Samsung's PN58A550 58' Plasma vs. Samsung's HL67A750 67' LED DLP: Both TV's got glowing reviews from Amazon and CNET and was wondering if I could get your good peoples advice?
1547580
If I were buying from scratch, I would get the plasma. But since you are already happy with a bigger set, I think you would regret downsizing. Everyone else will think your plasma is huge at 58, yet it will seem small to you. Ever buy a computer that is slower than the one it replaces? Seems interminable even if it would be fast enough. To me, 58 is plenty. But in your situation I would stay put unless it now feels too big or you plan to hang it on the wall. My 2 cts.
1262698
That's good to know Bridger. I have this one (Samsung plasma PN50B450) as well and the manual states that brightness and contrast should be reduced to prevent burn in while play video games. Also appreciate the first hundred hour rule-mixing tv with games.Thanks. The only thing I'm worried about is my kids walking away from a video game and a screen just sitting there. But hey, for the price you could buy another one and not spend what you can for a 1080p lcd 52 inch. I know that defeats the purpose but isn't that why you would be interesed in this tv anyways? for the price?
302407
I don't know how much help I can be but I'll give it a shot. I bought the Samsung because I own a Samsung LCD 46" bought in '08. I was quite happy with that TV so I stuck with the Samsung brand. I really think the 46" has a better picture than the 65" LED. Could be because of a consequential loss of picture clarity that comes with larger screen sizes. The UN65 has a dual core processor but if you're really into "smart," I recommend the quad core (more money of course). I subscribe to NFL game replays and they won't load well (and therefore can't view) with the dual core; I have to use my quad core computer. I think the UN has a really reasonable price, but you generally get what you pay for (as the old saying goes). Bottom line . . . I like the UN65 but, at the same time, I am a little disappointed. The only way you'll ever know is to look at them side-by-side and remember, showrooms do not have real-life broadcasts (in most instances) so when you get one home, your picture may not be a great as in the showroom. Hope this helps somewhat and good luck!
492245
I went to best buy yesterday looking at Plasma TVs and one of the guys there highly recommended this tv because he owns it and hasn't had any burn-ins. Also, the tv screen doesn't reflect light as much as other TVs, so if you're going to be putting your tv in a bright room or near a window, this would also be better than other brands. I'm no expert, but the guy from best buy seemed to know what he was talking about. Hope this helps.
188833
There is no comparison with the Panasonic plasmas unless you move up to a VERY expensive LED. These are bargains. If you want to step up slightly in picture quality from the Panasonic S60, look at the Panasonic ST60 series. Those have a shade darker blacks and a less reflective screen. Check the CNET reviews if you have any doubt as they are well known for their reviews.
1930302
I only see the TH-42PZ8OU for $1100 at Sears - maybe it's different in the store itself.I went all out and got the 46' 1080p plasma for $1050 on Amazon last week. Now THAT was a good deal.
697833
I am certainly no TV guru but, I had purchased the LN40A550 & returned it & bought the LN40A650 & could not be happier! We noticed immediately that the picture looked faded on the 550 & went to one of the local retailers & found that this is a common complaint on these units. They actually had a LN40A550 & LN40A650 side by side in the store & there is a huge difference. We are very impressed with the picture quality regardless of what we are watching. We have had many friends commenting on the awesome picture on this TV. Hope this helps. Les
912121
Don't know why Samsung dropped the 56" LED. If you're limited to 56" so can't go up to the LED HL61A750 take a careful look at the lamp models. They have a better display than the LED models and cost less. Even if you have to buy a lamp after a few years, they're only $100-150 online.
