|
|
|
help choosing between 3 HD LCD TV's
|
|
|
moloo
Junior Member
|
30. July 2009 @ 22:35 |
Link to this message
|
hi i'm buying my first HD TV and am really stuck between these three. i'm mainly going to be playing my ps3 and i hope to be setting up a home theater eventually and watching some blu rays. at first i was going to go with this
"Sharp Aquos 40" 1080p LCD HDTV** (LC40E67U)"
http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/proddet...10124484&catid=
but then someone told me the refresh rate is only 60hz and that it is going to make a big difference.
so i also found this
"Toshiba REGZA 40" 1080p 120Hz LCD HDTV** (40XV645U)"
http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/proddet...10122882&catid=
and
Insignia 42" 1080p 120Hz LCD HDTV** (NS-L42X-10A)
http://www.bestbuy.ca/catalog/proddetail...495&catid=24558
both the toshiba and insignia are 120hz but i'm really confused as to which one to go with. my price limit is $1000.00 and i'd appreciate any advice or help. i'm really confused with this 60hz vs 120hz as i hear from some people that it's a very noticeble difference and from others it's barely noticeable.
ya baby
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
qwert99
Senior Member
|
30. July 2009 @ 22:50 |
Link to this message
|
You definitely, certainly, without a doubt, need 120 Hz or something similar on your HDTV. By similar I mean some multiple if 24, the framerate of film. So 24 Hz, 48 Hz, 72 Hz, 96 Hz, 120 Hz, 240 Hz, etc. By far the most common are 120 Hz and 24 Hz.
Unless you are blind or ignorant, and you don't seem to be either, the difference is huge. This is especially true if you ever plan on adding bluray to your home entertainment setup. For regular over-the-air HDTV, you won't notice a difference, since television is 30 Hz, but it will make a very big difference for movies.
By the way, have you considered a DLP set? You could probably get 16" more for the same price and very, very close to the same quality.
DLP sets can be harder to find these days, but they are worth it, IMO, as long as you don't need to mount the TV on a wall. Here's a link to New Egg: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16889248050R
That link has a 60" Mitsubishi (good brand for DLP), 120 Hz, 1080P for under $900 US.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 30. July 2009 @ 23:10
|
|
moloo
Junior Member
|
31. July 2009 @ 00:08 |
Link to this message
|
thanks for the info. i defietly plan on adding bluray especially since my ps3 is a bluray player. so i guess the sharp aquos is out. between the insignia and the toshiba which is better? does brand name really matter? and other than the resolution, and refresh rate what else should i be comparing?
ya baby
|
|
qwert99
Senior Member
|
31. July 2009 @ 00:33 |
Link to this message
|
Without looking at reviews, and only looking purely at the specs of each TV, of the ones you are looking at, the Toshiba is the best.
The main specs you need to look for are resolution (1080/720), refresh rate (Hz), contrast ratio, viewing angle and # of HDMI inputs/misc ports.
For resolution you can get away with 720p on less than a 50" screen and not notice a quality difference at a distance.
For contrast ratio you want at least 10,000:1, which is still relatively low by the most recent standards, but is still okay. Contrast ratio represents how white whites are going to be and how black blacks are going to be, which is important in dark scenes.
Viewing angle means how far to the side of the TV you can be and still see the picture clearly. You've probably noticed this effect from laptop computer screens.
Have you looked for any 720p screens of the same size? You might be able to get a better quality TV for the same price if you go that route.
|
|
moloo
Junior Member
|
31. July 2009 @ 15:17 |
Link to this message
|
i can't find any 720p's for that size. the toshiba looks good but i just want to make sure it's a good tv for gaming and bluray. is that insignia brand decent? i've never heard of them before but it's 120hz as well.
ya baby
|
|
qwert99
Senior Member
|
31. July 2009 @ 15:33 |
Link to this message
|
The Toshiba would be just fine for gaming/bluray. I am not a pro, and I haven't read any reviews for Insignia, so I can't speak to its quality. However, I saw in the stats that it is something like 4,000:1 contrast ratio, which stinks. You want a minimum of 10,000:1.
By the way, I am assuming we are talking about Canadian dollars here? If that's the case, you may want to take advantage of the relative strength of the Canadian dollar compared to the US dollar and buy it in or from the US.
