HDTVs!

[octopus]

I love my plasma. This thread actually surprises me that you guys know what you're talking about :D Usually when I'm reading a thread about HDTVs in non-HDTV forums, you get all sorts of bad/outdated advice ;o

[Amele]

I love my plasma. This thread actually surprises me that you guys know what you're talking about :D Usually when I'm reading a thread about HDTVs in non-HDTV forums, you get all sorts of bad/outdated advice ;o

it got put in the technical support forum - if this had been in general discussion/spam you would see all the bad/outdated advice lol

[Penthesilea]

I worked at Best Buy from Feb til like a month ago. Having to sell TVs was fun, having to add on all the extra BS was not. I only worked there for the discount (saved about 5 grand) on my home theater set up and various other things.

Pioneer and Panny's are really really nice sets and if I didn't go with a plasma I'd get a Samsung 6 series. The 7 series are nothing different than the 6's other than some built in HDD that has preloaded pictures and recipes and junk.

[MisterBob]

Thanks for all the advice guys

[Elesirdur]

Man looking at HDTVs online is dangerous.

I've been wanting to get a new TV for ages (still using a 27" CRT I bought like 7 years ago) and I'm eyeballing these two LG units, a 42" model (42LG30) and a 37" model (37LG30). The 37" says it will do 1080p, though I kind of doubt it for that price, but since I mostly play games on my TV and don't have a BluRay player I'm thinking the 42" with 720p would be just fine.

At 1k each I could easily pay that off in a month or two on my CC with my new job - it's so tempting Q_Q

[Amele]

generally speaking. most people can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080p at screen sizes below about 36" (it's not uncommon to be unable to tell below 42") and this is sitting at distances closer than the recommended viewing distance.

so I'd be cautious about buying a 'small' screen 1080p.

*people with higher visual acuity or training in what to look for can distinguish at smaller apparent screen sizes. the average populous can't.

[Stiker]

I just recently purchased a 46" Samsung 6 series and love it. Reason I went with LCD over plasma was because I know I'll be moving soon and LCDs are good in any environment while Plasma really shines in rooms where you can control the light. Even with anti-glare on a plasma, the quality still won't be as good.

If you do go LCD, I would *highly* recommend you go with a model that offers a 120Hz refresh rate. Basically, what this will do is take your normal 60Hz signals that your components give up and increases that signal to reduce blur. Granted the comparision demos in the store always look good in this respect, but I did it for shits and giggles at home as my Samsung has a demo mode for 120Hz refresh (as it's a setting you need to turn on/off). So I popped in a game, played in demo mode which puts half the screen at 120Hz and the other at 60Hz -- it was definitely noticable to say the least.

Anyways long story short, if you go LCD, shell out the extra dough for the 120Hz refresh, well worth it IMO.

[Elesirdur]

I just recently purchased a 46" Samsung 6 series and love it. Reason I went with LCD over plasma was because I know I'll be moving soon and LCDs are good in any environment while Plasma really shines in rooms where you can control the light. Even with anti-glare on a plasma, the quality still won't be as good.

If you do go LCD, I would *highly* recommend you go with a model that offers a 120Hz refresh rate. Basically, what this will do is take your normal 60Hz signals that your components give up and increases that signal to reduce blur. Granted the comparision demos in the store always look good in this respect, but I did it for shits and giggles at home as my Samsung has a demo mode for 120Hz refresh (as it's a setting you need to turn on/off). So I popped in a game, played in demo mode which puts half the screen at 120Hz and the other at 60Hz -- it was definitely noticable to say the least.

Anyways long story short, if you go LCD, shell out the extra dough for the 120Hz refresh, well worth it IMO.

Doesn't that require some form of in-betweening technology on behalf of the TV?

Edit: Wow, just took a second to look some stuff up and bumping up to 120Hz refresh rate seems to add anywhere from 50-100% to the cost of the 60Hz units 0_o

[Amele]

you should see it before you buy. some people won't be able to tell the difference (60hz is 60 frames/sec on progressive scan, which is typically twice the rate of most video feeds already)

[MisterBob]

I really liked the 120hz vs 60hz when looking at the TVs in the store. A friend also has the 52" Bravia with 120hz, and the picture is pretty damn amazing.

