Lcd Tvs

[mjdx88]

Hey guys,

Im behind the times quite a bit. Im in the market for a nice LCD TV or Monitor. I have been looking around for the last week or so and im finding a few things but not much. I was hoping that some of you could give me some input on brands and places to look.

I know I want 1080p and an ATSC Tuner unless its a Monitor and if its a Monitor I need a remote cuz im just that damn lazy. Also if im picking up a monitor I will need a DVD Rec. with a ATSC Tuner.

All in all it needs to be name brand ( I know I will pay more but I rather that then the company going bankrupt) and Im looking at spending no more than $1200 and at least 27"

I have looked around newegg and the best deals I have seen have been on the Toshiba's.

Anyone have anything at home that they love, the main purpose for this TV is for an Xbox 360 that I will also be picking up =) but I like to watch a lot of movies and sometimes I will watch TV hence the reason for the most current tuner.

Mike

[Scoop]

Sharp Aquos LC32D64U 32-inch 1080p LCD HDTV
Sharp Aquos LC32GP1U 32-inch 1080p LCD Gaming HDTV
Sharp LC32GP3UB 32-inch 1080p LCD HDTV Black

Probably the 3 best 32" on the market. Edited May 7, 2008 by Scoop

[chromecarz00]

Got a panasonic 42" plasma...wait nvm

[Mr.W]

i just bought a LCD LG 42" and i couldnt be more happy with it i play the 360 on it and it good greeeat

[Snoopy1966]

I have a Samsung 40 inch flat screen with the 1080 dpi and you can use it for a TV and a Computer Monitor. It has a great pic, and if you look around you can get one for about $1100.

[Stinkyfisherman]

go with samsung they are great tv's you also need to be looking at the refresh rate on them, you dont want any lag when your play'n on the 360. You dont really need to consern yourself with 1080 if your only looking at a 27-32" the first time you'll be able to tell a differnce in 720 and 1080 is gonna be at the 42" size, then i'd say go 1080.

[Snoopy1966]

go with samsung they are great tv's you also need to be looking at the refresh rate on them, you dont want any lag when your play'n on the 360. You dont really need to consern yourself with 1080 if your only looking at a 27-32" the first time you'll be able to tell a differnce in 720 and 1080 is gonna be at the 42" size, then i'd say go 1080.

My TV works great for my Wii. I am sure it would be good enough for the XBox and the PS3.

[gaia.plateau]

My aunt is the manager for an electronics store, and she recommended the Sharp Aquos hands down. Have a 37" en route to me for $800.

[mjdx88]

My aunt is the manager for an electronics store, and she recommended the Sharp Aquos hands down. Have a 37" en route to me for $800.

You wanna hook a brother up?
lol

[NickReppinThe909]

my mom just got the new panasonic viera 37" lcd for her bedroom and it has an amazing picture but i still prefer my aquos 65D64U for the ultimate xbox 360 gaming experience

[Bulldog_916]

I got a Samsung Series 3 32" LCD. The picture is awesome and I got it at a discounted price. 700 bucks. 360 looks HAWT

[gaia.plateau]

Panasonic for plasma, Sharp or Samsung for LCD.

[teq]

Okay, first let me start by saying LCD is a technological failure in its current state. For one, there are too many integral components with very short shelf lives(the inverter, the cathode, and the substrate of pixels, just to name a few). Second, organic LED displays need to progress before the power usage/price point will outweigh the fact that LCDs have terrible contrast ratios and limited viewing angles. Third, 2009 will mark the beginning of a new trend in display technology. Many studios will be defaulting to 3D technology -- something most LCD TVs will not support. Don't even get me started on how flawed plasma displays are... I'll only mention that most of them are incapable of even displaying 720p properly and at full resolution.

So, what do I suggest instead? DLP

For your target $1200, you can get a 50" with plenty of HDMI ports, 3D display support, and a 120hz refresh rate(not necessary unless you're displaying BluRay). While you might not be able to mount it on the wall, the profile is very slim, extending no more than two feet from the wall. The larger profile does have its advantages, though.

The only item that can fail in a DLP is the lamp. Luckily, the cabinet is easy to service and they sell replacement bulbs for a mere $300. Because it uses a hallide lamp, contrast ratios are typically in the ballpark of 10000:1, meaning blacks are blacks and white isn't a milky gray.

Comparatively, if you look at front projectors, DLP is the superior technology over LCD.

Just my two cents.

[gaia.plateau]

teq : http://www.dlptvreview.com/dlptv/dlptelevision.html

Each type of HDTV has advantages and disadvantages, but try to be clear on the facts

LCD contrast ratios are superior to DLP, Plasma and LCOS, until you start getting up to 50"+ when DLP starts to beat it. You haven't been able to get an LCD with problematically limited viewing angles since 2006, that technology has long been resolved.

