|
Krono99 posted:Cross post from 'Coupons & Deals': Take a look at the Panasonic TC-P65S2. Should be around $2k.
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2010 00:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jan 14, 2026 19:29 |
|
|
What's the consensus on refurb TVs? Sony's got their 46v5100 refurb on sale for $799. http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs...#specifications
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2010 02:24
|
|
|
Chu020 posted:What's the consensus on refurb TVs? Sony's got their 46v5100 refurb on sale for $799.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2010 03:36
|
|
|
Could someone help me find a set? I am trying to find a TV that will fit in a wall cutout. 46" Wide, 25.5" High, 5" Deep I can find 42"-class sets that will fit, but am struggling to find anything closer to 46" because of the height constraint. Should I just go for a 42" and fill the extra space (in the width) that will be leftover with speakers or something? I am thinking LCD since I could probably get away with sitting it in the cutout without a full mounting bracket. ...another way of going about it I guess would be to mount the tv with a bracket over the top of the inset. This would probably be my best bet I imagine? Then I can just get whatever. Any thoughts on mounting a heavy plasma (what I'd prefer to get) over a thin LED LCD? paradigmm fucked around with this message at 04:46 on Mar 15, 2010 |
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2010 04:26
|
|
|
I'm pretty much ready to buy this 46" Samsung LN46C630 for $989 at a local Fry's. Any reason why I shouldn't? Something better for the price? I'll be viewing it from roughly seven feet now but when I move in a few months that distance will most likely increase to closer to ten feet. The other option is the same model at 40" for $809. My budget started at around $800 + tax but I gave myself some leeway of $150 for special cases. In the store I liked the 46" better but figured I'd post here for second opinions. Are there any other panels out currently in the $800-$1000 band >=40" that are better than this one? Dameius fucked around with this message at 04:55 on Mar 15, 2010 |
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2010 04:53
|
|
|
Dameius posted:I'm pretty much ready to buy this 46" Samsung LN46C630 for $989 at a local Fry's. Any reason why I shouldn't? Something better for the price? I'll be viewing it from roughly seven feet now but when I move in a few months that distance will most likely increase to closer to ten feet. I spent the last few weeks reading AVSforum and slowly going insane. Ended up ordering a Panasonic 42G25 this morning for $1099, I'm fairly sure it's the best possible TV for the money.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2010 14:52
|
|
|
VERTiG0 posted:About to pull the trigger on a Samsung PN50B530 50" plasma. Thoughts? There's no glare issues. I bought this for $899 at a local retailer here and it's an awesome TV for the price.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2010 16:11
|
|
|
Does anyone know if there is a list of the Best Buy stores with the 3D TV displays up now?
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2010 17:07
|
|
|
I read the OP and saw some basic calibration info (using THX DVD's?) but wanted to ask further. Sorry if this was answered sometime recently- I have no time to read 220 pages. I picked up a Sony KDL-46V2500 from a friend the other day and the picture, while worlds better than what I had on my old 720p 26" Westinghouse, still seems off to me. It's currently connected to my Comcast DVR using component cables, and I'm headed out to buy HDMI cables right now (one for the DVR and one for my PS3), but is there anything else I can do to improve the picture? I Googled "calibration settings" for this model and came up with these settings: http://www.lcdtvbuyingguide.com/lcdtvreviews/sony-kdl46v2500-review.shtml which make it look a bit better, but I'm hoping there's something better. Does anyone else have this model of TV? Could you pass along what your settings are? I'm still pretty clueless about this stuff but I know enough to come here for advice. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2010 22:11
|
|
|
This post looks like the best resource for that model and it discusses calibration: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9607046&&#post9607046
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2010 23:12
|
|
|
Fishmasher posted:This post looks like the best resource for that model and it discusses calibration: Thank you so much! I'll check that out. Edit: The settings there made a HUGE difference! Thanks again! 