Isn't 120hz also a "magic number" for refresh rates? It's divisible by TV broadcast rates and dvd rates I guess

[Tyr]

Can I get in on this? I'm looking to buy a plasma TV - not with the same budget as Mr. Bob though.

I read up on some comparisons on CNET, and I'm pretty confident in going with a Plasma TV. 1080p is inconsequential to me, because I don't have a PS3/Blu-Ray

Currently looking at a few different ones, I want to spend less than 1k preferably:

Panasonic Viera 42" Plasma TH-42PX80U -- (I'm trying to get my hands on this from Frys.com, which I saw it for 777$, but it's now sold out - I think Costco has it for 799$)

Samsung 50" Plasma PN50A450 -- $1174

LG 42" 720p Plasma HDTV 42PC5D (~$900)

Right now I'm leaning towards either the Panasonic, if in fact it would be 800$. The difference in size for me doesn't warrant the 300$ price difference between the Samsung and the Panasonic, but I don't know the situation really with TV brands and all that.

Can anyone shed some light on this? Or any ideas on a better route?

[octopus]

Panasonic makes fantastic plasmas (I own one, not the model listed but..), so I can definitely recommend that.

[Stiker]

Doesn't that require some form of in-betweening technology on behalf of the TV?

Edit: Wow, just took a second to look some stuff up and bumping up to 120Hz refresh rate seems to add anywhere from 50-100% to the cost of the 60Hz units 0_o

You are correct on both accounts. The TV itself has the technology and each company has their own "flavor" of 120Hz technology. And yes, it is a significant price boost, but I felt that my HD set was a major investment anyways. Once I saw the difference for myself in the store, I felt it was well worth is as far as quality and once I took it home and did my own tests, I felt it was a much smarter purchase on my part.

[testdummy]

I have a Samsung 7 series 46" lcd and i love it, no regrets other then the new 8 series will be here soon(with a msrp of $4000+ >_>), and that would cause the price to drop futher. I'll agree with the other and say the 120hz is an amazing addition, once you get used to it of course.

[evilbau]

No one mentioning rear projection technology, personally I find it has the best PQ with less burn in issues. Has the largest footprint, but is also the lightest if you move around. I got my 61" JVC 1080P D-ILA (their verson of DLP) for about 900$ (Aprox 35-40% of Retail)

To me my priorities were:
1. HDTV (1080p in particular)
2. Size (50"+) & Weight
3. Picture Quality & Brightness
4. Price
5. Features (HDMI/Component/etc)

Although people say DLP is a 'dying' technology, to me I found it was superior in the things that mattered to me, and am happy with my choice.

[Kyo]

I personaly used to have a 32" LCD Samsung series 6, and while playing stranglehold I expierencd shade and health bar burn in. At this point the tv was 2 yr's old so I decided to buy a new one I got a 46" series 7 samsung with the 120 htz tech and I wouldnt trade it for any other tv. It's simply amazing and I only paid 1800 for it.

[Roranora]

I know I'm way late to this thread, have those people shopping made any purchases yet? If so, I'm curious what you guys bought.

I'll echo that Samsung is quality. My very unprofessional opinion puts significant value on the brand of TV. Sony/Samsung are at the top, followed by LG and Sharp's Aquos series TVs. Panasonic, Hitachi, Pioneer are solid, too, although I'd buy the latter 4 brands first. Just don't buy a Vizio or Zenith or some shit like that. ._. I picked up a LN-T4065F about 13 months ago now, and I'm very pleased with it. At the time, no HDTVs had 4 HDMI inputs, and I was set on getting one with 3 HDMI inputs. I went with LCD over Plasma because of one, price, but also because I'm pretty wary about Plasma TVs staying as vibrant as they are new after a few thousand hours have been put on them. I'm not real sure how well some of the newer Plasma TVs hold up for the long run (help me about BG Plasma owners), but I've yet to hear of a Plasma owner who didn't feel like he/she had at least some drop-off in its color and image after significant use. Burn-in is not really an issue with either LCD or Plasma, though.

