Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???
-
@garak0410 said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
I'm thinking I may pick it up as an up-step to something better later...has to to be a little better than we have now and we just continue to use the XBOX One as our media center.
Unless you have the new version of the Xbox One that supports 4K, if you don't have another source, the 4K will not be used.
-
@Dashrender said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
All the reviews I've read say that LG LCD panels have horrible color reproduction. Samsung and Vizio are significantly better.
Unless you want the Samsung Ring of Fire.....
-
@gjacobse said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
@Dashrender said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
All the reviews I've read say that LG LCD panels have horrible color reproduction. Samsung and Vizio are significantly better.
Unless you want the Samsung Ring of Fire.....
haven't heard of that. Time to hit google.
oh
you're doggin on the phones. nevermind. -
@Dashrender said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
@gjacobse said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
@Dashrender said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
All the reviews I've read say that LG LCD panels have horrible color reproduction. Samsung and Vizio are significantly better.
Unless you want the Samsung Ring of Fire.....
haven't heard of that. Time to hit google.
I was being sarcastic - referencing the Samsung Phone issues...
-
@gjacobse said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
@Dashrender said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
@gjacobse said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
@Dashrender said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
All the reviews I've read say that LG LCD panels have horrible color reproduction. Samsung and Vizio are significantly better.
Unless you want the Samsung Ring of Fire.....
haven't heard of that. Time to hit google.
I was being sarcastic - referencing the Samsung Phone issues...
well with things like the red ring of death on the Xbox, you never know. But google quickly pointed me to the phones and well I put 2 and two together...
-
We have a 50" LG and a 60" Samsung. The color isn't bad on the LG, except it loses some resolution on dark shots. Nowhere near as badly as the 40" Sanyo did, but dark sections tend to get a little blotchy. The Samsung's color is better, but it's also a year or two newer.
-
I have an LG 37" 1080p hosplatility grade tv that is probably from 2010. I ordered one of these now and I'm picking it up from best buy this evening.
-
60Hz refresh rate. That you will notice if you're a sports fan. There will be a blur that follows any fast moving object. Gets annoying real fast.
Can't find any information about its color depth. If it's 8 bit you'll really notice it in 4k where color banding is evident (because it can't reproduce enough colors to make up the gradients). Look for a 12 bit capable TV. It's HDR which is a better color reproducing engine but HDR with low bit depth isn't good at all.
I also can't find any info on whether it is edge lit or if it has multi zoned LED. The multi zoned LEDs will give you much truer blacks and you won't have that washed out effect from light bleeding.
This looks like a nice entry level TV at this size, but emphasize entry level.
-
@NashBrydges said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
60Hz refresh rate. That you will notice if you're a sports fan. There will be a blur that follows any fast moving object. Gets
No shows broadcast even at 60, let alone above it. THe human eye can't see 60Hz. No issues there.
-
At that price it's definitely edge lit.
Even my $2k Samsung is edge lite, I'm pretty sure.. damn now I need to go look.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
@NashBrydges said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
60Hz refresh rate. That you will notice if you're a sports fan. There will be a blur that follows any fast moving object. Gets
No shows broadcast even at 60, let alone above it. THe human eye can't see 60Hz. No issues there.
@scottalanmiller said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
@NashBrydges said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
60Hz refresh rate. That you will notice if you're a sports fan. There will be a blur that follows any fast moving object. Gets
No shows broadcast even at 60, let alone above it. THe human eye can't see 60Hz. No issues there.
I don't buy this.
Back on the day I would get headaches on a 60hz monitor, bump it to 70, headaches gone.
-
@scottalanmiller Hey Scott. When you've actually seen the visual artifacts introduced by objects on screen on a 60Hz tv then come back and tell me. Everyone who's ever owned one of these at 60Hz will tell you about it.
Btw has nothing to do with the human eye seeing at 60Hz lol. Don't remember saying that in my post.
-
My old sharp LCD I think was 60Hz and I didn't have artifacts issues that weren't on the broadcast side.
-
I've got a 60" Visio C55-V2. They quit making that model, and I don't know what the replacement is, but it was the best price/picture quality around. I generally check www.avforums.com before buying any home entertainment equipment.
-
those artificats are caused by interlaced video more than anything else.
-
@NashBrydges said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
@scottalanmiller Hey Scott. When you've actually seen the visual artifacts introduced by objects on screen on a 60Hz tv then come back and tell me. Everyone who's ever owned one of these at 60Hz will tell you about it.
Btw has nothing to do with the human eye seeing at 60Hz lol. Don't remember saying that in my post.
But 60Hz is how fast the images come up. It's literally impossible for humans to see something at 60Hz. Remember that television is no faster than 30Hz. No matter what you've seen, it isn't from this. It's physically impossible. There are no artifacts from 60Hz, especially when it is showing a 30Hz signal (or 24 for movies.)
I've got one of the fastest eyes (that's really a thing) along with @AndyW and both of us can see over 30Hz, which is abnormal for humans, and neither of us can see 40Hz let alone 60Hz. There is a reason that television, youtube and such doesn't make anything over 30Hz, because it just isn't very important.
-
@Dashrender said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
@scottalanmiller said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
@NashBrydges said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
60Hz refresh rate. That you will notice if you're a sports fan. There will be a blur that follows any fast moving object. Gets
No shows broadcast even at 60, let alone above it. THe human eye can't see 60Hz. No issues there.
@scottalanmiller said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
@NashBrydges said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
60Hz refresh rate. That you will notice if you're a sports fan. There will be a blur that follows any fast moving object. Gets
No shows broadcast even at 60, let alone above it. THe human eye can't see 60Hz. No issues there.
I don't buy this.
Back on the day I would get headaches on a 60hz monitor, bump it to 70, headaches gone.
Yup, you'll get headaches from a CRT at 60, but it's not visible.
-
@NashBrydges said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
@scottalanmiller Hey Scott. When you've actually seen the visual artifacts introduced by objects on screen on a 60Hz tv then come back and tell me. Everyone who's ever owned one of these at 60Hz will tell you about it.
Artifacts in progressive scan images comes from pixel response time, not refresh rate. The refresh rate above 60Hz is either a marketing trick from TV manufacturers trying to make a quick buck off of you or for doing 3D by flicking the screen back and forth because you want 60Hz for each eye. But response time is the only thing that creates artifacts, not refresh rate above the visible limit. No matter what the refresh rate, it will never create blur, refresh can't do that. Even a 5Hz screen won't have blur.
Tons of cheap TVs have response times slower than the time needed for the refresh rate, thus causing blur. Reality is, humans don't care about the refresh rate, they care about the response time. But a fast response time is expensive, making a high refresh rate is cheap. So manufacturers sell the cheaper number so that they can raise the price without really doing anything to make the TV better.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
There is a reason that television, youtube and such doesn't make anything over 30Hz, because it just isn't very important.
Content is not made in Hz. It's frame rates. the only affect it has on that is that it has to be divisable by it hence why their is PAL and NTSC for 50hz and 60hz broadcast systems respectively.
-
@Jason said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
@scottalanmiller said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:
There is a reason that television, youtube and such doesn't make anything over 30Hz, because it just isn't very important.
Content is not made in Hz. It's frame rates. the only affect it has on that is that it has to be divisable by it hence why their is PAL and NTSC for 50hz and 60hz broadcast systems respectively.
Framerates are measured in cycles of frames per second, though. So 30 frames per second, for example.