With the information I've given you, you are well on your way to your TV purchase. This is a lot of money so just make sure you don't act impulsively and you really do your research and look around the market. You will be happy you did when you have your nice new TV for a great bargain.
|
|
moloo
Junior Member
|
31. July 2009 @ 23:13 |
Link to this message
|
what about 720p plasma's? could a better 720p plasma be better than a 1080p LCD? what is better anyway, plasma or lcd? i always thought 1080p was the best but how come some people say on a 40" you won't notice the difference between a good 720p and a 1080p?
oh and i saw this plasma:
LG 42" Plasma HDTV** with XD Engine (42PQ60) - Future Shop Exclusive
http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/proddet...cking&langid=EN
im in canada and i can't buy online because i don't have a credit card. i've saved a bunch of cash over the past year or so and i'm putting it towards my tv!
thanks for all the help.
ya baby
|
|
qwert99
Senior Member
|
31. July 2009 @ 23:31 |
Link to this message
|
720p plasma would be fine. 1080p is better, but you're right about not noticing on a smaller screen. Go to a store and take a look at different display models and see what you think.
Plasma is generally better than LCD, yes. This is because the contrast ratios are way better on the plasma. However, the plasma you linked to I would not recommend since it does not do 120hz or 24hz. That is probably one of the most important things if you are serious about an HDTV for quality playback of blurays. Also, supposedly plasmas have issues with burn-in, like old CRT displays, and this can be an issue with video games. Not sure if this is still an issue in the modern plasmas.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 31. July 2009 @ 23:32
|
|
moloo
Junior Member
|
1. August 2009 @ 01:44 |
Link to this message
|
ya baby
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
1. August 2009 @ 17:05 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
qwert99
Senior Member
|
1. August 2009 @ 17:45 |
Link to this message
|
I honestly wouldn't recommend any of those 4 TVs, since they are all 60 Hz. Remember that getting a 120Hz or 24 Hz, etc is one of the most important features you will get on your TV if you are serious about not wanting judder when you play back movies, especially blurays.
If I were you, unless I was positively set on a 40" screen due to a small room, or absolutely had to get a TV that would mount on a wall, I would be looking for DLP. With a $1,000 budget your money will go a LOT further with a DLP than with another type of set. The technology that DLP uses is way cheaper, so you can get a much better set for less money. Even a second hand DLP would be fine as long as it looked decent, was a good model (Mitsubishi or Samsung), and still had the manufacturer's warranty. This is especially true if you get a LED DLP, on which the bulbs are basically a non-issue.
I bought my 56" Samsung LED DLP with 24 Hz movie playback mode and 10,000:1 contrast ratio two years ago for $1,400. I am sure you could get a used model of the same type for $800 or $900 today. That's 16" more and a better quality set for less money than you'd pay for a crappy LCD or plasma TV like you are looking at. Try Craigslist. Or, you may even be able to buy it new for quite a good price these days. It's just that most stores don't carry DLP any more because 1) it doesn't mount on the wall and 2) it isn't expensive enough to set a real high markup on! Truly though, DLP, especially LED DLP, is the king of low-priced, high-quality HDTV.
Another thing you're going to want to keep in mind is that you are going to need a wall mount bracket for your LCD or plasma screen, and that is going to be another $150 or so, I believe. Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think that you can just sit most of them down on a stand.
It is possible for you to get a decent TV for under $1,000. However, you are going to have to really keep your finger on the pulse of the market, and pay attention to any sales, etc. It may take awhile. If you keep DLP in mind, I think you will have a much easier time.
|
|
moloo
Junior Member
|
1. August 2009 @ 18:30 |
Link to this message
|
ya baby
|
|
qwert99
Senior Member
|
1. August 2009 @ 19:01 |
Link to this message
|
If those are truly your only 3 choices, then you really only have 1 choice: the Toshiba. It's the only non-60Hz TV of the bunch.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
1. August 2009 @ 19:14 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by qwert99:
I honestly wouldn't recommend any of those 4 TVs, since they are all 60 Hz. Remember that getting a 120Hz or 24 Hz, etc is one of the most important features you will get on your TV if you are serious about not wanting judder when you play back movies, especially blurays....
If I were you, unless I was positively set on a 40" screen due to a small room, or absolutely had to get a TV that would mount on a wall, I would be looking for DLP.
Did you read the blurb on the Pany I linked?
Film, from start to finish
... While true 24fps film makes it from Hollywood to your Blu-ray player, just like a movie-house feature film, it needs a screen to be enjoyed . . . i.e. your flat panel needs to be able to display 24p content. Enter the TCP42U1 with 24p playback. This technology is fully capable of displaying 24fps video thanks to specific video processing that reproduces film-based images as video content.
