HDTV Help

Search

Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2012
Messages
6,214
Tokens
I could use some advice as I am looking for a 70” LED HDTV. More specifically I have been looking at the Sharp Aquos.

What I have found is they have 3 models that on average price out at 2000, 2500, & 3000. I know you can get variations of 100 to 200 on those prices but that isn’t a concern yet. Once I make a decision on the unit I’ll shop specifically for price based on that model. In my research I’ve seen other brands but the prices are for the most part higher. If I throw in a different size like 60” or 55” I get a completely different set of prices ranging from more expensive to less. I’ve decided the TV should last at least 10 years so why not get the largest as long as the intended space can handle it There’s no need to bore anyone with room dimensions or viewing intentions I’ll just leave it with the statement 70” is probably what I’ll go with and I’m not interested in Plasma.

I’m aware there’s an 80” available but that price jumps up considerably so based on value/reward it’s not a consideration.

To get back to the 3 Sharp 70” models that I listed at the start of this post. I’m interested in the difference there. Each 500 step in the words of the salesmen makes the TV much better. I’ve heard what the dealers say in explaining the difference but my question is “do I need it?”

They are big on refresh rate and act like anything below 240 is bad but when I look at 120 models I don’t notice a difference. I remember not too long ago 120hz being the upgraded refresh rate.

The higher priced models add that yellow pixel but when I view those TV’s I don’t see it adding any big difference compared to other brands that don’t have it. Ya gotta love those displays they have where you look through a sort of jewelers loop and see the yellow pixels mixed in.

I have seen the units side by side but the problem there is in comparing TV’s like that you will usually see a little difference but does the lesser unit only look inferior because it’s next to the better ones? When standing alone would the cheaper model look satisfactory there by making the extra expenditure unnecessary?

It’s like buying a car if you look at something that is a top of the line quality automobile you can always get a more expensive higher quality car but that doesn’t make what you’re looking at bad.

What I’m looking for here is information on satisfaction with this brand and these models. I’d obviously like to spend the least. Not out of desperation it’s just based on need.
(it’s funny how we accept losing large amounts of cash with nothing to show for it in wagering yet strive to save whatever we can on purchases especially big ticket purchases)
If the more expensive model is better value for the buck that’s fine I just don’t want to spend more than really necessary.

Time isn’t a concern. I’ve been looking since before Christmas and I will be going to a party for the Super Bowl so there is no incentive to act quickly. In fact with that in mind I’m curious if there’s any reason to hold off until the release of the new models?

If anyone can help me with this in terms of personal experience or knowledge I’d appreciate your input.

I have observed it’s apparently not “chic” (for lack of a better word) for the more established participants of this site to communicate with the newer people but if you can help I’d appreciate throwing the little dog a bone.

Thanks and to All – Have a Nice Weekend!
 

THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX.
Joined
Jul 23, 2006
Messages
15,349
Tokens
I just got a Samsung 55 inch LED from Costco.

I thought it had the best picture of them all.

I set out for a 60 inch but thought the Samsung 55 had the clearest picture.

Hockey looks veey good on it also IMO, I know some people say the LED's arent great for fast action sports, but I think this tv is fine.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
6,066
Tokens
you have obviously already made quite a bit of research, my only suggestion is look the models in amazon.com and read each and every review and see what actual owners say

I never buy anything unless I can find decent feedback of the item and at least 4 stars
 

Member
Handicapper
Joined
Oct 31, 2004
Messages
44,299
Tokens
Too bad you are not interested in Plasma.
This assures that you will not be getting the best picture possible no matter how much money you spend on the other lesser tech such as LED, LCD etc...
 

I like money
Handicapper
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
5,381
Tokens
Yes, the bigger the TVs the bigger price jumps every couple inches. You must remember the screen is measured diagonally. The surface area difference from a 60 to a 70 inch tv, is a entire additional TV. Do the math.

If the room lighting allows it, get a plasma. Pioneer Kuro series is the shit.

The yellows in the pixels on the higher end tv don't really do a whole lot for the picture. It is more about digital efficiency and power consumption.

Yes, technically a 240mhz is better than a 120 mhz tv but you must compare apples to apples. There are a ton of 120mhz tvs that look way better than some of the 240mhz tvs.

Sharp Aquos is a very good high quality product that has a good reputation. Two places I really like reviews from are the good old fashioned consumer reports and a website www.egadget.

For what ever reason The Camera Stop or Shop (i cant remember) always has great prices for the Aquos series.
 

Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
4,190
Tokens
Too bad you are not interested in Plasma.
This assures that you will not be getting the best picture possible no matter how much money you spend on the other lesser tech such as LED, LCD etc...

:103631605:103631605:103631605:103631605:103631605:103631605
 

Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
4,190
Tokens
Yes, the bigger the TVs the bigger price jumps every couple inches. You must remember the screen is measured diagonally. The surface area difference from a 60 to a 70 inch tv, is a entire additional TV. Do the math.

If the room lighting allows it, get a plasma. Pioneer Kuro series is the shit.

The yellows in the pixels on the higher end tv don't really do a whole lot for the picture. It is more about digital efficiency and power consumption.

Yes, technically a 240mhz is better than a 120 mhz tv but you must compare apples to apples. There are a ton of 120mhz tvs that look way better than some of the 240mhz tvs.

Sharp Aquos is a very good high quality product that has a good reputation. Two places I really like reviews from are the good old fashioned consumer reports and a website www.egadget.

For what ever reason The Camera Stop or Shop (i cant remember) always has great prices for the Aquos series.

Would not trade my 500M for nothing:howdy:
 

I like money
Handicapper
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
5,381
Tokens
The 500M and the 600M are TV's. The Kuro is the same exact parts except there is no TV tuner built in so its about $500 less. The Kuro came out after the M models. I love them both as my favorite plasmas.
 

Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2012
Messages
6,214
Tokens
OK you have my attention. I'd be interested in hearing how Plasma is better?

What I based my decision on is the fact the Plasma runs hotter and obviously the heat is the result of more energy consumption.
The other issue that raises is heat being the enemy of solid state electronics so when those components operate in a higher temp environment life of operation is effected. That can be seen in the effort to provide extra cooling when possible to CPU's in computers

Having said that you should know I don't bring up these factors in an effort to discredit you they are just factors I used when making my considerations.
I would buy Plasma if all things showed it to be the better choice.
 

New member
Joined
Nov 29, 2005
Messages
4,391
Tokens
If you are interested in Plasma (as I am) buy.com has the Panasonic 65" 3D version for $1699 with free shipping. Great tv, great reviews, great picture, etc, etc
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
6,814
Tokens
Don't you have to replace lost gas in plasma's after about 3 years?; or is that something that was worked out. I have a 48 inch LCD samsung with 240 ms refresh and feel it handles sports well..

gl; btw; TV's are rumoured to continue to be better and better deals as capacity and technology increases have made it easier to get a deal on TV's..

gl
 

Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
4,190
Tokens
Don't you have to replace lost gas in plasma's after about 3 years?; or is that something that was worked out. I have a 48 inch LCD samsung with 240 ms refresh and feel it handles sports well..

gl; btw; TV's are rumoured to continue to be better and better deals as capacity and technology increases have made it easier to get a deal on TV's..

gl

NO, ur answer to the gases:103631605
 

New member
Joined
Aug 30, 2008
Messages
197
Tokens
Panasonic Viera TC-P60S30 according to Consumer Reports is the best plasma of that size.

If you go the panasonic route, may want to consider the ST30 for better picture quality for not much more, or the GT30 or VT30 if price isn't a concern, although the picture quality isn't significantly better for those two.

I have a 50 inch ST30 and love it.
 

New member
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
6,559
Tokens
If you're interested in 80", maybe a projector is in order? Just a thought - not sure what your viewing situation is like.
 

Member
Handicapper
Joined
Oct 31, 2004
Messages
44,299
Tokens
Plasma has no backlight like all other techs do.
This allows you to have true blacks to give you a contrast ratio that others cant do.
There are no view angle issues like with the other techs.
And they are much more energy efficient then they were 10 years ago.
You will probably pay an extra $2 a month in electricity for a plasma then an LCD. If you can afford a 3K tv you can afford an extra $2 a month utility bill.


JUST ASK any videofile what tech has the best picture. 100 out of 100 will tell you plasma.
That is at least until OLED becomes main stream and affordable about 4 years from now.


OK you have my attention. I'd be interested in hearing how Plasma is better?

What I based my decision on is the fact the Plasma runs hotter and obviously the heat is the result of more energy consumption.
The other issue that raises is heat being the enemy of solid state electronics so when those components operate in a higher temp environment life of operation is effected. That can be seen in the effort to provide extra cooling when possible to CPU's in computers

Having said that you should know I don't bring up these factors in an effort to discredit you they are just factors I used when making my considerations.
I would buy Plasma if all things showed it to be the better choice.
 

Member
Handicapper
Joined
Sep 18, 2006
Messages
18,959
Tokens
Imo, LCD's arent as good as Plasma tv's when it comes to dark areas & imo, plasmas are the best to watch sports on. I have a Sony 50 inch plasma & the HD NFL ticket is amazing. I compared it to my brother-in laws LCD tv & there is no comparison. The grass & the games look so real in a plasma.

Only thing I dont like about plasmas is the reflections. You dont have much reflections on an LCD but I rather have a great picture with a plasma.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,108,474
Messages
13,451,847
Members
99,415
Latest member
ElmaODrisc
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com