|
|
|
lcd 120hz
|
|
|
jaymizzle
Junior Member
|
3. March 2008 @ 17:32 |
Link to this message
|
i havent really seen any lcd tvs that are 32" and have 120hz... is it not needed for a screen size that small?
i was looking to get a set about 32" for my bedroom. i watch movies, regular tv and play xbox 360 all the time on my room tv so it really has to be a great set. a major dislike of mine for flat panel tvs is that fast motion (ie sports) look blurry and pixelated. can anyone recommend a great lcd 32"
p.s. - just from in store browsing i would say that 40" lcds look the best. i guess mostly b/c they are larger screen size but the images just seem much more vibrant. how come most smaller sets dont have a higher contrast ratio?
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
joytime36
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
3. March 2008 @ 19:37 |
Link to this message
|
If you want to buy a 32" tv, you should have a look at the ViewSonic N3235w, it got very nice reviews. My sister bought one for her bedroom. It seems that the price has dropped a lot, it is $500 now instead of $650.
|
Senior Member
|
4. March 2008 @ 10:51 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by jaymizzle:
i havent really seen any lcd tvs that are 32" and have 120hz... is it not needed for a screen size that small?
i was looking to get a set about 32" for my bedroom. i watch movies, regular tv and play xbox 360 all the time on my room tv so it really has to be a great set. a major dislike of mine for flat panel tvs is that fast motion (ie sports) look blurry and pixelated. can anyone recommend a great lcd 32"
p.s. - just from in store browsing i would say that 40" lcds look the best. i guess mostly b/c they are larger screen size but the images just seem much more vibrant. how come most smaller sets dont have a higher contrast ratio?
The sharp aquos is good and the samsung is better depends on what you want to buy you can save money if your not needing 1080 and only 720
|
|
goodswipe
Suspended permanently
|
4. March 2008 @ 11:04 |
Link to this message
|
Or you could bypass that VeiwSonic all together and roll with a much better tv. Take a look at this 32" Samsung LCD, for a few extra bucks you could get a much better set that you will be very happy with.
I'd say that ViewSonic would make an excellent bedroom tv, nothing else. If you are going to be using the tv a lot, get one with better specs.
The ViewSonic also skips out on the inputs, one HDMI port? You don't want to be limited as to what you can do with your tv.
ViewSonic
Samsung
The Samsung blows the ViewSonic out of the water on the contrast ratio. Always get a tv with a high contrast ratio. Although the ViewSonic does have a 8ms response time like the Samsung, that's the only thing I can see that's a plus there. There's also no backlight control on that ViewSonic, that can be a minus for some people. The built in sound system on the Samsung sounds GREAT! A friend of mine actually has this tv so I can vouch for that.
Go ahead and spend the extra money. I think you will find that Samsung produces a much better image!!
Update: You're right, it's pretty hard to find a small tv that boasts a HIGH refresh rate with a normal price tag. I think Sony and LG are a few that make smaller sets with high refresh rates.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 4. March 2008 @ 11:13
|
Senior Member
|
4. March 2008 @ 11:35 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by goodswipe:
Or you could bypass that VeiwSonic all together and roll with a much better tv. Take a look at this 32" Samsung LCD, for a few extra bucks you could get a much better set that you will be very happy with.
I'd say that ViewSonic would make an excellent bedroom tv, nothing else. If you are going to be using the tv a lot, get one with better specs.
The ViewSonic also skips out on the inputs, one HDMI port? You don't want to be limited as to what you can do with your tv.
ViewSonic
Samsung
The Samsung blows the ViewSonic out of the water on the contrast ratio. Always get a tv with a high contrast ratio. Although the ViewSonic does have a 8ms response time like the Samsung, that's the only thing I can see that's a plus there. There's also no backlight control on that ViewSonic, that can be a minus for some people. The built in sound system on the Samsung sounds GREAT! A friend of mine actually has this tv so I can vouch for that.
Go ahead and spend the extra money. I think you will find that Samsung produces a much better image!!
Update: You're right, it's pretty hard to find a small tv that boasts a HIGH refresh rate with a normal price tag. I think Sony and LG are a few that make smaller sets with high refresh rates.