As far as DLP when Consumers Reports did their Reiability testing they didn't fare so well, actually terrible.
Compare those numbers to Plasma/LCD direct view.
|
|
qwert99
Senior Member
|
1. August 2009 @ 19:24 |
Link to this message
|
Guess I missed the 24p part. I skimmed it and figured it would've been displayed more prominently. In that case, then that TV is good, too.
As far as DLP reliability, I'd be willing to bet that a vast majority of those repairs were a bulb going out, or a color wheel problem, neither of which is going to happen to an LED DLP, since it uses LEDs instead of bulbs and has no color wheel. In addition, the two best DLP brands, Samsung and Mitsubishi, didn't seem to fare too much worse than the average LCD brand, even with that in mind.
I don't think there's any doubt that DLP is the most affordable type of HDTV, though.
|
|
moloo
Junior Member
|
1. August 2009 @ 19:48 |
Link to this message
|
thanks for all the advice. i can't find any DLP's at any store's in my area. i've just saved a bunch of extra cash and wanted to buy a good tv. i'm going to future shop and bestbuy this week to check the tv's out i just want to gather as much information as i can before i go. i was curious what your thoughts on the 720p panasonic plasma are. i'm thinking that the 1080 is out of my price range so right now just from what i've looked at online i'm thinking the toshiba regza 1080p with 120hz is probably best but i'm unsure how a 1080p 120hz would compare to a 720p plasma. if i'm using a ps3 and bluray with hdmi on a 40" will i notice the difference betwen 720p and 1080p? also whats 1080i, alot of the sites i've been reading start talking about 720p vs 1080p and all of a sudden their comparing 1080i and 1080p. can anyone clear this up? thanks. sorry for all the questions i just want to make sure i make the right decision.
ya baby
|
|
qwert99
Senior Member
|
2. August 2009 @ 01:15 |
Link to this message
|
Technically you COULD notice a difference between 1080p and 720p on a 40" screen, but it is really hard to do. The reason is just that larger screens need more detail since they are bigger. Basically it's just that if you blow up a picture, you need more detail to make it look as good when it's big as it did when it's small. Like when you play a YouTube video in the tiny little video player, it looks pretty good, but when you play it in full screen you can notice that the picture quality suffers.
I think it would be a lot better to go with a smaller 720p picture with 120 Hz than to go with the same size screen with 1080p and 60Hz. The "judder" you get from playing a 24 Hz source (bluray) on a 60 Hz HDTV is seriously the most annoying HDTV picture quality issue I've come across.
1080i is a lot like 1080p. The "i" stands for interlaced and the "p" stands for progressive. Technically speaking, what it means is that the interlaced picture will draw half an image, so 540 pixels, and then stop drawing that picture and draw the other half of the 1080 pixel image of another 540 pixels. Progessive-scan TVs, or 1080p/720p draw the entire picture, all 1080 pixels, at once. A still picture will look the same in 1080i and 1080p. However, when there is a lot of motion on the screen, like in an action sequence or perhaps a panning shot, an interlaced image will not look as good as a progressive image. I've only read about it, and never seen it myself, but supposedly it is a lot like the judder or "tearing" you get from a 24 Hz film on a 60 Hz TV. In other words, pretty crappy. For a screen smaller than 50", I'd rather get a 720p than 1080i TV.
As long as your specs and price are good, the technology your TV will use is really secondary. Just remember contrast ratio of 10,000:1 or better and a refresh rate of some multiple of 24, like 24 Hz, 48 Hz, or 120 Hz. For a screen under 50", 720p is fine, but if you can get a 1080p screen for the same price, by all means you should.
The most important thing to keep in mind is to not rush into a purchase. I remember how antsy I was to get my TV when I had my tax rebate sitting in the bank, but you will not regret it if you take your time and find a great buy. :)
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
2. August 2009 @ 06:29 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by qwert99:
Guess I missed the 24p part. I skimmed it and figured it would've been displayed more prominently. In that case, then that TV is good, too.
As far as DLP reliability, I'd be willing to bet that a vast majority of those repairs were a bulb going out, or a color wheel problem, neither of which is going to happen to an LED DLP, since it uses LEDs instead of bulbs and has no color wheel. In addition, the two best DLP brands, Samsung and Mitsubishi, didn't seem to fare too much worse than the average LCD brand, even with that in mind.
I don't think there's any doubt that DLP is the most affordable type of HDTV, though.
"As far as DLP reliability, I'd be willing to bet that a vast majority of those repairs were a bulb going out". Did you read what CR said "That had ever been repaired or had a serious problem".
