50" Plasma

[monkeyboy]

and installed $1400


good deal?

 

[lesroi]

Depends on the brand and model I suppose!
Took me 2 months to decide on mine and I went with a Consumer Reports recommendation. Have to say we love it!



Tracy

 

[Am_I_There_Yet]

That is way cheap and I'm a firm believer in if it's too good to be true, it usually is.

We have a 42" LCD and Best Buy wanted $500 to install the television, alone.

My husband did it, and even though it took him a day and a half (we hung it over the fireplace and he had to run the electrical), he said he'd do it again in a heartbeat, to avoid paying the installation fee.

 

[azgal81]

Depends on the brand. If that is a well known getting good reviews brand then yes that is a good deal if it's a brand no one has heard of then I wouldn't bother.

I would rather spend more money for quality especially if I'm going to spend that much on a TV!

 

[Zippa D Doodah]

I'd go for it, monkeyboy. You can't beat watching March Madness in 50" glory... Not that I would know; I just have an old 29" regular TV

 

[mill4023]

That's kind of like asking if $10 is a good deal for a meal.

 

[DisneyGuy77]

What brand is it?

 

[Bojo]

Depends; does it work?

Does the picture look good?

How long will it work and will the picture keep looking good?


Now, about installation ....

 

[DISUNC]

 

[SwedishMeatball]

That is way cheap and I'm a firm believer in if it's too good to be true, it usually is.

That was my thought as well.

 

[JimB.]

1080i? 1080p? 720p?

 

[hlbtimes2]

1080i? 1080p? 720p?

And that really only matters if you have source providing you with input at those rates.......
As the others have said- depends on the brand and picture quality. Also depends on how long you want to have the set for. If you wouldnt feel bad replacing it in a couple years, then go for it. If you want this to be a long term set you'll want to spend more and get higher quality.

 

[bicker]

Actually, that sounds to me like a great, but not necessarily "too good to be true" price. There are a lot of 50" plasmas selling for around $1300 these days. Lower quality, to be sure, but still you would get what you paid for.

 

[leafette]

Depends on the brand and model I suppose!
Took me 2 months to decide on mine and I went with a Consumer Reports recommendation. Have to say we love it!



Tracy

What did you end up getting? My DH is researching. I've told him "never," but he DOES have a birthday coming up . . .

 

[DisneyGuy77]

Honestly, I wouldn’t recommend Plasma. Plasma has a high risk of image burn in, depending on how you use the TV, and may not last as long as other displays. If you play games on it or watch programs on it that display a static image, e.g., news tickers, station logos or other such static images, than burn in could occur. If you are set on a flat panel display, you may also want to consider LCD. It is a little more expensive, but it does not suffer from burn in, and is an overall better technology IMO.

 

[mill4023]

Honestly, I wouldn’t recommend Plasma. Plasma has a high risk of image burn in, depending on how you use the TV, and may not last as long as other displays. If you play games on it or watch programs on it that display a static image, e.g., news tickers, station logos or other such static images, than burn in could occur. If you are set on a flat panel display, you may also want to consider LCD. It is a little more expensive, but it does not suffer from burn in, and is an overall better technology IMO.

Five years ago, you would be right. But burn-in and longevity are basically non-issues now.

Unless you are going to leave your tv on with a static image for days, you aren't likely to have a problem with burn-in.

The rated half-life of recent plasmas is around 60,000 hours. So after watching TV for 10 hours per day for 16 years straight, it would now be down to half the brightness that it started at. And since Plasmas are so bright to begin with, even at half full brightness, it will still look good.

Since most people aren't going to watch 10 hours per day and almost nobody will be using the same TV in 16 years, it's a non-issue.

Plasmas are brighter, have better color, better black levels, less motion blur, and better contrast then LCDs. They also don't get dead pixels like LCDs.

With that said, LCD's have made great improvements in picture quality and some of them now look just as good as Plasmas. I'd consider either.

 

[Patch'sD]

I agree with the last poster. Also some TVs now shift the image so slightly to reduce the chance of burn-in.

I just purchased a 42" Plasma for about $ 1000.00. 1080i and HD Tunner. The Wall Mount was another $90.00 (Non Tilt) Cabling was another $100.0 I went the Five Wire Route ( 3 Video and 2 Audio) x 2 For TV and Surround Sound System. I could have used the HDMI from Cablebox to TV. Hardest part was hidding the wires in the wall. I had to punch a Hole in the wall and then drill a large hole from the basement through Wall Base to pull the Wires through. Worked out nice no wires exposed at all, even power supplied from the basement for TV, Cablebox, and Surround Sound System. I would say that $ 140.00 won't cover the installation. More like $ 500.00 for cabling and snaking the cables through wall and than to the components.