The big "How do I choose an HDTV?" thread.

*Legion* wrote:

..........Costco has a coupon knocking $250 off of the brand new Vizio 47" 1080p LCD, reducing its price to $1649.99

My parents are taking my money and picking it up for me while the new wife and I are on our honeymoon (coupon would run out before we got back).

Needless to say, I'm pretty pumped about getting that TV.

I'm going to Costco tomorrow to get one of these. Some people at the AVS Forum already have them. Sounds like a great deal.

The Pioneer Elites are VERY nice, but VERY expensive!

I think I was misled in my readings in the past - it seems like LCDs are better for well-lit/sunlit/windowed rooms?

I notice that Conn's has the 37" Westinghouse 1080p model for $999(edit:got it wrong first time) in the paper today, but now I'm confused about LCD vs Plasma with regards to lighting situations. Arg. Blah.

I do believe LCDs are generally considered "brighter" than plasmas duck.

duckilama wrote:

I think I was misled in my readings in the past - it seems like LCDs are better for well-lit/sunlit/windowed rooms?

I notice that Conn's has the 37" Westinghouse 1080p model for $999(edit:got it wrong first time) in the paper today, but now I'm confused about LCD vs Plasma with regards to lighting situations. Arg. Blah.

Plasma's have glass screens.. thus more glare when viewed in Direct Sunlight..

Well balls. I've got two double windows(w/ beige curtains) on the right-side wall of my TV room and a direct line-of-sight through the kitchen to a southern bay window. Sounds like I need to be looking at LCD panels, then. All that research and reading, wasted.

Is $1000 a good price on that Westinghouse? I haven't really done much research on LCDs or the Westy in particular, but that monitor seems to be the darling of the last couple of months(though I have read enough to know that the 42" model has a fair number of complaints about "banding", whatever that is). $1000 is about my ceiling on price. Viewing distance is approx. 8 ft. If I ever do mount it, the fact that it's got side-inputs sure is nice.

Anywho. HD isn't all that important to me, but since I did get the FIOS DVR, I am paying for HD content anyway(or I get it as part of the deal, depending on perspective), so an HD set wouldn't be "wasted" as long as it still displays SD content with good PQ.

so an HD set wouldn't be "wasted" as long as it still displays SD content with good PQ.

Probably not.. displaying lowres on a high res screen generally looks like crap. Plasma's are a tad better at SD content than LCD's due to their technology. But for $1000 your pretty much looking at a LCD anyway.. unless you go to say $1200ish or so then you can get the very well regarded Panny 42" HD Plasma.

For SD on HD, I got to play with my dad's bigscreen over christmas, and while he had the colors boosted through the roof and the whole picture just zoomed straight in, I tinkered and found I could live with both the black bars on the side(non-zoomed) mode and the least of the zoom modes.

So if SD looks fine displayed in 4:3 mode with bars, I can live with that.

Duck, for your uses I agree with Guru and would really recommend the 42" Panasonic plasma (TH-42PX60). They are well liked pretty much everywhere and are a good deal, even with the slightly less viewable picture plasmas have compared to LCDs in bright rooms. Just buy it somewhere that has a good return policy like Costco or something just in case you really have a problem with it.

I set up my 37" Vizio HDLCD TV today. Gears of War looks fantastic on it. Movies look great. However, I got the HDTV DVR box from my cable company and some programs look good and others look bad. I have the TV set to Wide Screen, do I need to switch it to "normal" to get some shows to show up better?

Or is there just a problem with non-HD content on an HD tv?

thanks

If you stretch a non-widescreen (4:3) program into widescreen (16:9), of course it's going to look terrible. So if that's what you're doing, then that's the problem.

SD does look less than impressive on an HDTV, but make sure you're not stretching the picture first and then figure things out from there.

*Legion* wrote:

If you stretch a non-widescreen (4:3) program into widescreen (16:9), of course it's going to look terrible. So if that's what you're doing, then that's the problem.

SD does look less than impressive on an HDTV, but make sure you're not stretching the picture first and then figure things out from there.