VIEWING ANGLE

Manufacturers claim viewing angles of 160-170° for both LCD and DLP displays. The viewable picture at these extreme angles is quite impressive for both technologies. The picture on the LCD displays remained consistent throughout all viewing angles. This was not the case with the DLP TVs. Viewing a DLP set from various angles will impact the overall color accuracy of the image. There is a considerable shift in the tints when changing vertical positions. You will notice this if you shift positions (i.e., stand up or sit down) while watching your DLP unit.

Advantage: LCD. If having a sizeable "sweet spot" for optimal viewing pleasure is a must, then an LCD television is your best bet.

Also, with DLP you're paying an extra $200-$500 for replacement bulbs every year or two (8000ish hours), so over 10 years you're paying about 5x as much as you would for another type of HDTV.

It depends on individual need; as a student I tend to live in basement suites with small rooms, so I went with an affordable, small TV with the best colour, contrast, clarity and brightness. Also I can't afford to be changing bulbs every year, and DLP TVs draw far more power than LCDs and I can't afford that tacked onto my electrical bill every month. If I was going to lay down $3,000 and get a 60", and if I could afford to pay an extra $5,000-$10,000 over the next decade in bulbs and electrical bills, I would definitely go with the DLP, no question. But if a consumer has a budget, it's by no means the only choice. Edited May 8, 2008 by gaia.plateau

[Unrelenting]

Hey guys,

Im behind the times quite a bit. Im in the market for a nice LCD TV or Monitor. I have been looking around for the last week or so and im finding a few things but not much. I was hoping that some of you could give me some input on brands and places to look.

I know I want 1080p and an ATSC Tuner unless its a Monitor and if its a Monitor I need a remote cuz im just that damn lazy. Also if im picking up a monitor I will need a DVD Rec. with a ATSC Tuner.

All in all it needs to be name brand ( I know I will pay more but I rather that then the company going bankrupt) and Im looking at spending no more than $1200 and at least 27"

I have looked around newegg and the best deals I have seen have been on the Toshiba's.

Anyone have anything at home that they love, the main purpose for this TV is for an Xbox 360 that I will also be picking up =) but I like to watch a lot of movies and sometimes I will watch TV hence the reason for the most current tuner.

Mike

Well I'll tell you right now, the only company that makes less than 40" 1080p TV's is Sharp, the Aquos, and they're madd expensive. Not many things are out for 1080p, and in my eyes 1080i-p has no difference between eachother

[mjdx88]

Eh Im a media geek, i know the difference even tho I cant see and yes these are pricey but its like buying a hookah or cigars if your gonna dish out the money for em might as well get the best you can get.

I think I am pretty much sold on the Aquos I dunno with model yet but I will be getting one soon I hope.

Mike

[teq]

teq : http://www.dlptvreview.com/dlptv/dlptelevision.html

Each type of HDTV has advantages and disadvantages, but try to be clear on the facts

LCD contrast ratios are superior to DLP, Plasma and LCOS, until you start getting up to 50"+ when DLP starts to beat it. You haven't been able to get an LCD with problematically limited viewing angles since 2006, that technology has long been resolved.

VIEWING ANGLE

Manufacturers claim viewing angles of 160-170° for both LCD and DLP displays. The viewable picture at these extreme angles is quite impressive for both technologies. The picture on the LCD displays remained consistent throughout all viewing angles. This was not the case with the DLP TVs. Viewing a DLP set from various angles will impact the overall color accuracy of the image. There is a considerable shift in the tints when changing vertical positions. You will notice this if you shift positions (i.e., stand up or sit down) while watching your DLP unit.

Advantage: LCD. If having a sizeable "sweet spot" for optimal viewing pleasure is a must, then an LCD television is your best bet.

Also, with DLP you're paying an extra $200-$500 for replacement bulbs every year or two (8000ish hours), so over 10 years you're paying about 5x as much as you would for another type of HDTV.

It depends on individual need; as a student I tend to live in basement suites with small rooms, so I went with an affordable, small TV with the best colour, contrast, clarity and brightness. Also I can't afford to be changing bulbs every year, and DLP TVs draw far more power than LCDs and I can't afford that tacked onto my electrical bill every month. If I was going to lay down $3,000 and get a 60", and if I could afford to pay an extra $5,000-$10,000 over the next decade in bulbs and electrical bills, I would definitely go with the DLP, no question. But if a consumer has a budget, it's by no means the only choice.

I'll just start by listing a few caveats of the article:

+ Considering it mentions LCD contrast ratios of 500:1, I'd say it was probably written about two years ago.

+ Further support of this is illustrated in the fact that nowhere do they mention RGB LED, but rather a color wheel. This technology has been phased out.

+ The "sweet spot" they mention is simply the convergence of the light from the cold cathodes meeting at an equal distance. With any LCD, you'll notice one side gets slightly dimmer as you angle away from it. This is due to the angle of refraction and affects all LCD TVs, but moreso the ones without a gloss.


Okay, so let's go ahead and bring the article up to date.

For one, the contrast ratios of LCD and DLP are currently neck and neck on paper. They both offer 15000:1+ ratios in the top of the line models, but visually, anything above 2000:1 is grossly excessive. This is due to fact that most movies don't make use of HDR and choose locales that don't have much variance in light. Throw on Star Wars, and you'll appreciate the contrast more than you would on a movie like Lord of the Rings.

