your response and I take your point made in your your first post that you obviously have a lot of experience and have to call it as you see it on a review.
It is also true that no, I have not compared the Samsung and Panny side by side. I do not however have "pre conceived ideas"; my view is based on the evidence of my own eyes ie not matter how much LCDs have improved, they still look like LCDs and always will ! I have seen many on display and can always pick them out "blind" againsts Plasmas , the LCDs with their computer screen like picture texture, artificial colours, fuzzy SD pictures and waxy skin effects. No improvement in black levels or motion will ever change that.
If you own a PIO 428 yourself, why not be honest and stop confusing people like the poor guy flip on this post, who just wants to buy a telly with the best picture quality ? Who cares about "connectivity design and features" if you are getting a pants picture ?
I had hoped you would have replied by now to my last post. I don't want the world and all that's in it, just a decent HDTV for my money, so can you tell me, does a plasma screen tv have a better quality picture than an lcd tv, price for price, and size for size, forget sound quality, connections, and gimmicks, just picture quality. I would be grateful for your experienced opinion.
I had hoped you would have replied by now to my last post. I don't want the world and all that's in it, just a decent HDTV for my money, so can you tell me, does a plasma screen tv have a better quality picture than an lcd tv, price for price, and size for size, forget sound quality, connections, and gimmicks, just picture quality. I would be grateful for your experienced opinion.
Regards Flip.
And while you are at it John, can you confirm that you are chucking in your Pio Plasma and replacing it with the Smasung LCD you were raving about ? Errr....no, didn't think you would be.