I think this is something the Pioneer elites do very well. 4:3 looks different, but really pretty good. I also think this tv will handle a lit room very very well!

*Legion* wrote:

If you stretch a non-widescreen (4:3) program into widescreen (16:9), of course it's going to look terrible. So if that's what you're doing, then that's the problem.

SD does look less than impressive on an HDTV, but make sure you're not stretching the picture first and then figure things out from there.

I just got my Dish Network HD receiver setup over the weekend. One thing I've noticed was that I had to set my receiver to an HD output from an available list (480i, 480p, 720p, 1080i). Not sure why 480i and p were on there, oh well. I set mine to 720p, but the local HD channels that broadcast in 1080i are showing up in 4:3 mode (black bars on the sides). My local Fox broadcasts in 720p and it is showing up widescreen with no bars. Should I just set it to 1080i for the sat. receiver output?

Hemidal wrote:

I set mine to 720p, but the local HD channels that broadcast in 1080i are showing up in 4:3 mode (black bars on the sides).

1) Make sure that the programming is HD. Not every HD broadcasting channel shows ONLY HD content, especially the broadcast networks. Non-HD content will be shown in 4:3.
2) Make sure your TV is set to the appropriate "zoom" mode (it may be switching modes when switching between 1080i and 720p)

I'll be picking up a 37w3 with my tax return money to follow up a new desk and new chair I'll be getting in the next few weeks. My little computer room will become my all purpose entertainment room, be it movies, 360 games, or whatever else. I'm not sure what I'll do with my 32" Samsung TV after that, but that's the plan for the moment.

The only way that plan changes is if someone releases a TV that's more fully featured and somehow a better deal than the 37" Westy.

We'll see.

I'm actually looking forward to tax time. 15 minutes on a website and I'll be done, and a few weeks later I'll buy a TV. Should be fun.

Thin_J wrote:

The only way that plan changes is if someone releases a TV that's more fully featured and somehow a better deal than the 37" Westy.

Maybe Vizio will have their smaller 1080p displays by then.

*Legion* wrote:
Thin_J wrote:

The only way that plan changes is if someone releases a TV that's more fully featured and somehow a better deal than the 37" Westy.

Maybe Vizio will have their smaller 1080p displays by then.

I'm kind of hoping, but a big part of the allure of that TV is it's just extremely fully featured. 2 DVI inputs, an HDMI, VGA, 2 Component... there just isn't anything else around in that price range with both 1080p and all that connectivity. I can't help but wonder if any new sets will really compete with it in all the ways it needs to.

Keep in mind that HDMI is backwards compatible with DVI, so in general I greatly prefer multiple HDMI inputs over a single HDMI plus a DVI or two.

*Legion* wrote:

Keep in mind that HDMI is backwards compatible with DVI, so in general I greatly prefer multiple HDMI inputs over a single HDMI plus a DVI or two.

Yes well.. given my complete lack of an actual HDMI device to date and the would-be need to send the audio to a receiver anyway I don't care too much about the number of HDMI ports. My current Samsung TV has two of the currently useless little bastards and it only has one component input which is really a pain in the ass.

Thin_J, Meijer has a decent little RCA 4 input component switcher that I picked up for my TV (which has two component inputs). No signal loss and was only $50. It will switch by remote too. Just a recommendation.

Thin_J wrote:

Yes well.. given my complete lack of an actual HDMI device to date and the would-be need to send the audio to a receiver anyway I don't care too much about the number of HDMI ports. My current Samsung TV has two of the currently useless little bastards and it only has one component input which is really a pain in the ass.

One component input does suck. I don't get why you seem interested in DVI ports but call HDMI ports "currently useless" though, since a $10 DVI-to-HDMI cable essentially turns an HDMI port into DVI.

But anyway, as for the component, I haven't seen a 2006 or newer model of TV with only one component input. Two is pretty much standard on all new HDTVs now.

I can actually use two DVI inputs. One for the laptop and one for my main computer, both of which I already have regular old DVI cables for.