Absolutely, it depends on individuals needs and preferences but with technology why skimp out always have options to put in a nother room at one point.
|
|
jaymizzle
Junior Member
|
4. March 2008 @ 20:19 |
Link to this message
|
i'm definetly not looking to skimp out; if i had a larger viewing area, i would jump up to a 40" or 42" with 120hz as well as all the other goodies like greatest contrast ratio
i wont need 1080p b/c of the screen size, yet i'm just afraid that the 60hz doesnt have the power i'd want in fast motion sports and movies. my eyes seem to perceive motion blur very strongly, as well as blacks looking very gray and different shadings of dark looking 'blocklike' next to each other
anyone have any more recommendations? unfortunately whenever i go to best buy to check out the tvs their sets are always laggy and glitchy due to whatever crap they have going on, and circuit city (whose tvs work great) doesnt seem to have the displays i'm really there to look at
|
Senior Member
|
4. March 2008 @ 20:25 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by jaymizzle:
i'm definetly not looking to skimp out; if i had a larger viewing area, i would jump up to a 40" or 42" with 120hz as well as all the other goodies like greatest contrast ratio
i wont need 1080p b/c of the screen size, yet i'm just afraid that the 60hz doesnt have the power i'd want in fast motion sports and movies. my eyes seem to perceive motion blur very strongly, as well as blacks looking very gray and different shadings of dark looking 'blocklike' next to each other
anyone have any more recommendations? unfortunately whenever i go to best buy to check out the tvs their sets are always laggy and glitchy due to whatever crap they have going on, and circuit city (whose tvs work great) doesnt seem to have the displays i'm really there to look at
At this time i dont think they offer 120hz in that size.. then again Sony is comming out with something called an OILY or OILED something like that a 20" 1080p with over 120hz for 4500.00 lol
|
|
jaymizzle
Junior Member
|
4. March 2008 @ 20:52 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Blnkstare:
Originally posted by jaymizzle:
i'm definetly not looking to skimp out; if i had a larger viewing area, i would jump up to a 40" or 42" with 120hz as well as all the other goodies like greatest contrast ratio
i wont need 1080p b/c of the screen size, yet i'm just afraid that the 60hz doesnt have the power i'd want in fast motion sports and movies. my eyes seem to perceive motion blur very strongly, as well as blacks looking very gray and different shadings of dark looking 'blocklike' next to each other
anyone have any more recommendations? unfortunately whenever i go to best buy to check out the tvs their sets are always laggy and glitchy due to whatever crap they have going on, and circuit city (whose tvs work great) doesnt seem to have the displays i'm really there to look at
At this time i dont think they offer 120hz in that size.. then again Sony is comming out with something called an OILY or OILED something like that a 20" 1080p with over 120hz for 4500.00 lol
do you think it is b/c 120hz is not needed for a screen size that small? the only model i know that claims to have 120hz is this Sony Xbr
|
Senior Member
|
4. March 2008 @ 21:05 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by jaymizzle:
Originally posted by Blnkstare:
Originally posted by jaymizzle:
i'm definetly not looking to skimp out; if i had a larger viewing area, i would jump up to a 40" or 42" with 120hz as well as all the other goodies like greatest contrast ratio
i wont need 1080p b/c of the screen size, yet i'm just afraid that the 60hz doesnt have the power i'd want in fast motion sports and movies. my eyes seem to perceive motion blur very strongly, as well as blacks looking very gray and different shadings of dark looking 'blocklike' next to each other
anyone have any more recommendations? unfortunately whenever i go to best buy to check out the tvs their sets are always laggy and glitchy due to whatever crap they have going on, and circuit city (whose tvs work great) doesnt seem to have the displays i'm really there to look at
At this time i dont think they offer 120hz in that size.. then again Sony is comming out with something called an OILY or OILED something like that a 20" 1080p with over 120hz for 4500.00 lol
do you think it is b/c 120hz is not needed for a screen size that small? the only model i know that claims to have 120hz is this Sony Xbr
Thats what i think yes, but there are others than offer 120hz or a compatable mine is called LED motionplus instead of 120hz
|
Senior Member
5 product reviews
|
4. March 2008 @ 23:32 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by blnkstare:
At this time i dont think they offer 120hz in that size.. then again Sony is comming out with something called an OILY or OILED something like that a 20" 1080p with over 120hz for 4500.00 lol
The TV you're referring to is called The Sony OLED (Organic Light Emitting Diode).
Originally posted by jaymizzle:
do you think it is b/c 120hz is not needed for a screen size that small? the only model i know that claims to have 120hz is this Sony Xbr
You could be right about this, as smaller screens will not show motion blur as easily. 120hz is designed to display films more like the filmakers intended. Films are produced at 24fps. 120hz basically means that the screen refresh rate is 120 times every second. 120 is divisible by 24 so it creates a perfect environment for 24fps material. A higher refresh rate also helps to reduce motion blur in fast action scenes.
|
Senior Member
|
4. March 2008 @ 23:34 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Ryu77:
Originally posted by blnkstare:
At this time i dont think they offer 120hz in that size.. then again Sony is comming out with something called an OILY or OILED something like that a 20" 1080p with over 120hz for 4500.00 lol
The TV you're referring to is called The Sony OLED (Organic Light Emitting Diode).
