Large screen TV help and opinions needed

[RBLilly]

Absolutely stick with LCD over plasma.

(Though in the latest Popular Science, they claim that Gamers prefer DLP sets over plasma or LCD)

For my MBR, I recently put in the new Mitsubishi 52" LCD 1080p (read: "expensive" ) It's visually stunning - better than the theatre.

I have another new Mitsubishi 52" DLP 1080p in the den, and absolutely love it, but DLP sets don't exactly go on the wall. But if you're not going to mount your TV on the wall, DLP 1080p is fantastic. And MUCH LESS $ then LCD.

However, for my Family Room I JUST (this weekend) ordered the new Sharp Aquos 52" LCD 1080p. I selected this model because it has 10,000:1 dynamic contrast - picture is fan-freakin-tastic even in a very bright room. No glare. (This is one of the advantages that plasma used to have over LCD. Not anymore. You just have to buy the latest-gen LCD model)

I really wanted a 60" LCD 1080p, but they cost more than a Szamboti!

And the lamp life on this Sharp model is 60,000 hrs. Safe to say I won't watch that much TV in the next 30 years!

-von

The new DLP LED from Samsung will mount on the wall and to me it has the best picture of any TV out there!

 

[cigardave]

I just ordered this one today... http://reviews.cnet.com/flat-panel-tvs/pioneer-pdp-5080hd/4505-6482_7-32476901.html?tag=uolst

 

[dabarbr]

What's the story on High Def? Is that something you should have or not? I currently do not.

I know they make high def TV's. But do you need special equipment attached to your cable system? Maybe all new TV's are high def. I don't know.

I have a 50" Panasonic plasma. I've had it for over two years and the picture is still perfect.

You will need a HD receiver from your programing provider. I have Dish network. Out of the 100 plus channels about 30 are high defination.

I rarely watch anything that is not HD. Sporting events are awesome.
You will have to pay a little extra for HD programing. I understand that in the near future everything will be HD.

If you are thinking about upgrading you might consider a 1080p set. Many videos will be Blue Ray, which is a sharper picture and needs the 1080p.

 

[scottycoyote]

i got the visio 37 lcd 1080i last year at sams for xmas and love it........i get about 30 channels in high def and its awesome.......regular tv isnt bad but the high def will spoil you. Planning on going with something larger in the pool room this xmas......prob 50" lcd, might look at the dlp too.......just do some internet searches, lots of reports and forums out there that can give you the skinny on which sets to buy

 

[mattman]

You will have to pay a little extra for HD programing. I understand that in the near future everything will be HD.

Yeah...and they charge for not having HD also. I orginally had HD, but when I found out the big 4 (abc,nbc,cbs & fox) did not come in HD, I cancelled. Cable had them in HD, but not Dish Network...not my area anyway. I now get charged a $6 a month, HD disabling fee.....go figure. Also, I did research on HD about 4 years ago and at that time they (FCC) said it was going to be law that everything was HD by 2006....didn't seem to happen.

 

[RBLilly]

Yeah...and they charge for not having HD also. I orginally had HD, but when I found out the big 4 (abc,nbc,cbs & fox) did not come in HD, I cancelled. Cable had them in HD, but not Dish Network...not my area anyway. I now get charged a $6 a month, HD disabling fee.....go figure. Also, I did research on HD about 4 years ago and at that time they (FCC) said it was going to be law that everything was HD by 2006....didn't seem to happen.

No everything wasn't supposed to be HD by 2006. Analog cable was supposed to go away, and everything was supposed to be digital. That deadline got extended to the end of 2009, with most companies having plans to do away with analog by the end of 2008. I really don't know when everything might become HD, but everything is supposed to be all digital by the end of 2009.

It is really neat on my TV to look at the analog channels, then the Digital Channels, and then the HD channels.........wow what a difference!

 

[mantis99]

Agreed.. the pixel refresh rate is higher on LCD, leading to less trailing during high-action sequences. They also require less maintenance than a plasma.


This is incorrect. Plasmas have a faster refresh rate, which is why people who want to buy a big screen to watch football or live events favor plasma over LCD.

The most recent independent research suggests that plasmas will brighter for longer.

In all reality, you can not go wrong with either. They both show a great picture. LCD's have the advantage of showing better in rooms with more sun light, and they have no burn in effect. Plasmas have a better viewing angle, higher contrast ratios, and show better blacks. Also remember, that while plasmas can get burn in (although newer technology has improved this), LCD's can get dead or stuck pixels, which the manufacturer will not repair.

Current reviews from high level audio/visual magazines rate the sharp Aquos as the best LCD, and Pioneer, Hitachi, and Samsung as the best plasmas. Do not listen to consumer reports for this.

Opinion on what looks the best is somewhat subjective, just like the hit of a cue. Some like a brighter look, some a more natural color. Go out and look at the tv's mentioned, and see what you like the best. If your room has a lot of sunlight, an LCD may be a good idea. Otherwise, you will get more size for your money with a plasma. Whatever you get, get 1080p resolution.

