Poll: If you had only one HDTV choice, which would you pick?

I'd still give LCD a chance, especially a Samsung or a Sony, since they deliver probably the best picture qualities, and they are better with gaming, which I do a lot of, and are equally good in that you don't have to worry about burn-in, or suffering from brightness issues over time. Plus LCD prices in the larger sizes are narrowing to those of the plasma counterparts. For example, I did see the Samsung 46A650 in the stores, of which Cnet just gave the 52" an Editor's Choice Award. Comparing that to a Pioneer Kuro, it seemed like Samsung was equally as impressive as a Pioneer, which surprised the wazoo out of me. So, yeah, LCD is still a strong going format, and may continue to be impressive throughout the days to come.

The one past drawback to plasmas is that they have screen burn-in risk. Well if you buy either Panasonic or Pioneer nowadays, they have virtually eliminated that same risk. Plasma has the best blacks, best viewing angle, and is slightly cheaper in the larger sized displays than LCD.

Also, LCD still has dead pixel risk. I, for one, would be driven crazy by a small accumulating number of dead pixels on my expensive display as I waited for the portion to reach a certain level before the manufacturer would even service it.

I'm currently in the market for a new flat panel. After much research and visiting BB or CC. I've come to the conclusion that Plasma is the way to go and here's why.

First, No motion blur. The motion blur on LCD's is so hard to watch. I watch a lot of sports and the LCD just can't handle the motion like plasma.
Second, Plasma has realistic colors and brightness. Whenever you go into BB or CC you'll notice how pretty and bright the LCD's are compared to the plasma's(like moths drawn to the light). This to me is unrealistic. While the picture LCD's give off is pretty and bright this isn't enough justification.
Third, The viewing angles on LCD are horrible. Everyone can't sit right in front of the TV.
Fourth, The black levels are insane on plasma. If you like that washed out greyish blacks of LCD's go for it.

With the only real negative plasma has for it is Burn-In and Image Retention. After much research this almost never occurs anymore if it does its fixable.

I have a Pioneer Kuro 50" 1080p and couldn't be happier. The blacks are excellent and blu-ray looks far better to me than on my HD LCD. I was afraid of plasma in the past, but burn-in seems to be a minimal issue for normal use now and the lifespans are quite good. They definitely both have their place, but the picture of the plasma definitely wins hands down. And, the plasma can runs 1080p 24Hz @ 72Hz where my LCD is stuck @ 60Hz. Granted some are up to 120HZ, which works this out, but the plasma is quite crisp and quick.

As you mentioned plasma takes more power there for adds to global warming even if indirectly.
We must take responcability for our carbon footprint and that begins in the home.
Do not let your senses dictate your priorities. Use your head and be responcable for your excessive energy usage.
Bruce

Although the gap is narrowing, I will concede a slight edge to Plasma. It is still not enough to offset the difference in weight (and therefore ease of mounting) and energy efficiency of LCD screens. As for quality, I'm confident the near future holds more giant leaps in performance & quality from technologies still in the R&D labs or early limited (& expensive) release.
At this moment, LCD would be more than adequate for my needs. ...but I'm a pragmatist, not a purist.

I need smaller sizes for my small home. Plasma isn't really an option since I want the screen size to make sense with the overall size of my room and my rooms have to be multifunctional. Not a technical answer - but still part of the overall consideration.

Plasma TVs are really power hungry, most of which is lost in the form of heat. Some will say "so what", the answer is why pay through the nose!

There will always be some sort of case for having them, but it all boils down to "keeping up with the Joneses", after all they are not much better than an LCD unless they are around 42" or more, and who needs something that size in their living room?

If I had to choose between Plasma or LCD I would pick
the Plasma technology. But in my opinion, the CRT HD sets are better than both of them.
I own a 46" Sony Wega rear projection Tv that beats them
both. It is too bad that they are phased out. Yes they
are big and use a lot more power but my vote still goes
for CRT.
I have spoken to several technicians that delivered my
LCD set and they readily agreed.

1. There's a depth to a plasma TV picture that you don't see with LCD. I would liken the LCD to looking at a picture of, for instance, a pastoral scene. I would liken the plasma to looking out the window at that same pastoral scene.

2. My 50" Panasonic Plasma TV's blacks are indeed black, not some shade of gray or purple but a good honest black. It makes all the difference in the world in the sense of a feeling of reality, of being there.

3. I can get far off angle from my TV's face and still see the picture just as well as someone sitting in the sweet spot. That means a lot in my house.

One might wonder whether it was Panasonic or Pioneer that first proposed the idea of Panasonic manufacturing Pioneer's plasmas. After all, chances are good that Panasonic, in this deal, also gained full rights to Pioneer's advanced plasma technology.

Until there's a technology that yields a picture that matches the quality of the plasma's picture, you can bet that plasma isn't going anywhere.

Have had one of our plasmas for many years - long before you could buy them at a local store. A 42" Panny ED that cost $5K. No burn in. Also have 2 later model 50" Pannys (one in each home) HD models.

1. Plasma is more lifelike and realistic.
2. Handles action better.
3. Contrast (black levels) better
4. Still cheaper.

Someone mentioned the energy saving of LCD. That is one compromise I am unwilling to make to quality. I use florescent bulbs to excess, drive small compacts, recycle - but won't give up a quality picture so save a few watts.
I suppose if we had kids who used the main display to play games, i would think LCD. OTH, if we did, I may just get him (do females play) a smallish LCD so as not to interrupt normal TV viewing.

Don't forget that virtually all retail stores have all their displays configured to settings that aren't normal. To compare I would suggest visiting friends who have the various types and models. Or go to CES in January where the mfrs. take great pains to show their products in the best possible way<G>.

...mike

I also have a Kuros 50inch plasma. One word: AWESOME.

No LCD has reached the potential of the plasma tv, even though not all plasma TV's are alike, they are still more vibrant than LCD. I got a PS3 with many blu-ray movies and my games look excellent on the Pioneer. I hereby clap my hands to the greatest plasma I have ever seen (clap clap clap). I wish Plasma improves more instead of giving up on the technology.

Jose

I have one of each too and there is no comparison as far as the picture quality between my LCD and my Plasma. The Plasma picture is far superior!!!