574223
I can only say that my older 'plasma' started having its first issue after 6 years. I think modern LCD TVs in some respect last longer, perhaps since they produce little heat and don't have that plasma burn in...however the more technology that's put into these tv's, (LED, internet, etc.) the more 'things' that can go wrong. I do believe some manufacturers do a better job than others in build quality....luckily prices for these TVs have gotten generally much more affordable, but Ive never invested over $1500 on a TV, and so if it goes bad in 7-8 yrs I wont be super pissed off. I'll probably be itching for the next better image TV by then anyways. I can only say that my older 'plasma' started having its first issue after 6 years. I think modern LCD TVs in some respect last longer, perhaps since they produce little heat and don't have that plasma burn in...however the more technology that's put into these tv's, (LED, internet, etc.) the more 'things' that can go wrong. I do believe some manufacturers do a better job than others in build quality....luckily prices for these TVs have gotten generally much more affordable, but Ive never invested over $1500 on a TV, and so if it goes bad in 7-8 yrs I wont be super pissed off. I'll probably... » Read More I can only say that my older 'plasma' started having its first issue after 6 years. I think modern LCD TVs in some respect last longer, perhaps since they produce little heat and don't have that plasma burn in...however the more technology that's put into these tv's, (LED, internet, etc.) the more 'things' that can go wrong. I do believe some manufacturers do a better job than others in build quality....luckily prices for these TVs have gotten generally much more affordable, but Ive never invested over $1500 on a TV, and so if it goes bad in 7-8 yrs I wont be super pissed off. I'll probably be itching for the next better image TV by then anyways. « Show Less
326616
This plasma is considerably brighter than most. Will it be brighter than the brightest LED? No, but I came from an LED and I have 0 brightness issues. I love this tv. It took 6 tvs before I was happy, and it was worth the hassle.
1451668
According to the Samsung manual, the 8500 Plasma 64" TV consumes "typically 218 watts; maximum of 653 watts". I suspect that in our situation (bright sun-lit room) where we have both brightness and contrast set at fairly high levels. the power consumption is probably somewhere between these two levels. An LED LCD TV would almost certainly draw less power.
754510
I do not know about the comparison. I have never seen a plasma that I cared for the picture. This Sony was not good as it came from the factory. I had lots of problems setting the color, but it is very good now.
864097
4K TVs by contrast are resolution enhanced but rely on the same LCD front panel (twisting crystals) with a backlight source (LED). While there have been incredible improvements in LED TV black levels, they still don't match the best plasma TVs, which is one of the biggest factors in a superior picture. Plasma TVs have a big enthusiast following. Look up articles about the Pioneer Kuro. Look up how a lot of those Pioneer engineers moved to Panasonic. And the disappointment when Panasonic decided to stop making plasma TVs. There's a reason why these TVs are up in price... but it's more so nostalgia. I agree with you, it's NOT worth the price. If you want a plasma TV, get the Samsung 8500 for half the price. But I would also say that right now is a bad time to buy ANY expensive TV since the industry is in-between technologies. What TV channels feed 4k? I would wait if you're in that price range. Prices are going to drop quite fast.
1371392
Honestly, these comparisons depend on the taste of each one of us. A few years ago I had plasma TV from Sony, after it came time to buy the new Sony's xbr and now I'm preferring the new more expensive models from Samsung.
459728
Thanks Dylan! That's great info.Acc. to this CNET posting, a 46"inch LED Samsung is around 106watts while a Panasonic Plasma is around 160 watts. Both Samsung LED TVs and Panasonic Plasmas have improved over their last year models by an impressive margins. I am still inclined towards a Plasma for reasons of black and contrast on plasma over LCDs (LCDs are improving, but not sure if they can match Plasmas yet). If Plasmas are still consuming 400watts, then the choice would have been very clear, but now bet. 100 and 150, it is not clear.
1855104
I have not been in the TV market for over a year. Since I first wrote the review, I switched over to top-of-the-line plasma technology. The picture on the Samsung 64" that I purchased is FAR superior to the Elite, and at a much lower price point. While plasma is said to be the older, dying technology, I have discovered that LED's with 'local dimming' simply can not match what plasmas can still do. I wish that I had discovered that sooner, as the Samsung is far less expensive.
1658970
The picture quality is AMAZING. Its better than a $900 plasma i just returned. You wont regret the purchase. I got the 55 inch.