Originally posted by jaymizzle:
do you think it is b/c 120hz is not needed for a screen size that small? the only model i know that claims to have 120hz is this Sony Xbr
You could be right about this, as smaller screens will not show motion blur as easily. 120hz is designed to display films more like the filmakers intended. Films are produced at 24fps. 120hz basically means that the screen refresh rate is 120 times every second. 120 is divisible by 24 so it creates a perfect environment for 24fps material. A higher refresh rate also helps to reduce motion blur in fast action scenes.
Yes, good info ryu i must remember oled like oleg with a d
|
|
jaymizzle
Junior Member
|
4. March 2008 @ 23:36 |
Link to this message
|
ok, anyone who will read this topic i would like to compare 3 lcds. i know that they are probably similar sets and i wouldnt truly know which set was best for me until i spent time using each, however, this is the real world and that is not the case...
i'd like to compare a few key areas and get peoples' opinions concerning HD picture, SD picture, fast motion sports, gaming and standard upconverted dvds with the following tvs.. Sharp LC32GP3UB 32" Sharp Aquos LC32GP1U 32 and Sony Bravia XBR KDL-32XBR4 32"
again, i'm pretty much just looking for opinions,,, any clarity brought would greatly help... especially if you are familiar with a real downfall of one of these machines
|
Senior Member
|
4. March 2008 @ 23:39 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by jaymizzle:
ok, anyone who will read this topic i would like to compare 3 lcds. i know that they are probably similar sets and i wouldnt truly know which set was best for me until i spent time using each, however, this is the real world and that is not the case...
i'd like to compare a few key areas and get peoples' opinions concerning HD picture, SD picture, fast motion sports, gaming and standard upconverted dvds with the following tvs.. Sharp LC32GP3UB 32" Sharp Aquos LC32GP1U 32 and Sony Bravia XBR KDL-32XBR4 32"
again, i'm pretty much just looking for opinions,,, any clarity brought would greatly help... especially if you are familiar with a real downfall of one of these machines
You are the only one who can make that determination. Ask your local shop to set them up next to each other and you decide which one looks better. I have 2 sharps and a samsung. By far the samsung is the best picture, but out of the 3 you selected i would choose the sony for its clarity and picture quality. Sharp is good but sony is one of the best, especially that model.
|
Senior Member
5 product reviews
|
5. March 2008 @ 03:33 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by jaymizzle:
ok, anyone who will read this topic i would like to compare 3 lcds. i know that they are probably similar sets and i wouldnt truly know which set was best for me until i spent time using each, however, this is the real world and that is not the case...
i'd like to compare a few key areas and get peoples' opinions concerning HD picture, SD picture, fast motion sports, gaming and standard upconverted dvds with the following tvs.. Sharp LC32GP3UB 32" Sharp Aquos LC32GP1U 32 and Sony Bravia XBR KDL-32XBR4 32"
again, i'm pretty much just looking for opinions,,, any clarity brought would greatly help... especially if you are familiar with a real downfall of one of these machines
I am a Sharp advocate as I have a 46" 1080p Aquos...
The 2 Sharp TV's you posted links for seem technically about the same. I personally prefer the styling of the LC32GP1U but that is only my opinion. Now, as you probably noticed the 2 Sharp panels you posted are Full HD (1920 x 1080) but don't seem to be 120hz. So the Sharp would show more detail with 1080p source material. The Sony Bravia XBR KDL-32XBR4 has a lower resolution 1366 x 768 but offers 120hz. So this TV would look smoother with 24fps material and fast action scenes.
With that said, both of these features (1080p/120hz) are probably less important on a 32" panel when compared to the bigger screens in each of their respective series.
I would say go for Sharp as they have more credentials in the LCD scene and have set the standard for innovation in this area for quite some time. I believe that they actually created the very first colour LCD screen (a 14" colour TFT LCD in 1988). Also, they released LCD's with 1080p, then the rest followed. Then they launched their 120hz panels, then the others followed etc.
My opinion is that the top 3 LCD brands (quality and technology wise) are in this order 1) Sharp 2) Samsung 3) Sony.
Remember, that most of this is only my opinion and after you've gathered all the information you need to make your decision, it will be your opinion that matters the most.
|
Senior Member
|
5. March 2008 @ 09:24 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Ryu77:
Originally posted by jaymizzle:
ok, anyone who will read this topic i would like to compare 3 lcds. i know that they are probably similar sets and i wouldnt truly know which set was best for me until i spent time using each, however, this is the real world and that is not the case...
i'd like to compare a few key areas and get peoples' opinions concerning HD picture, SD picture, fast motion sports, gaming and standard upconverted dvds with the following tvs.. Sharp LC32GP3UB 32" Sharp Aquos LC32GP1U 32 and Sony Bravia XBR KDL-32XBR4 32"
again, i'm pretty much just looking for opinions,,, any clarity brought would greatly help... especially if you are familiar with a real downfall of one of these machines
I am a Sharp advocate as I have a 46" 1080p Aquos...
