|
Arriba
Offline
Posts: 21305
|
 |
« Reply #1 on: Tuesday, October 14, 2008, 15:19:34 » |
|
panasonic do the best lcd tv's followed by sony.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
magicroundabout
Fanta Pants
Offline
Posts: 8786
|
 |
« Reply #2 on: Tuesday, October 14, 2008, 15:22:41 » |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Samdy Gray
Dirty sneaky traitor weasel
Offline
Posts: 27183
|
 |
« Reply #3 on: Tuesday, October 14, 2008, 15:23:05 » |
|
Also i've read that anything under 42" is best to get an LCD Screen?! True/False Not strictly true, moreso plasma has a slight edge over LCD from 42" upwards. The Samsung you linked to would do a good job, can't fault Samsung for LCD really.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
tans
You spin me right round baby right round
Offline
Posts: 26828
|
 |
« Reply #4 on: Tuesday, October 14, 2008, 15:23:42 » |
|
Wheres Ralphy when you need him?
Magic, got your invite yesterday
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
magicroundabout
Fanta Pants
Offline
Posts: 8786
|
 |
« Reply #5 on: Tuesday, October 14, 2008, 15:27:06 » |
|
Wheres Ralphy when you need him?
Magic, got your invite yesterday
hope you and the Mrs can make it dude
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Colin Todd
Offline
Posts: 3318
|
 |
« Reply #6 on: Tuesday, October 14, 2008, 15:27:48 » |
|
I have a panasonic TH42px80. its very good and was cracking value at just over £600. They do a 37" version i believe.
I've no idea if you would be better off getting a LCD for that size or not. I cant see that it would make all that much difference tbh.
I wouldnt bother paying the extra for a 1080p TV, unless you can get a really good deal. The difference seems pretty negligable to the naked eye.
But it depends what you are going to use it for I suppose or if spending an extra £200 for a marginal improvement in picture quality bothers you or not.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Arriba
Offline
Posts: 21305
|
 |
« Reply #7 on: Tuesday, October 14, 2008, 15:28:29 » |
|
magic. any models that take your fancy google them and then read the reviews.or go to avforums and read what is said on there. panasonic is worth the extra spend imo.they are the best tv's on the market. plasma is better than lcd but only on a big tv.they also cost more to run
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
magicroundabout
Fanta Pants
Offline
Posts: 8786
|
 |
« Reply #8 on: Tuesday, October 14, 2008, 15:28:38 » |
|
Not strictly true, moreso plasma has a slight edge over LCD from 42" upwards.
The Samsung you linked to would do a good job, can't fault Samsung for LCD really.
so you think that 40" LCD would be fine?! i'm going up to view them tonight to get a proper view of them.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Colin Todd
Offline
Posts: 3318
|
 |
« Reply #9 on: Tuesday, October 14, 2008, 15:31:46 » |
|
Agree about reading the reviews. Its possible to spend more on a TV thats not as good as a cheaper model of a different brand if you see what i mean.
Some decent brands seem to release TV's that get lukewarm reviews, yet at the same time release bigger / smaller ones that get good reviews.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
magicroundabout
Fanta Pants
Offline
Posts: 8786
|
 |
« Reply #10 on: Tuesday, October 14, 2008, 15:32:09 » |
|
I have a panasonic TH42px80. its very good and was cracking value at just over £600. They do a 37" version i believe.
I've no idea if you would be better off getting a LCD for that size or not. I cant see that it would make all that much difference tbh.
I wouldnt bother paying the extra for a 1080p TV, unless you can get a really good deal. The difference seems pretty negligable to the naked eye.
But it depends what you are going to use it for I suppose or if spending an extra £200 for a marginal improvement in picture quality bothers you or not.
but having the 1080p format would suit when wanting HD movies etc in the future over the 720p HD? magic. any models that take your fancy google them and then read the reviews.or go to avforums and read what is said on there. panasonic is worth the extra spend imo.they are the best tv's on the market. plasma is better than lcd but only on a big tv.they also cost more to run
i've done a few searches at work today and each one has good reviews but there isn't a comparison over Panasonic/Samsung for example.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
tans
You spin me right round baby right round
Offline
Posts: 26828
|
 |
« Reply #11 on: Tuesday, October 14, 2008, 15:33:02 » |
|
hope you and the Mrs can make it dude
check your pm
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Samdy Gray
Dirty sneaky traitor weasel
Offline
Posts: 27183
|
 |
« Reply #12 on: Tuesday, October 14, 2008, 15:35:19 » |
|
so you think that 40" LCD would be fine?! Yep. All the big brands are much of a muchness really, they've got the same kind of technology and contrast ratios so the picture quality between them is negligible, what it really boils down to is reliability. Like arriba said, have a look at some reviews (AVForums is really good) and find one you like best.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Arriba
Offline
Posts: 21305
|
 |
« Reply #13 on: Tuesday, October 14, 2008, 15:35:37 » |
|
for anything over 32 inch go for a 1080p.but the key thing about a tv is how its normal sd output looks.some are terrible so make sure you see normal feed tv stuff in the shop.not just dvd or hd as it wont show up its flaws.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Colin Todd
Offline
Posts: 3318
|
 |
« Reply #14 on: Tuesday, October 14, 2008, 15:36:16 » |
|
but having the 1080p format would suit when wanting HD movies etc in the future over the 720p HD?
Obviously it is better, but I dont think by anywhere near as much of a margin as 720p HD is over SD. I guess you'll spend much more time watching SD tv or at best watching sky HD which aint 1080p anyway (??) Depends on your budget really, if you are feeling minted go for it. I put the money i saved on the TV towards a PS3
|
|
« Last Edit: Tuesday, October 14, 2008, 15:38:28 by Colin Todd »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|