Motion Blur and Refresh Rate
"Plasma TVs are better at handling motion than LCDs are." You've probably heard that before--possibly right before you bought your last TV. But what does "handling motion" mean?
Earlier LCDs suffered from a problem called "motion blur," in which the TV would look as if it were struggling to keep up with the fast-moving scenes it was displaying. Several factors contribute to the effect (this Wikipedia article about motion blur is a pretty good resource), but the two primary issues facing LCD HDTVs have been the time it takes for a pixel to change color ("response time") and the number of times the TV refreshes the image per second ("refresh rate"). If the response time isn't quick enough, the TV can't change colors fast enough to keep up with the on-screen action.
Refresh rate, however, is a little more complicated, which is why we have a whole article devoted to sorting it out--read "LCD HDTV Motion Features: How Do They Work?" for more. Suffice it to say, current LCDs don't really have a problem with motion blur anymore, though a new class of image quirks and artifacts accompany the techniques that manufacturers have used to eliminate motion blur.
One thing that the increased refresh rate does is make pretty much everything look smoother. If you view the same panning shot side-by-side on a 240Hz LCD TV and a plasma TV, everything on the LCD TV will look as if it's gliding along, making the plasma seem choppy by comparison.
Whether that gliding effect looks better or worse than the motion on a plasma TV is really a matter of personal preference--dedicated moviegoers probably won't like it (some call it the "soap opera effect," since it doesn't look as cinematic), as it's not quite so faithful to the source material. On the other hand, casual TV watchers might prefer a 240Hz LCD.
The verdict: Motion blur isn't really an issue nowadays. The various engineering techniques used to fix motion blur in LCDs can lead to a few strange image issues, though, and if you don't like the overly smooth look of a 120Hz or 240Hz LCD set, stick to a plasma.
3D Plasma Versus 3D LCD
Right now, regardless of whether you choose LCD or plasma, you need to wear active shutter 3D glasses to watch 3D TV. These glasses receive a signal from the TV set (or, in some cases, an external adapter) that tells the glasses to alternate between dimming the left lens and the right lens, while the TV itself rapidly alternates between two slightly different perspectives. This arrangement causes your eyes to see two different images--which makes the image appear 3D.
Since the glasses dim the image considerably, and since the TV has to alternate quickly between two different perspectives, you'll need a bright, fast TV. Otherwise, the image will be dark, and you'll see "ghosting" in the 3D image because your left eye and your right eye aren't seeing images that are different enough to produce a consistently 3D effect.
As you can probably guess, that plays to plasma's strengths, which is why an affordable TV like the Panasonic TC-P42GT25 looks about as good as the Sony Bravia 40HX800 despite the latter's costing nearly twice as much. To show a high-quality 3D image on an LCD, you need the higher-end features, such as LED backlighting and a 240Hz refresh rate, while a standard plasma set can handle 3D just fine.
The verdict: Both TV technologies can produce a good-looking 3D image, but plasmas don't have to work so hard for it. If you want a cheap 3D TV, plasma is the better bet. Read "How to Show Off Your 3D TV" for more tips on 3D.
Still the Same: Price, Viewing Angle, Power Consumption
A few things haven't changed between plasmas and LCDs. Plasmas still require significantly more energy than most LCDs do--in our latest HDTV roundup, we found that plasma sets from LG and Panasonic used two to three times as much electricity than most of the tested LCD models did, even LCDs in larger size classes.
You'll find energy hogs on the LCD side of things, too, however--the Mitsubishi Unisen LT46265 LCD used only about 8 percent less power than the Panasonic TC-P46G25, a plasma in the same size class. If you're looking to slash your electricity bill, start by checking our reviews; we post the power-consumption test results in the PCWorld Lab Results section (just click the link that says Show Complete Lab Results, and scroll down to the 'Power Off' and 'Power On' listings.).
Plasmas are still cheaper, as well. A plasma display by a major manufacturer, such as LG, Panasonic, or Samsung, typically costs up to $1000 less than a similarly equipped LCD set of the same size (read "Cheap HDTVs for Black Friday and Beyond" for more on inexpensive TVs). And while LCD TVs' viewing angles are good enough for most living-room setups, plasmas still win out handily in that respect.
In Video: How to Buy a Flat-Screen TV
Buying a TV that meets your needs and fits your budget isn't easy--and if you aren't able to sort out the facts from the fiction, it can get much, much harder. Be sure to read our HDTV Buying Guide and our HDTV Holiday Shopping FAQ for more advice on finding the right set for you.
This story, "Plasma vs. LCD: The State of the HDTV" was originally published by PCWorld.