One other thought. You will want to get an HDMI cable for connections. DO NOT buy one in the store. On sale last week at best buy, they were $94. At www.monoprice.com you can get one for about $6. DO NOT believe it when a salesman tells you a more expensive HDMI cable is better. HDMI carries a digital signal. It is 1's and 0's. They either get through or they do not. I have used a $100 cable, and a $6 cable and they look EXACTLY the same. Unless you need a cable over 10', do not pay extra.

Enjoy whatever you buy. The picture is fantastic with HD. My personal choice would either be a sharp aquos LCD, or a pioneer plasma.

 

[Bastian]

You're quite right.. I was confusing LCD for SXRD (what I have), with regard to pixel refresh rate.

 

[a9ballbr8k]

One other thought. You will want to get an HDMI cable for connections. DO NOT buy one in the store. On sale last week at best buy, they were $94. At www.monoprice.com you can get one for about $6. DO NOT believe it when a salesman tells you a more expensive HDMI cable is better. HDMI carries a digital signal. It is 1's and 0's. They either get through or they do not. I have used a $100 cable, and a $6 cable and they look EXACTLY the same. Unless you need a cable over 10', do not pay extra.

Great point. I also bought one off of ebay from monoprice.com and the cable works great.

 

[VonRhett]

Current reviews from high level audio/visual magazines rate the Sharp Aquos as the best LCD, and Pioneer, Hitachi, and Samsung as the best plasmas. Do not listen to consumer reports for this.

Yeaaaahh, Baby! I just ordered the Sharp Aquos 52" LCD 1080p. The new one is 25% less thick, and has 3 HDMI ports. Ironically enough, I DID look at Consumer Reports, who also Rated it #1, so that cinched the deal for me. I guess I got lucky!

But as already stated, HD is absolutely amazing.

And Football in HD? Fuggidaboudid!!

-von

 

[Scaramouche]

Current reviews from high level audio/visual magazines rate the sharp Aquos as the best LCD,

I bought a 26 inch Sharp Aquos - it is computer compatible - about a month ago for my bedroom. Now I want to junk the TV in the livingroom and replace it with a bigger Sharp Aquos.

 

[BillPorter]

LCD rear projection - a lot of bang for the buck

I don't think anyone has mentioned LCD rear projection high def TVs yet. We just bought a 55" Sony LCD rear projection TV for about $1,700. In general, rear projection TVs give you much more screen area for the money and I think the picture quality is more than acceptable. Sure, if money is no object, or if you want a wall-mountable flat screen model, go get a 50 inch or larger LCD or Plasma TV. Or a DLP if you prefer the images they produce. But if you want a 55" or 60" high def TV for around $2,000 or less, and you don't mind the bulkier size of a rear projection unit, try a Sony SXRD.

 

[RBLilly]

I don't think anyone has mentioned LCD rear projection high def TVs yet. We just bought a 55" Sony LCD rear projection TV for about $1,700. In general, rear projection TVs give you much more screen area for the money and I think the picture quality is more than acceptable. Sure, if money is no object, or if you want a wall-mountable flat screen model, go get a 50 inch or larger LCD or Plasma TV. Or a DLP if you prefer the images they produce. But if you want a 55" or 60" high def TV for around $2,000 or less, and you don't mind the bulkier size of a rear projection unit, try a Sony SXRD.

For the price that you paid for your Sony you can get a DLP 65" Samsung with LED technology and have the best picture around. It is the only DLP that put's up a fight against Plasma. Sitting side by side to the Panasonic plasma I like the picture of the DLP better, and the only plasma that has better picture than the Panasonic is the Pioneer. At least that is what most of the reviews say. I would save my money buy the 65" Samsung, and be a happy camper!

 

[BillPorter]

You missed my point

For the price that you paid for your Sony you can get a DLP 65" Samsung with LED technology and have the best picture around. It is the only DLP that put's up a fight against Plasma. Sitting side by side to the Panasonic plasma I like the picture of the DLP better, and the only plasma that has better picture than the Panasonic is the Pioneer. At least that is what most of the reviews say. I would save my money buy the 65" Samsung, and be a happy camper!

A quick check of prices will show you that you can't get a 65" Samsung for $1,700 and let me add that my wife and I decided that a 55" TV was the size we wanted in our small condo. I guess I could further add that "best picture around" is as subjective as the "hit" of a pool cue and we spent a year looking at all of the high def TVs out there before picking the Sony. But the main thing I need to add is that you missed the point of my post altogether. To restate it: rear projection TVs (LCD OR DLP) give you a lot of square inches of viewing area for the dollar spent as compared to plasma and LCD.

 

[PROG8R]

I heard that the DLP technology isnt very sturdy yet. I was told that if that "lil mirror thing' goes out you need to junk the TV and get another because they can't be repaired. Not being an AV pro, it was enough to scare the Ba-jesus out of me. I am getting ready to purchase my first LCD, and I am teetering between two of them that I saw on HSN. One is an LG 32" (man it is bad a$$), the other is some digital living brand that gat some very high reviews, for about 300$ less. The LG has 5ms response time and an 8000:1 contrast ratio and the cheaper model has 1000:1 and an 8ms respose time. I am not sure if those differences are even noticeable or not so I am still on the fence. Any suggestions?