As for 60hz vs 120hz, this guy says it pretty thoroughly..

What you end up with is a smoother flowing picture, but it's dependant on the source, and the particular t.v.'s ability to deal with the input.

The most common refresh rate for today's Televisions are 60hz for NTSC-based systems and 50hz for PAL-based systems. However, with the introduction of some Blu-ray Disc and HD-DVD players that can actually output a 24 frame per second video signal, instead of the traditional 30 frame per second video signal, new refresh rates are being implemented by some television display makers to accommodate these signals in the correct mathematical ratio.

If you have a TV with a 120hz refresh rate that is 1080p/24 compatible (1920 pixels across the screen vs 1080 pixels down the screen, with a 24 frame per second rate). The TV ends up displaying 24 separate frames every second, but repeats each frame according to the refresh rate of the TV. In the case of 120hz each frame would be displayed 5 times within each 24th of a second.

In other words, even with higher refresh rates, there are still only 24 separate frames displayed every second, but they may need to be displayed multiple times, depending on the refresh rate.

To display 24 frames per second on a TV with a 120hz refresh rate, each frame is repeated 5 times every 24th of a second.

To display 24 frames per second on a TV with a 72hz refresh rate, each frame is repeated 3 times every 24th of a second.

To display 30 frames per second on a TV with a 60 hz refresh rate, each frame is repeated 2 times every 30th of a second.

To display 25 frames per second on a TV with a 50 hz refresh rate (PAL Countries), each frame is repeated 2 times every 25th of a second.

To display 25 frames per second on a TV with a 100 hz refresh rate (PAL Countries), each frame is repeated 4 times every 25th of a second.

If the television is also required to do a 24 frame per second to 30 frame per second or vice versa frame rate conversion, then you also have to deal with 3:2 or 2:3 Pulldown as well where the 24 frames of film will be stretched onto 30 frames.

I will add that you need to be watching something with a lot of quick movement to see a difference AND that you have to be looking at pretty large screen, I'd say 50"+.



And some random rambling...

Some HDTVs only look good at or near their native resolutions, which is something else to consider, but it shouldn't be a problem unless you buy a really cheap TV. While the Samsung I got looks fine at 480p with the original Xbox/Wii, I will say most 1080p TVs, including mine, look pretty awful with composite, 4:3 signals. So, because I want to have my NES, SNES, and N64 hooked up at all times, I got a KV-40XBR800 off Ebay last week. It's stupid amounts of heavy, but it's a model I wanted pretty badly when it was new, when I couldn't afford it. It was manufactured during a pretty unique transitional period for TVs. There surely weren't many 4:3, 1080i, direct view tube TVs made.

[Elesirdur]

Bit of an update to this thread but yesterday I picked myself up a 42LG30 and I'm pretty damn happy with it so far. I was considering getting the 37" version but for an extra $200 I figure I might as well get the 42" since I'm not getting a unit that could properly do 1080i/p.

Even though it's LG's entry-level HDTV I am still really happy with it and the picture quality on my 360 games looks great. Even though I've got an old non-elite 360, requiring me to use component for my input instead of HDMI, the picture quality is still very nice.

Speaking of, at 720p resolution, what kind of difference in quality would I see on a mid-grade LCD tv between going from component to HDMI input? My next purchase is going to be a BluRay player, preferably one that is a combo unit that can upscale my regular DVDs.

[Tyr]

El, how's your first week been with the LG?

Before I went to Circuit City and Best Buy (to see the products I might be getting), I was set on the Panasonic Viera 42" Plasma 720p TV. Now I'm starting to lean towards an LCD, and was trying to decide between Panasonic, LG, and Samsung.

[Amele]

El, how's your first week been with the LG?

Before I went to Circuit City and Best Buy (to see the products I might be getting), I was set on the Panasonic Viera 42" Plasma 720p TV. Now I'm starting to lean towards an LCD, and was trying to decide between Panasonic, LG, and Samsung.

Samsung LCD TVs are amazing, but you'll pay the price for them. if it's in your budget I'd say get the samsung - they're some of the best TVs on the market right now.