Where the two technologies differ, however, is in color purity. The light from a cold cathode has no chance against an RGB LED array, because the light is of the resulting color and not simply translucency.

Because new DLP displays use RGB LEDs to produce the illumination, the lamp life has risen to about 20,000 hours or more, depending on whether the display is set to economy mode or super bright. The replacement lamps are also only around $200. If you consider that most cathodes will die shortly after an LED array, it's better to be able to easily replace the lamp every few years than have an LCD turn into a paperweight because they're difficult to service.

I've owned every type of display other than plasma, LCOS, and the soon to be released multi-CRT display, and though I prefer CRT, I still would prefer DLP over LCD.

[Bulldog_916]

My TV displays in 8000:1 contrast ratio. It looks absolutely amazing and it's on the inexpensive. Hockey in HD owns. UFC in HD owns. The Science Channel, Discovery, and NatGeo own. All I need now is a PS3 and I'm set for life. I like LCD because of the longevity factor. Everyone I know who has had any LCD display has never had a problem with them. We've had the family computer LCD screen for almost 5 years and it still has yet to go bad. It outlasted my Viewsonic CRT. That was one thing, the other thing was that it was a Samsung. Sold.

[gaia.plateau]

Why would the only official DLP dealer on the internet, a vendor that specializes in DLP televisions, not Plasmas or LCDs, use an outdated article that cast an unfavourable light upon its product? Research I've done, which includes talking to representatives at major electronics stores, indicates that the colour wheel is still the most common technology in DLP televisions.

The replacement lamps are also only around $200.

Luckily, the cabinet is easy to service and they sell replacement bulbs for a mere $300.

If you consider that most cathodes will die shortly after an LED array, it's better to be able to easily replace the lamp every few years than have an LCD turn into a paperweight because they're difficult to service.

But by the time an LCD burns out (45,000-75,000 hours), you'd have gone through up to 9 or 10 bulbs (at 8,000 hours a pop). 10 bulbs costs between $2,000 and $5,000 depending on model. You could easily buy 2-3 better quality LCDs or Plasmas for that price

[Scoop]

stay away from plasma if youre gonna do any gaming. youre gonna get burned out spots really quick

[teq]

Why would the only official DLP dealer on the internet, a vendor that specializes in DLP televisions, not Plasmas or LCDs, use an outdated article that cast an unfavourable light upon its product? Research I've done, which includes talking to representatives at major electronics stores, indicates that the colour wheel is still the most common technology in DLP televisions.

The replacement lamps are also only around $200.

Luckily, the cabinet is easy to service and they sell replacement bulbs for a mere $300.

If you consider that most cathodes will die shortly after an LED array, it's better to be able to easily replace the lamp every few years than have an LCD turn into a paperweight because they're difficult to service.

But by the time an LCD burns out (45,000-75,000 hours), you'd have gone through up to 9 or 10 bulbs (at 8,000 hours a pop). 10 bulbs costs between $2,000 and $5,000 depending on model. You could easily buy 2-3 better quality LCDs or Plasmas for that price

There are many vendor websites that don't get updated frequently. If a company starts becoming profitable, they usually only bother to update the online store.

As far as electronics store reps are concerned, most salesmen that work in large appliances do so on commission. The more sales they get, the better, so why would they bother to point you in the direction of a set you're going to get longevity out of, when they'd rather have you come back in a couple years for a new one?

Most televisions never see their full lifespan anyway, as people tend to upgrade with the common trend.


The $100 price difference between replacement lamps is because RGB LED is cheaper than hallide/halogen.


As far as lamp life is concerned, I don't know if you've had the same LCD screen for several years, but after a while, the cathode starts to dim, the inverter starts to fail, and pixels decay. If there's no protective film on the screen, the topmost layer will also yellow with sunlight/cathode exposure.

I don't know where you're getting your figures, but 45,000 hours is typically the mean life of an LCD. However, 15,000-20,000 hours for a DLP is based on tested variables, such as the brightness setting and temperature. Naturally, the lamp consuming less power and running at cooler temperatures will prolong its life.

Furthermore, in the mean life of an LCD(which, remember, includes all of the time the LCD spends dimming, losing calibration, and slowly getting fuzzy), you will have gone through 2-3 DLP bulbs, depending on use. This comes to no more than $900 -- the price of a 42" LCD.

Why would I downgrade to a less enjoyable 42" if I started with a 65"?

[gaia.plateau]

Search "LCD longevity" or "LCD burnout" or some such, everywhere gives figures of 45,000-75,000... similar searches for DLP bulbs all say 8,000. So that's more like $2-5k.

[mobbed]

i actually replaced the cold cathode bulbs on my old lcd monitor and replaced the inverter for about 60 dollars so boyahhh

as for the tv sharp aquos all the way i own a 37 in vizio but its my main computer monitor and its great for that but no real hdmi connections here