 

[VonRhett]

Well, I'm not an expert, BUT every single review I've read from every source agree on one item: DO NOT buy the cheapest LCD or Plasma set!

You don't have to go hi-end to get a great set, but don't buy that Blue Light Special either.

And you WILL see a big difference between 8000:1 and 1000:1 contrast!!

Refresh rate, not so much unless you're gaming alot.

So get that LG set and enjoy HD!

<EDIT: To keep it on-topic, once everyone goes HD, we can get rid of those stuuupid PINK 4-Balls on TV matches!>
-von

The LG has 5ms response time and an 8000:1 contrast ratio and the cheaper model has 1000:1 and an 8ms respose time. I am not sure if those differences are even noticeable or not so I am still on the fence. Any suggestions?

 

[RBLilly]

I heard that the DLP technology isnt very sturdy yet. I was told that if that "lil mirror thing' goes out you need to junk the TV and get another because they can't be repaired. Not being an AV pro, it was enough to scare the Ba-jesus out of me. I am getting ready to purchase my first LCD, and I am teetering between two of them that I saw on HSN. One is an LG 32" (man it is bad a$$), the other is some digital living brand that gat some very high reviews, for about 300$ less. The LG has 5ms response time and an 8000:1 contrast ratio and the cheaper model has 1000:1 and an 8ms respose time. I am not sure if those differences are even noticeable or not so I am still on the fence. Any suggestions?

The LED light engine that Samsung is using isn't the same thing that you are talking about. Trust me when I say it has one of the best pictures and prices around. Side by Side with Plasma this thing is unreal!

As far as someone telling me you can't get a 65" for that price you are right. The 56" was on sale last month for $1895............yea a little more than 1700, but you couldn't pay me enough to buy a Sony. I guarentee that the Sony won't stand up to the picture of the Samsung, and also it won't last as long since Sony isn't even making their own big screens anymore.

 

[RBLilly]

A quick check of prices will show you that you can't get a 65" Samsung for $1,700 and let me add that my wife and I decided that a 55" TV was the size we wanted in our small condo. I guess I could further add that "best picture around" is as subjective as the "hit" of a pool cue and we spent a year looking at all of the high def TVs out there before picking the Sony. But the main thing I need to add is that you missed the point of my post altogether. To restate it: rear projection TVs (LCD OR DLP) give you a lot of square inches of viewing area for the dollar spent as compared to plasma and LCD.

I stand corrected on the price it was the 56" that was on sale last month for $1895, but it has a lot better picture than the Sony!

 

[mantis99]

[quote. I am getting ready to purchase my first LCD, and I am teetering between two of them that I saw on HSN. One is an LG 32" (man it is bad a$$), the other is some digital living brand that gat some very high reviews, for about 300$ less. quote

LG also makes a nice tv. I would not venture into the other brand. The $300 will probably be well worth it for something you will have for 10-12 yrs.

Rear projection DLP is a good bang for the buck. My neighboor has one of these. Sitting by itself, it looks very nice. The bottom line though, is that its picture does not compare to a good plasma or LCD set. Remeber that a new bulb for one will cost you another $350.

My brother in law just got the new 52" sharp aquos that is 25% thinner. Awesome picture. 10,000 to 1 CR. He got it for $1800 with a friends and family rate.

I would say that most of the decent brands would look cool on your wall by themselves. The price difference isn't enough between the worthwhile brands and the good ones to justify saving the money over the improved picture quality. The real low priced brands I would just stay away from. Remember, you will have the tv for at least 10 yrs. If you can not afford a good one, do not buy one yet. Pioneer, is the only one that is really priced higher than the others. It is the best plasma picture, but not for the price. I should have added LG to the worthwhile category.

 

[BillPorter]

I stand corrected on the price it was the 56" that was on sale last month for $1895, but it has a lot better picture than the Sony!

When we bought the Sony, it was sitting right next to a Samsung DLP. At first glance, the Samsung picture looked more vivid and brighter. But it did not look as natural as the Sony. I can see how some people would prefer the image on the Samsung, but my wife and I both liked the image on the Sony better. BTW, if you want the Samsung to tone down the color saturation and edge enhancement to look more natural, then you would turn off the DNIe processing. But, unfortunately, you can't turn it off on the Samsung DLP if I recall correctly. Here's a snipet about DNIe:

"Samsung includes a separate game mode, which increases color saturation, edge enhancement, and overall brightness for a more vibrant, less realistic look that some gamers might prefer. Fortunately, Samsung's DNIe processing, which introduces more edge enhancement, is defeatable (in Movie mode, you can't even turn it on),"

The link for the above quote is: http://reviews.cnet.com/flat-panel-tvs/samsung-hp-s4253/4505-6482_7-31864380.html?tag=pdtl-list

NOTE: The above link is for a Samsung plasma, but the comments regarding DNIe apply to any use of this image processing in Samsung TVs.

As I said before, the "best picture" is CLEARLY subjective. So if you prefer the Samsung image, that's great! I am happy for you. My wife and I prefer the image on the Sony, so why can't you be happy for us??????

Here's a link that you won't be interested in, but someone else may be: