Recommend me a good TV

I still stand by my previous statement of the Sharp Aquos line of TVs; they have the least input lag of any manufacturer out there, and a few of their models actually have a video processing mode specifically designed to address input lag for gaming and reduce it even further;

I just ordered a 1080p 32" model for my dorm at college (mainly because my 42" at home is too big for the dorm room lol), and it has their Vyper Drive game mode; the model is "lc32e67u" and I paid $600 at http://www.6ave.com They're doing some site and database restructuring, so I have to wait a little while for it to arrive, but it's worth the wait.

Ive have been also looking at a few other brands of TV too. But i am having an absolute bitch of a time getting all the specifications on the product. Ive looked at the Samsung LA32B550, but nowhere am im getting the Hz for it. Just says its 4 ms, is that a 50Hz or a 100Hz tv set? Im confused.

I can only highly recommend the new Sony Bravia line (W, Z and X models). Zero input lag. ZERO. And all picture enhancement features are defeatable, which is an option you don't get with many manufacturers.

at what cost though? Bravia's cost a kidney where i am. I like them, but not really a good price.

If it doesn't say anything regarding 100hz, it's best to assume that it is not supported - especially at that price.

If you want to get the most value for your money and be relatively happy with what you end up with, I suggest you get a list of TV's that are within your price range (and a couple a little above it) which interest you, and go check them out in person. See if there's anything above your price range that makes you say "ok I'll work a couple of extra shifts for that"; and if there isn't, just stick with a TV you are willing to pay less for.

For features/price, I think that Sharp which was linked to a page or so back looks alright, but it's always worth seeing the product in person before you jump for a purchase that's going to set you back that much money.

Also, be prepared to try and bargain with the retailers, see if you can get a good deal. You might be able to get a couple hundred $ off.

Just my advice...

Back when I was still green to the whole HDTV thing, i had gotten a 42" Bravia; good picture but mine had bad input lag. It wasn't quite as drastic as the Samsung I had bought immediately before it, but it was still enough to screw me up when I played Sonic or Megaman- therefore, it was a no-go for me. I even turned game mode and all other picture enhancements off :/

Maybe they've since improved?

Kigo: only go for 50hz/60hz TVs... any of that 100/120 "smooth-motion" or whatever the f*** it is, it completely useless for games because of the lag it adds :/ It looks creepy on movies and TV shows too, I think :P

And always remember, buying online is consistently cheaper than in a store unless you plan on trying to haggle an in-store price down a bit. Ask them if they can go any lower, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AG-wolf

Maybe they've since improved?

---

Most definitely, yes. Even with full motionflow enabled, the input lag is only about 30ms (most Samsungs have over 60ms lag), and if I turn all the unnecessary features off, lag is below 1ms ('cos 1ms is the lowest I can measure, and it always shows up as zero).

****, now im even more confused.

Thanks for the additional suggestions AG-Wolf and Habib,

So i should look for a Full HD, 50Hz TV instead ??? If i want a lagless experience?

All modern LCD's sold in Australia are capable of 60hz and the lack of a region lock allows PS3 games to all have the same HD content no matter what country you bought the PS3 from FYI, it's only the sub-HD stuff that concerns 50/60hz and PAL/NTSC, etc..
But yeah, I don't think the motionflow tech is that necessary since it does induce a little input lag. That said, it's something that can be written on paper, but the difference is less apparent in observation.

Like I mentioned in the above post though, research and seeing things work in person is the best way to identify anything you don't like. Any comments on a forum are going to be based around a personal observation, and everyone is going to have a different one of those; while yours is the only one that counts in the end.

Plus one on that, amplificated. Well said.

K, coming close to decision time,

A few last questions,

Samsung? or / Sharp?

Full HD? or / Standard HD?

50Hz? or / 100Hz+ ?

Samsung over the Sharp ,it's no contest.

The price of full HD has dropped and most new sets are 1080p now,not that you will really notice it that much on a 32" screen, you might with Blueray discs.

You should notice the different between 50 & 100Hz even on the smaller size screen, so get 100Hz if you can.

Here is a shoot out between 3 32" screens , Panasonic -Sony - Samsung by Smarthouse in Australia.
http://www.smarthouse.com.au/Reviews...splay/R5R7N5S4

You can pick these screens up for a lot less if you shop around.

