Yeah man sales employees are the most knowledgeable people ever! //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif Manufacture specs are manufacture specs. Understanding their application in a meaningful way is a different story. And don't forget the difference in static and dynamic contrast ratios. Now more than ever, with the comparison of direct-lit LED LCD's to classic PDP's Dynamic contrast means squat.
Dynamic contrast ratio is the ability of the set to deliver its absolute black and absolute white simultaneously next to each other... how is that irrelevant?
Since you're such an LED/LCD buff, maybe you'll recall that it was the LED/LCD manufacturers who started using static contrast ratios in order to inflate their numbers to make them seem superior to plasmas? 2M-3M:1? Please....
For those who don't know.... if you display an all-white image with the set turned as bright as possible, that gives you your absolute white, then with the entire screen blacked out, your absolute black. This is in essence your static contrast ration, and how they come up with such ridiculously high numbers. However, these numbers mean nothing in terms of indicating every-day performance, since the movies and shows and games you're watching on your TV aren't ever full-screen absolute white or black.... or else there would be no IMAGE! Thus, the more accurate measurement and reporting of a TV's actual everyday ability to display pictures with vivid contrast between black and white (and everything in-between) is by looking at DYNAMIC contrast ratios.... which tells you how much differently they can display black and white adjacent to each other.... kind of like using max power ratings on a Jensen amp, when the only way it will ever put out that much power is when it's either direct-shorting or hit by lightning!
As for this silly assertion of 240Hz being superior... why is it that the human eye can STILL see blur on a 240Hz set??? I know I could! I saw it in the store, in a dimly-lit viewing room, not on some bright-*** glaring sales floor. Taking a 60Hz source and "interpolating" additional frames (aka making up shit that isn't in the source) to try to mimic the faster response of plasma doesn't help... repeating additional frames or making up frames to fill in the gap isn't helping, folks.... the blur is still there.
I, too, was all hardcore for LCD or LED when I first started looking into buying my TV. I had been scared by the pundits who talked about plasma IR and burn-in... I'd seen pictures of plasma monitors used for airport flight arrival/departure monitors. It's true, that's a horrible application for plasma. I would never recommend a plasma for something that would display such static images for days on end. It would be retarded. But, the newer generations of plasmas are leaps and bounds ahead of the plasmas from just 2-3 years ago. I bought a high-end plasma for cheaper than any quality comparable LCD or LED, and it has fantastic color saturation, picture quality, brightness, black levels and has never once shown a ghosted image or had any bit of image retention or burn-in. I do game on it, and also use it for light-duty computer monitor. I am sitting right now off-axis about 75-degrees from it as I type on my computer monitor, and as I look over at it, the color and PQ are just as good as sitting directly in front of it. LCDs/LEDs simply do not have the same color saturation when viewed significantly off-angle.
As for the power complaints.... Again.... this is using max vs. RMS power. The power ratings on TVs are for their maximum current draw... so, think again of displaying a full-white color screen at maximum brightness. Yes, in an instance like this, plasma draws a lot of power! However.... plasma TVs scale power draw to the level of brightness being displayed at the time. So... if you watch a movie or TV show that is a full-white screen 100% of the time, then sure, you're going to draw maximum power all the time! However, if you're smart, and turn your plasma down to normal levels of brightness and contrast (as I do in a normal viewing environment, not in the factory-set "torch mode" you see on showroom floors) and then watch normal movies and TV shows, the average power-draw of the plasma is MUCH MUCH lower than the maximum ratings. However, you might not know that LCD's/LEDs draw the same power all the time... so you can know what an LCD will draw all the time it's on. Plasma power draw varies based on picture output. While plasmas are somewhat higher in average power draw than LCDs, the difference is practically negligible in real-world terms. Yet another case of specifications telling less than the whole story.
Apples-to-apples - calibrated sets, 5.2 hours per day of usage, 365 days per year, 11.35 cents per killowatt-hour.
My TV costs $69.90 per YEAR to operate
Comparable (slightly smaller) Samsung LCD costs $31.27 per YEAR.
Difference - $3.21 per month...
Maybe you care about $3/month... but I don't. Personally, I feel my TV is much more suited to my usage habits, has a better PQ (as compared side-by-side in an actual normalized viewing environment), and is overall a superior technology, with some rather small concessions. I have about 25% greater weight per size, and pay about $3 per month more for mine. The weight is negligible and has no meaning once my set is wall-mounted properly, as any other set would be.
Fair trade, if you ask me.
There are a few situations where I would recommend LCD over plasma... when displaying static images for long periods, when using a size smaller than 42", or in a room that is excessively bright (i.e., lots and lots of lighted windows) and the light level can't be controlled. But I think in that instance, you pay for it anyways, in poorer color saturation by having to turn it up so bright to compete with ambient light levels.
Oh well... so that's how some of the "plasma hype" and myths really stack up in the real world... if you want the latest bling on the market and don't want to sit down and actually learn about the technology, nor spend the time to compare things side-by-side yourself... be my guest. I personally did all of those things, and after seeing them side-by-side in a viewing environment with actual real media showing, the choice was clear.
Plasma won hands-down.