If at some point I *need* to get more than one HDMI device I'll get a receiver with HDMI switching since that's a more elegant solution anyway.

Oh snap!

IMAGE(http://www.spaceflightnow.com/sealaunch/nss8/images/explosion.jpg)

Looks like the new Directv 11 satellite is going to be delayed for its launch.

IMAGE(http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m313/Smthkd/th_NSSExplosion.jpg)

BOOO!

My Comcast service here in Sal... err, Monterey County, is not of the same caliber as my DirecTV service was. Particularly the SD channels, where Comcast still maintains "analog" stations in the 2-99 channel range.

As soon as Monterey locals come in HD, Comcast goes bye-bye.

I got the Vizio GV47LF 47" 1080p LCD.

Black levels are a bit hard to swallow after coming from an HD CRT, but picture quality is nice otherwise. Fantastic for the 360. Still might return it to Costco if another LCD with better black levels comes out (waiting to hear a review on the 47" Philips 1080p LCD that they've got going).

If not for shows like Battlestar Galactica, I would be tickled pink with the set. My desire to be able to use it as a PC display (and the wife's disdain for stretched 4:3 content, as well as my own disdain for the same) precludes us from getting a plasma.

Legion the latest Sharp series of LCD's has pretty much the best black levels going (in terms of LCD).. I was close to getting the 52" one.. but for $1000 less the Pioneer 50" Plasma just has superior Picture Quality at less price.. and 1080P native seems so pointless.

edit

Just read your edit.. so nm.. but perhaps look at the Sharp series..

This one

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...

TheGameguru wrote:

Legion the latest Sharp series of LCD's has pretty much the best black levels going (in terms of LCD).. I was close to getting the 52" one.. but for $1000 less the Pioneer 50" Plasma just has superior Picture Quality at less price.. and 1080P native seems so pointless.

edit

Just read your edit.. so nm.. but perhaps look at the Sharp series..

My dad picked up the 46" version of that TV. I have to say, I was pretty impressed by the PQ.

Why would you say native 1080p is pointless, GG? If you're in the market for a new TV at this point, doesn't it make sense to get one that supports the highest quality resolution? Granted, nothing broadcasts in 1080p at this point, but it does give you a nice resolution when you hook up a computer to the device.

Tyrian wrote:

Why would you say native 1080p is pointless, GG? If you're in the market for a new TV at this point, doesn't it make sense to get one that supports the highest quality resolution? Granted, nothing broadcasts in 1080p at this point, but it does give you a nice resolution when you hook up a computer to the device.

I was waiting for 1080p to come into my price range but went with a 720p (768) because at the size I was getting (42" though it supposedly applies to anything under 50"), there's no visual difference at standard viewing distances.

Grumpicus wrote:
Tyrian wrote:

Why would you say native 1080p is pointless, GG? If you're in the market for a new TV at this point, doesn't it make sense to get one that supports the highest quality resolution? Granted, nothing broadcasts in 1080p at this point, but it does give you a nice resolution when you hook up a computer to the device.

I was waiting for 1080p to come into my price range but went with a 720p (768) because at the size I was getting (42" though it supposedly applies to anything under 50"), there's no visual difference at standard viewing distances.

I've read in several places that 1080p makes a significant difference if you're using the HDTV as a computer monitor, even on a smaller screen. Can anyone verify or debunk that claim? There are some great deals out there on 720p-capable systems but I'm leery of going with something that's not going to play well with my gaming PC.

KillerTomato wrote:

I've read in several places that 1080p makes a significant difference if you're using the HDTV as a computer monitor, even on a smaller screen. Can anyone verify or debunk that claim? There are some great deals out there on 720p-capable systems but I'm leery of going with something that's not going to play well with my gaming PC.

If you're gaming on a PC, remember that 1080P is 1920x1080. Unless you've got a nuclear reactor for a video card, you probably won't get acceptable frame rates. Higher resolution is good for 2D (web pages, docs, etc...), but that high a resolution isn't so great for gaming if you want acceptable performance.