The 2 Sharp TV's you posted links for seem technically about the same. I personally prefer the styling of the LC32GP1U but that is only my opinion. Now, as you probably noticed the 2 Sharp panels you posted are Full HD (1920 x 1080) but don't seem to be 120hz. So the Sharp would show more detail with 1080p source material. The Sony Bravia XBR KDL-32XBR4 has a lower resolution 1366 x 768 but offers 120hz. So this TV would look smoother with 24fps material and fast action scenes.
With that said, both of these features (1080p/120hz) are probably less important on a 32" panel when compared to the bigger screens in each of their respective series.
I would say go for Sharp as they have more credentials in the LCD scene and have set the standard for innovation in this area for quite some time. I believe that they actually created the very first colour LCD screen (a 14" colour TFT LCD in 1988). Also, they released LCD's with 1080p, then the rest followed. Then they launched their 120hz panels, then the others followed etc.
My opinion is that the top 3 LCD brands (quality and technology wise) are in this order 1) Sharp 2) Samsung 3) Sony.
Remember, that most of this is only my opinion and after you've gathered all the information you need to make your decision, it will be your opinion that matters the most.
My top 3 would be:
Samsung 81 series, Mitsubishi LT 244 series then Sony XBR seies. Sharp would be 4th but hey to each is own.
|
|
goodswipe
Suspended permanently
|
5. March 2008 @ 10:44 |
Link to this message
|
Looks like you are stuck with some tough decisions here my friend. All three of those LCD's you mentioned are top notch.
Both Sharps have a dynamic contrast ratio of 10000:1 as the Sony only has a 8000:1 dynamic contrast ratio. Both Sharps have a 6ms response time, which is very good. You probably won't see much, if any ghosting at all. As for the resolution, 1920x1080 probably won't mean much since the screen size is small. They both have a brightness of 450cd/m2, which is weird, most nice LCD's have a 500cd/m2 brightness level. But hey, those are just numbers right?
The Sony is nice, like Ryu said, the 120hz will make good for watching 24fps material and fast action scenes. The resolution isn't something to worry about either since the screen size is small. It does have a 10-bit display, most panels only have an 8-bit display. You will get more color depth out of this one.
I like the look of the Sharp LC32GP1U. Something about the stand on that other model erks me. When I first went into this I was thinking you should get one of those Sharps you had mentioned, but now I'm not really sure. None of them seem to skip on the hookups. Really I would try and find a tv in the store that compares to these three, take a real good look at them and judge from that. Let your eyes be the ones to make the decision.
|
Senior Member
|
5. March 2008 @ 13:46 |
Link to this message
|
|
It also depends on your budget...
Good Luck.
|
|
goodswipe
Suspended permanently
|
5. March 2008 @ 15:10 |
Link to this message
|
Yea, true. If it were me, I'd save up a few extra bucks and get a nice DLP or LCOS. You could go a lot bigger then 32" and only end up paying around 1200-1700 for a nice set that's probably only a year old or so.
Rainbow effect? Nah, the new LED light engine technology, that they have incorporated into these new DLP's does away with that. Also, no more use of those stupid bulbs that tend to have a short life. They have also improved the start up time on most DLP's. They've also thrown in the 120Hz technology into the Samsung HLT5687SAX. This tv is excellent for movies, sports, and video games.
Check it out, it's a very nice tv.
Nearly as slim as an LCD!
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 5. March 2008 @ 15:15
|
|
goodswipe
Suspended permanently
|
6. March 2008 @ 16:19 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
Senior Member
|
6. March 2008 @ 19:27 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
|
goodswipe
Suspended permanently
|
8. March 2008 @ 13:39 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
Senior Member
|
8. March 2008 @ 14:38 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
|
goodswipe
Suspended permanently
|
10. March 2008 @ 11:27 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Senior Member
|
10. March 2008 @ 18:57 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by goodswipe:
Originally posted by Blnkstare:
Originally posted by goodswipe:
What do you guys think about this LCD by Mitsubishi?
http://www.amazon.com/Mitsubishi-LT-4013...0RYUWXE
I have done alot of research before making a selection and if i were to choose a Mits (which i almost did) befoer Samsungs 81F series came out it would have been this 1:
http://www.amazon.com/Mitsubishi-LT-4624...&sr=1-1
Yea, Mitsubishi's Diamond Series TV's are pretty nice.
It was 2 or 3 on my top 3. the 52" can fit in a 46" space due to the sleek design. I ended up choosing the 81F samsung, best decision i made.
|
|