Referee fucked around with this message at 01:01 on Mar 16, 2010 |
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2010 23:16
|
|
|
Why is it that a lot of the lcd's in store seem to be very pixelated? This is making it especially hard to make a decision on a screen. Is this because of the signal they are receiving or the hookups used?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2010 02:47
|
|
|
freestyl posted:Why is it that a lot of the lcd's in store seem to be very pixelated? This is making it especially hard to make a decision on a screen. Is this because of the signal they are receiving or the hookups used? Don't a lot of stores use a set-up that splits a single signal over multiple TVs? I could see that causing some issues maybe.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2010 03:37
|
|
|
sanchez posted:I spent the last few weeks reading AVSforum and slowly going insane. Ended up ordering a Panasonic 42G25 this morning for $1099, I'm fairly sure it's the best possible TV for the money. You won't be disappointed, it's absolutely fantastic.  Not many 2010 plasma models out yet, but other manufacturers will have a hard time beating Panasonic.AVforums review for G20 : http://www.avforums.com/reviews/Panasonic-TX-P42G20-Plasma-HDTV-Review.html We only have G20 in europe, no G25. There probably isn't much of a difference.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2010 08:54
|
|
|
RichterIX posted:Don't a lot of stores use a set-up that splits a single signal over multiple TVs? I could see that causing some issues maybe. Yea, it's basically bad source material. No modern LCD from a name-brand manufacturer should pixelate with a good source.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2010 10:37
|
|
|
It could also be ridiculously over-the-top sharpness settings causing jagged edges.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2010 13:22
|
|
|
Is there anything negative about 120hz? Right now I don't watch any blue ray and don't really see that changing much soon. Should I spend a little more for 120hz or what? freestyl fucked around with this message at 14:03 on Mar 16, 2010 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2010 13:59
|
|
|
freestyl posted:Is there anything negative about 120hz? Right now I don't watch any blue ray and don't really see that changing much soon. 120Hz lets you avoid 3:2 pulldown, that's about it. It's nice but most people have been watching movies at home with 3:2 pulldown for years without bothering them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2010 14:05
|
|
|
Got referred to this thread. I'm pretty stupid when it comes to HD in general and while the OP helped tremendously, I still need some assistance. I have a PS3 and was wondering if there were any HDTVs for around 250 - 400 that I could take advantage of the PS3s HD capability. Some people pointed me to HD Monitors, but like others have said, they are for computers not really gaming with a PS3. Agreed has pointed me to a Vizio Razor 23" LED-lit LCD HDTV. Is playing on a HDTV smaller then 40" even worth it, or should I stick with my SDTV until I can afford a sexy one (not for 3-4 years due to family and paying for private school for my 3 girls :shakes fist: ) Again, thanks a lot for the information you've already pointed me to Agreed!
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2010 22:01
|
|
|
No problem, glad you're here. You do have options; that Vizio that I want is going to be a kickin' computer monitor, but unless you game RIGHT UP NEXT to your TV, all that screen real estate - more than 2,000,000 pixels packed into 23" - is basically going to be wasted. The same quality that makes it a good computer monitor with up-close gaming dual functionality (high resolution in a small, thin format, with a great picture) will not make it so good as a general TV. The smallest you'll want for a general TV is like a 32" or so widescreen LCD. In that size, 720p is what you should be looking for. That'll put better options in your price range. Now, I understand budgetary concerns. Trust me. I'd have loved to have brought home a 60" TV, but I had to keep it closer to the wallet (I don't like buying on credit, ever, if I can help it - our student loans are our total debt, and as long as we can, we'll keep it that way). But I feel compelled to point you toward an option that would absolutely kick rear end for you, though it's $200 higher than your desired price range: Samsung PN42B450, $624. A 720p Plasma with a great picture, big enough to fill your den/living room needs but not too big for the bedroom when you upgrade later. 720p is the native output resolution of most PS3 games, so no scaling needed; it will accept inputs higher than that and downscale them as needed, so no worries there either. Plasmas have excellent motion resolution and very little input lag. The one thing they suffer from is image retention, which is basically the problem of a static image staying sort of "ghosted" on screen for a few minutes afterward. It's just a limitation of phosphor technology and it isn't something you'll notice most of the time, just after longer gaming sessions if you switch over to regular programming and you still see a little bit of the game's health bar or whatever. A good LCD TV option in the same price range is the LG 42LH30, $650. Same size as the above TV, but a full 1080p screen, with an LG-made IPS panel; IPS panels offer excellent motion resolution (so no discernible motion blur) and good viewing angles, though the black depth on them can't compare to Samsung's and Sony's pricier S-PVA panels, or to Plasma's inky blacks. However, if you are concerned about image retention, this is going to be your best bet in the price range for getting a similarly sized TV. Remember, LG makes panels for Vizio; they're sort of an OEM, in that regard, and so you can save some money going direct to the source. Also, all LG LCDs have amazing color correction options, available to the user, so you'll be able to adjust the picture with a great deal of precision. Also, since this is a 1080p panel, BDs will show every possible detail, and look great. Both of those are higher than your proposed price range, so I understand if it's just not an option, but they feature WAY, WAY more surface area of the screen. They are serious TVs that aren't TOO far out of your way. You'll be a lot happier with them for your proposed application than you would with the smaller monitor, and if you consider that for around twice the price you get tons more space it seems like less of a bargain for the lower priced Vizio that I initially recommended. That really is intended for monitor applications, that's where its strengths lie. If you are just desperately restricted in your budget, then I will try to find some lower priced options, but it is risky to go with lower tier manufacturers. I've gotta go pick up food for my wife and I, so I'm out of here for now, but I'll check back in later to see if you need any help others haven't already given.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2010 00:24
|
|
|
Can anyone tell me the difference between these two sets. VO370M $547 Supports 480i (SDTV), 480P (EDTV), 720P (HDTV), 1080i (HDTV), 1080P (HDTV) VL370M $498 Supports 480i (SDTV), 480P (EDTV), 720P (HDTV), 1080i (HDTV), 1080p (FHDTV) I bolded the parts that are really confusing me. This is from Vizio's website, on walmart's specs page for the VO370M, it lists 1080P as Video Signals instead of "HDTV". What is the difference here, is FHDTV just a catch phrase? Why the price difference, what is different about these models? And which is better?