Just google the particular brand & model number of the unit you are interested in with the word review typed in first,only take seriously the reviews from Audio/Video mags and Tech sites,not shops with purchasers reviews as they are seldom of any worth [nobody likes to admit the bought a lemon]

My opinion is that you can see the difference between 720P and 1080P on PS3 graphics on a 32 inch. It doesn`t matter for a lot of not full HD PS3 content like LBP, but on Wipeout and the PS3 menus you can see the difference. As a GT fan, Kigo, you are going to have to have 1080P above all else, imo. You will not be happy with less! ;) I don`t know about the 100HZ thing, I don`t see why it would improve games at all. It`s not going to cure framerate issues, I think.

for blu rays I think the overall quality of the TV`s picture matters at least as much as 720 v 1080. However you can get a little picture judder on some blu ray conversions and possibly 100HZ helps with this, however I would say that if PS3 gaming is your priority then 1080P is what you need. All imo and my observations, just to confuse you more.... :robot

So i shouldnt be worried much about lag, with 100Hz tv with the PS3.

Funny you mentioned that BW, i looked and got the price down for the SAMSUNG LA32B650, nice picture, $1796 though. at JB i looked at.

Lunar i will sure be getting the extra pixel screen for sure, i will be on GT5 alot when i comes out:) So Full HD it will be.

What is the difference between the LA32A650 and the LA32B650 TVs?

Quote:

---

Samsung? or / Sharp?

---

Samsung has a slightly prettier picture, Sharp has less input lag (and if you get one of their TVs with "Vyper Drive Game Mode" it responds even faster than their regular TVs).. i'll link to my youtube video again of the Samsung I had bought which had terrible input lag http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBolS3c1-Nk... if a tv hinders my ability to play Sonic, there's a problem lol. Sharp is actually one of the leading HDTV manufacturers out there, which is ironic because retailers don't seem to stock their TVs as much as other brands (around here anyway...). Sharp's picture quality is just behind Samsung's, almost to the point where the difference isn't even noticeable.. plus a Sharp will usually give you more color control options than a Samsung.

Quote:

---

Full HD? or / Standard HD?

---

wtf? I don't understand the difference, but you want Full HD, 1920x1080p native resolution

Quote:

---

50Hz? or / 100Hz+ ?

---

50/60hz. The 100/120hz bullshit is a gimmick; it's completely worthless for games and its effect on regular TV and movies only appeals to certain people anyway.


Your best bet? Drag your PS3/360/wii/console-of-choice into an electronics store with all the proper hookups (power cable, component/scart/hdmi cable, etc) and test TVs first hand.


Edit: 32 inches is tiny as hell, and paying $1700 for a 32 inch screen is uncalled for (unless that;s in australian, I know the exchange rate is kinda bad). You Should be able to get at least 40 or 42 inches for a fair price (Test in stores, buy online).
Samsung's website should tell you the difference between those two models, but im sure it's somethihg small. They;re both in the "6 Series" line it looks like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackwiggle

~snip~The price of full HD has dropped and most new sets are 1080p now,not that you will really notice it that much on a 32" screen,~snip~

---

Depends on how close you sit to the screen. In my case, 2 feet or less [very nearsighted, uncorrected].

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lance

Depends on how close you sit to the screen. In my case, 2 feet or less [very nearsighted, uncorrected].

---

Perhaps this will help.
http://myhometheater.homestead.com/v...alculator.html

These might be more appropriate ,not very fashionable mind you, but if they do the job.http://www.designnotes.com/Merchant2...0001/VTMG8.jpg

Doesn't look like there are any lenses to help one focus on the screen. Usually it is most desirable to have eyes at infinity focus for the least eyestrain. This would be, for people with typical un****edup eyesight, many feet away, perhaps fifty feet and more. [for my nearsighted eyes, which are very elongated front to back, 11 inches is infinity focus. Beyond that is infinity plus, as images become more and more out of focus as the objects are farther away.] Watching a movie in a theater would usually have one's eyes at infinity focus. In the case of that screen on the personal video display, a magnifying lens would be needed for each eye to allow the relaxed long focus.

Well, I dont know how (considering the amount of time I spend in front of a monitor/ HD) I have 20/20 vision...I guess I is lucky....:P