![]() ![]() |
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
98.26.100.196
In Reply to: RE: in the market for a 42" or 46" LCD w/matte-finish screen cover posted by BS64 on November 21, 2008 at 10:57:25
It has their Ultra Clean Panel, which is glossy, but I do not find the reflections overly distracting. When the screen goes blank (during BB's demo video), the front windows of the store are easily visible on the screen. But once the video starts up again, the picture over powers the reflection.
I find I actually prefer the glossy over the matte, on the Samsung models. The matte still has a defined reflection, but with a white haze surrounding it. The gloss UCP reflects the light source, and nothing more. No haze around the reflected source of light. Also, there is only one reflection - no double-reflection as on models with 2 pieces of reflective material covering the screen.
Sharp and LG do a great job of absorbing/dispersing the reflected light w/their matte finish screens, but I find the picture to be slightly washed out. For pic quality, I think LG would win in extended comparisons.
As far as comparing picture quality on different makes/models, to my eyes, the Samsung 1080p/120hz models look as if you are looking through a window. Now, I might be a little biased towards Samsung. CNET's list of top LCD TV's in the 40-49" screen size category is dominated by Samsung models. Based on picture comparisons at BB yesterday morning, I liked the picture on the LN46A650 over the Sharp Aquos hanging directly underneath it. Deep, rich color with nice sharp edges around objects.
Yesterday, BB, CC and Sears all had the LN40A650 priced at $1499.99. This morning they all have it at $1799.99. Will they all mark it back down to $1500 tomorrow as part of a marketing scheme? Amazon has the same TV for $1250 with free shipping. A local seller has one on Craigslist for $800 w/out the original box or manual.
I'm going to wait and see what the online pricing does over the weekend, then make a decision. Thanks for the responses.
Follow Ups:
Yup..I thought the Samsungs had great picture as well. I wanted the 52 inch in this model. At the time the price was more than I wanted to spend. It is very difficult to judge any of these TVs in store. It's funny, I compared the Sharp and LG..the Sharp won by a large margin in black levels. Again..calibration is the real key with any of these televisions. There's a point when you start splitting hairs with the brands. Most of the flat panel makers share parts and facilities. So you'll find them all intertwined behind the scenes. As long as your not in direct sunlight..the Samsung should do well.Good luck with your hunt.
Edits: 11/27/08 11/27/08
Without a doubt. They each have their own visual strong points during various scenes. You like one model one minute, then the one next to it the next minute.
I know price does not determine quality level, but I have learned over the years that if you buy cheap it will show, and you eventually buy twice. I try to find that middle ground of quality features and solid build at a "reasonable" price.
Friends keep telling me about such and such store having a 46" LCD for $500. What they don't understand are the specs, or lack thereof, behind that price. I want high contrast ratio, 120hz, 4ms. You won't find those specs in a 46" set under $1000. And it's those specs that will make a great TV stand out from a good one. Based on what I am seeing, anyway...
Yeah I agree ...that is normally where I'm at with this stuff...middle ground. I install them from time to time as well. So I get a chance to see them in different settings. Don't let the store displays fool you. Some of these so so TVs..are really pretty good at home.
I will keep that in mind. Thanks again...
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: