LCD vs Plasma.. pros and cons

I'm looking to buy a new flatscreen HDTV for my apartment. It's bonus time so i'm fine spending several thousand on this purchase. I watch a ton of sports and plenty of movies at home, so quality of picture is very important to me.

I have heard good arguments for both LCDs and plasmas. What are the pros and cons of each? I have heard plasmas are better quality picture but dont last as long as lCDs. Then there are those who say plasmas nowadays have great durability and that the argument that they broke down quickly is passe.

Please help. Any advice/explanation would be appreciated. I'm ready to spend real money but I dont want to make a mistake and buy the wrong thing.

Thanks.

[whiskeytown]

I had a plasma and swapped it for a LCD

Plasmas are clearer and crisper but they WILL retain burn in if you keep the same image up there long enough...I got frustrated when I saw the word "Lap" permanently burned into the screen when I turned it off, even days later -

LCD's aren't as crisp - have a slightly annoyin effect known as "Screen Door Effect" that isn't as pleasant as plasmas -

if all you got is movies - then definately plasma - but if you want computers and racing cars - go LCD cause it won't burnin permanent images.

RB

[Bigdaddydvo]

I have a Pioneer 50" plasma I bought in June with some p*ker money. For movies and HD sports it is unparalleled. My only complaint is that non HD broadcasts look pretty awful...so if you splurge ensure your cable/satelite provider has HD.

I got a good deal at Best Buy on a floor model w/a coupon...originally like 6K but with coupon/sale knocked it down to 3K. Allowed me to get a 50" vs. the 42" standard.

I'm not crazy about the picture on LCD...head to a circuit city/BB and compare for yourself.

[GuyOnTilt]

I'd go with DLP for now. Plasmas look much better, but are just way too expensive right now. Get DLP and wait till 2008 or so when organic cell technology hits the market and plasmas go down.

GoT

[Blarg]

How would it look compared to the same picture displayed on a tube at that size?

[Bigdaddydvo]

[ QUOTE ]
How would it look compared to the same picture displayed on a tube at that size?

[/ QUOTE ]

There are some decent HD DLPs out there in terms of picture. Plasma/LCDs have quickly gained popularity because of space considerations (especially if you want to do a wall mount). Those things being equal, I'd say plasma has a marginally better picture. Glare from houselights/windows seems to affect DLPs more though.

[-Skeme-]

[ QUOTE ]
How would it look compared to the same picture displayed on a tube at that size?

[/ QUOTE ]

wtf you don't know? *sky turns black*

[BeerMoney]

If you've got the space for it, a projector absolutely rules.

[marsvolta619]

The only difference is plasmas are cheaper, basically. They glare a little bit more in the light cause of the glass on it, but the picture is sharper. LCDs last longer and pictures dont burn in, they also have a brighter picture. You can get plasmas larger and thinner than LCDs, where a lot of the larger ones are rear projection.

I work for Best Buy, and honestly both are just as good.

[Blarg]

Projectors sounded like the coolest idea ever, and I have some friends who got them and rave about them(haven't been to their places in a long time, so I haven't seen them in person).

But I was looking up what it was like to keep them going, expense wise, and if you're someone like me who always has the t.v. on in the background for noise, they will cost a fortune in projector bulbs. Those things are unreal expensive. And I read the fans for the blazing hot bulbs can be very noisy, and the projectors can generate a lot of heat. I remember how hot projectors I handled in school could get, so I can relate to the ability of a projector to make a whole room hotter.

It wound up sounding to me like a great but expensive idea, with some real downsides.