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2010 02:35
|
|
|
freestyl posted:Can anyone tell me the difference between these two sets. From what I remember when I was looking around for cheap-ish TVs, these are basically the same TV except that the VL370M is the newer model. Since it's cheaper on there, I don't see any reason not to go with it, unless someone knows something I don't. For what it's worth though, I couldn't find the VL in any brick and mortar stores around me, whereas the VO was everywhere.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2010 02:58
|
|
|
Yeah I think it's the newer model too but since it's cheaper I'm getting thrown off.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2010 03:10
|
|
|
Kind of a random question, but I remember reading somewhere on the forums that if you're looking at a 23" TV, the difference between 720p and 1080p signals is not able to be picked up by the human eye. If that's the case, would you be able to see the difference between a 720p picture on a 23" 720p monitor, and a 720p picture on a 23" 1080p monitor?
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2010 04:29
|
|
|
GobiasIndustries posted:Kind of a random question, but I remember reading somewhere on the forums that if you're looking at a 23" TV, the difference between 720p and 1080p signals is not able to be picked up by the human eye. If that's the case, would you be able to see the difference between a 720p picture on a 23" 720p monitor, and a 720p picture on a 23" 1080p monitor? Absolutely. It depends on how much of your field of view the screen in question takes up. The more that is, the more easily you will be able to discern additional resolution. TVs are typically used at distance, monitors are typically used 1-2' away. Remember, computer monitors have been capable of displaying resolutions approaching 1080p for years. Higher end CRTs could do at least 1600x1200.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2010 08:49
|
|
|
And to answer your actual question, yes, it should be possible to discern the difference since the upscaling algorithms of any 1080p monitor would necessarily cause some "blurring" effects. If you're using it as a PC monitor (not just for movies), the difference will be huge since windows and text will no longer have sharpo edges. If you have access to any flat-panel monitor, try switching the desktop to a non-native resolution and you'll see this effect very quickly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2010 12:57
|
|
|
My brother just got a new set, and has a 60" SXRD Sony KDS-60A2000 that just got a brand new optical block and a bulb with only a few months on it. He told me he would give it to me for a wedding present, but a 60" TV is just way too big for how small my current living room is - I sit about 5-6' away from the screen, and currently have a 37" LCD. I think a 47" is about the biggest I could get away with at that range. However, in about 18 months I'd like to be purchasing a house and can see a larger TV being a great thing. But that's 18 months away, when the SXRD is going to be pretty outdated, even more than it already is. Is the set good enough to hold on to for another 18 months and use then? I've honestly only seen it in action a few times, he lives in a different city. I'm trying to convince him to sell it and get me a new receiver with the proceeds....
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2010 14:11
|
|
|
I just got the 47" Sharp Dell has on sale and set it up the other day. Factory settings were horrid, of course, but I don't own a calibration DVD. I made it look better, but I'm sure it isn't optimized. We should have a pass around or some such so that we aren't all buying a $30+ calibration kit. Anyway, HD sports and movies look fantastic. HD TV shows like Lost, CSI, etc. look very much like Soap Operas. Maybe I'm just not used to seeing anything but sports and heavily post-processed films in HD, but it frankly looks goofy and a bit too..stark or sharp or something. Is this a sign that my set isn't calibrated well, or is it just that I've never watched normal TV in HD and I'll get used to it?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2010 14:26
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:I just got the 47" Sharp Dell has on sale and set it up the other day. Factory settings were horrid, of course, but I don't own a calibration DVD. I made it look better, but I'm sure it isn't optimized. We should have a pass around or some such so that we aren't all buying a $30+ calibration kit. It's a setting you can turn off. It will probably be called something like "smooth motion" or "blur reduction" - a quick googling said that whatever it's called is probably under "film mode" -> "advanced".