Quote:
In addition, the two best DLP brands, Samsung and Mitsubishi, didn't seem to fare too much worse than the average LCD brand, even with that in mind.
You reading the same chart? 19 and 21% needed repairs (DLP) vs. 4.5% average of all plasmas and LCDs and Panasonic plasmas being the best at a mere 2%.
|
|
qwert99
Senior Member
|
2. August 2009 @ 15:35 |
Link to this message
|
Let me fix that quote for you: "That had ever been repaired or had a serious problem".
Do you mean that you think that they did not include replaced bulbs and color wheels in the list of repairs? Those are by far the most common two repairs on a DLP set. Actually, after 5,000 viewing hours(not that many) or whatever, every DLP set needs a new bulb... it's bound to happen. And I am willing to bet that most people will call the service tech to do it rather than do it themselves... hence the "repair".
Of course, like I said, both of these are non-issues with LED DLPs, and hence, the reliability would be much higher. I don't understand the hangup.
By the way, the LCD TV repair number in the same chart as the DLP chart average out to 17%. I compared the DLP numbers (20%) of the same chart to the LCD numbers on the same chart because I didn't want to compare apples to oranges. Even for the same brands, the number of repairs on the two charts don't match. That's a case of apples and oranges if I've ever seen one.
From the chart itself: "Note that the data on rear-projection and flat panel sets are not directly comparable."
I assume that's a reference to what I am saying.
Also, regarding that Panasonic TV from earlier, I did some further reading on it and what I initially said was correct. It is only a 60Hz screen and does not do 24Hz, but rather "supports" it by doing 3:2 pulldown, which means it's a TV you don't want.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 2. August 2009 @ 16:03
|
|
moloo
Junior Member
|
2. August 2009 @ 20:07 |
Link to this message
|
a couple of these tv's have a port to connect a computer. if i connect a computer to the tv and play 1080p movies would the quality be high or would it be higher playing it via something that uses hdmi? also if i use my macbook's minidvi to vga or minidvi to hdmi, and connect it to the tv would the quality be HD. the HD files i wanted to play are .mkv 1080p
VIDEO CODEC...: x264, 2PASS, LEVEL 4.1
FRAMERATE.....: 23.976
BITRATE.......: Variable ~ 9222 Kbps
RESOLUTION....: 1920X800
AUDIO.........: DTS 5.1 @ 1536 Kbps
just curious as to whether it would work because i'd connect my pc to the tv and play tons of divx, and HD rips off.
ya baby
|
|
qwert99
Senior Member
|
2. August 2009 @ 20:16 |
Link to this message
|
Yes, the quality would be high. The limiting factor there would be the compression of the video file rather than the TV itself. The only video you could play on that TV that would really take full advantage of it at this point is either bluray or an uncompressed bluray image of many tens of gigabytes. Anything you download won't be as high of quality as that. The quality can be good, but it won't be bluray good.
You could also make a full-fledged HTPC and add a bluray drive for like $100 these days. If you have an extra desktop PC lying around, it's worth the effort.
|
|
moloo
Junior Member
|
3. August 2009 @ 00:42 |
Link to this message
|
ya baby
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
qwert99
Senior Member
|
3. August 2009 @ 14:01 |
Link to this message
|
That receiver and speaker setup looks pretty nice. $200 for it seems to be a good deal, but not a great deal. Surround sound in general is freakin' awesome, though, and highly recommended.
To answer your questions: no, you will never be able to upgrade it to 7.1. You could use the same speakers with a new 7.1 receiver, but the receiver is the expensive part. 5.1 ain't bad, though.
It has a HDMI input, so it's good for bluray. And the specs say it supports DTS, so it's all gravy.
I'd probably go for it, if I were you. If you want to keep looking at surround sound setups, the specs you should keep an eye on are number and type of inputs (HDMI/optical/SPDIF/etc), # of watts it can deliver per speaker, and decoding technology (DTS/etc). For the speakers, pay attention to the frequency response range and # of watts it can support. Freq. response is how low of a sound it can make and the highest pitched sound it can make. So you want a number that is as low as possible in Hz and as high as possible in KHz when you see that stat.
PS -- remember that I'm not an expert, just an interested hobbyist. So keep that in mind when you're reading my advice. I am telling you what I know to the best of my ability, but you definitely want to double check what I say, and just use it as foundational knowledge. Another forum that is REALLY knowledgeable in this area is called AVSForum. I highly recommend it. Good luck!
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 3. August 2009 @ 14:04
|
|