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2010 14:37
|
|
|
I'm thinking about how to mount my TV, and think I will only have access to one stud, so a lot of wall mounts are out. This one: http://www.amazon.com/Peerless-PA740-Articulating-Mount-Displays/dp/B00155V210/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1268924591&sr=1-1 Claims it can handle up to 80 pounds. So it should be ok to put a 46 or 50 inch plasma on if it only weights 60-64 pounds. Thats what amazon says the Panasonic plasmas I looked at weigh. Right?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2010 15:13
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:It's a setting you can turn off. It will probably be called something like "smooth motion" or "blur reduction" - a quick googling said that whatever it's called is probably under "film mode" -> "advanced". I already have that turned off. It still looks like a soap or something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2010 15:24
|
|
|
freestyl posted:What is the difference here, is FHDTV just a catch phrase? Why the price difference, what is different about these models? And which is better? I'm pretty sure FHDTV is just Full HD TV (i.e. 1080p), so just a catch phrase. e: Yup, I was right according to Google.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2010 16:11
|
|
|
modig posted:I'm thinking about how to mount my TV, and think I will only have access to one stud, so a lot of wall mounts are out. This one: Because some people just don't know, and circumstances vary: Is your TV less than 32 inches across or is your house weird in some way? Most homes have studs located 14 1/2 inches apart.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2010 16:11
|
|
|
I've been shopping around and reading this thread but am still so far out of my element that I could use a good recommendation based on my criteria. My criteria:
Innocuous fucked around with this message at 19:32 on Mar 18, 2010 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2010 19:20
|
|
|
Just FYI looks like Best Buy will be running a special on March 21st for a 3D starter pack: Not a bad deal considering the glasses by themselves would be $300, plus 3 years no interest.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2010 22:03
|
|
|
During that three years, sets with similar specs will be a hell of a lot more affordable. I'm going to give it a few years before I even really seriously begin to think about investing in 3D.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2010 22:56
|
|
|
People complain about bad clouding with these edge-lit Samsungs, which is pretty loving annoying for a 55" that costs $3k.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2010 23:04
|
|
|
It's hard to assess how much of an issue clouding will be until you actually get the set in your viewing environment. Most of the example photos were taken in completely unlit rooms using cameras set for very long exposure times (because otherwise it wouldn't be possible to see it). However there ARE sets that look like that in casual usage, warranty issue if you ask me. It's the kind of thing that for the most part doesn't become a problem until you go out of your way to see it, then once you've done that you can end up hyper-focusing on it when it really doesn't have much of an affect on your viewing experience. If it's a particularly egregious example, that's one thing, but careful how much stock you put into AVS freakouts. That said... I don't like the idea of edge-lit. It just strikes me as a poor way to light a set. I mean, you want even lighting, two strips of bright lights on each side just seems like a bad solution, even though it's not so simple as just that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2010 23:16
|
|
|
Homunculus posted:Newegg and a bunch of other places have the Sony BRAVIA 40" KDL40EX400 for $699. Crutchfield has the 46" version of the Sony for $808 with free shipping. Plus, use the coupon code 3A825 for an extra $20 off which brings the total down to $789 and you can get a noticeably bigger set for a relatively small price increase over what NewEgg wants.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2010 02:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jan 14, 2026 19:29 |
|
|
Agreed posted:It's the kind of thing that for the most part doesn't become a problem until you go out of your way to see it, then once you've done that you can end up hyper-focusing on it when it really doesn't have much of an affect on your viewing experience. If it's a particularly egregious example, that's one thing, but careful how much stock you put into AVS freakouts.  vsforum.comI remember in specific when I went to find calibration settings for my set, there was a guy in the thread who had posted something like 20+ calibrations - and was utterly convinced that the numbers in one setting affected all the others as well. What was even funnier is all of his suggested settings were horrible. Crackbone fucked around with this message at 12:38 on Mar 19, 2010 |
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2010 12:35
|
|