Slashdot Mirror
Large Format TV Options?
pipingguy asks: "I'm planning to purchase a large screen TV and I'm leaning toward DLP at this time. After doing research on-line, I'm more confused than before. One thing I don't like about DLP is the relatively limited vertical angle for best picture viewing. LCDs don't seem to be as bad in this regard, but my understanding is that LCD is more expensive per inch. What is the current state-of-the-art for DLP? I'd rather buy a smaller TV with a better picture than one with a larger picture that is less appealing to the eye. And what about the thousands of tiny mirrors in DLP units? If these are mechanically moving parts, isn't that a likely source of failure (so says a Sony rep who wanted to sell me a LCD projection TV). Thanks for any advice/experience you can provide."
But thats what a warranty is for. I'd suggest going to different retail stores and asking their opinion. There is no one more honest then someone that thinks they are getting a commission. ;-)
Restore the madness of youth's lechery
Well, when I started comparing DLP and Plasma side-by-side (I was looking at 50" models, BTW), I looked at the detail of both, and even though Plasma theoretically had fewer pixels, the amount of detail was much superior. What I noticed was that DLP pixels are very "fuzzy" (presumably from the projection aspect of DLP), whereas the Plasma was razor sharp from the direct-light aspect.
When you also factor in that Plasma is far brighter with a much better viewing angle, I decided to spend the extra money for the Plasma screen. Of course, only you can decide if the additional quality is worth the extra money, but it worked out that way for me.
I didn't really look that closely at LCD. The Plasma seemed superior enough that if I was going to go for a "sub resolution", then I'd go Plasma.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
The the mirrors in a DMD (Digital Micromirror Device- used by DLP's) are under little stress and rarely fail. Most have undergone extensive testing and failure has never been a significant problem. Go to several stores, look at the available models- read the reviews for each unit and manufacturer and buy whichever one looks best to you.
-sirket
Depending on your setup, a projector might be best for you. My bro has one, giving his home theatre a nice 8-foot screen. It works with his TV, computer, and videogame consoles, and cost much less than a big screen of comparable size.
One thing I don't like about DLP is the relatively limited vertical angle for best picture viewing.
DLP is a projection technology, how could it possibly be limited in viewing angle (?!)
I bought a Samsung DLP unit, but had to return it due to strobing rainbow effect. It was a really great image, though that was in part because Samsung was doing a very high level of algorithmic sharpening, which can cause halos around some images. But I really couldn't move my eyes across it without seeing the trailing rainbows.
I didn't see this effect in the store at all, but at home the awareness of it really did build up. If you are interested in DLP, you might look at the new units that use high speed LED arrays instead of a high intensity white light bulb to handle the color.. these new ones still flash the colors in sequence, but the sequencing is much faster, and it really and truly is supposed to be below the perceptual threshold for everybody.
I wound up getting a Sony SXRD LCoS set swapped out for the Samsung DLP.. the SXRD was more expensive, but the resolution was higher (true 1920x1280p), with more digital connectors, and better firmware. The SXRD sets are similar to DLP in that they are digital microdisplay projectors, but they use three LCoS color panels instead of a color wheel spinning in front of a micromirror array.
If you want a good place to read heated and informed opinions about the various choices on offer, check out http://www.avsforum.com/.
Good luck!
- jon
Ganymede, a GPL'ed metadirectory for UNIX
it all depends on what you want
if you are only going to be using this TV as a TV, picture quality is best by far on a plasma. if you might use it with a home theatre PC I would go with an LCD tv. if you want a tv that is going to last a long time i would still go with CRT, or perhaps DLP. if you want a huge screen and dont mind spending hundreds a year on a replacement bulb, go with a projector. if you are going to be watching in the dark and close to the screen all the time an LCD is best on the eyes. if you are going to be watching a TV station with the logo in the corner of the screen all the time or with a bar at the bottom like a newsfeed, then you dont want a plasma screen because of image burn in. if you want something you can carry and move around all by yourself then you want either a projector or an LCD.
I've owned a DLP projector for 4 years now, and I've recommended Samsung and Mitsubishi DLP rear-projection televisions when asked. Some of my motivations: Plasma is subject to burn-in -- LG incorporates a 'dot-crawl' feature in their plasma displays that moves the image over one pixel, then up, then left, etc, to help mitigate this. If your panel suffers burn-in, you're out the cost of replacing the major component in your television/monitor. With DLP/LCD, you're only ongoing cost is replacement lamps, and they last quite a while. /. also reported that Samsung is close to releasing a DLP display driven by an LED light source. When choosing between LCD and DLP, one thing I might recommend reading about is how well the LCD panel retains its color purity over time. Granted, I saw this on the TI DLP site, but they demonstrated degradation in color purity over time of the LCD panel vs. DLP. There's more information at http://dlp.com/dlp_technology/dlp_technology_white _papers.asp (FWIW, I am an interested consumer. I do not work for TI, nor for any manufacturer of consumer/professional electronic equipment)
I looked around for weeks comparing sets, watching every make and model and reading everything I could get my hands on. In the end, I decided on the Sony Wega KF-E50A10, which is a 50" LCD rear projection TV. No matter what technology you choose - LCD (some manufacturers call it LCOS), plasma, DLP or CRT -- there are tradeoffs and advantages for each. In the case of the Sony, LCD technology has the potential to produce a pixelated, screen door effect and lower overall brightness and contrast. With a three LCD arrangement the Sony Wega is able to virtually eliminate the screen door effect and is able to overcome the contrast issue with a high brightness lamp, the only flaw to the set in my opinion as it will require replacement every so often. What sold me on the Sony was the quality of not only the HDTV picture, which I think is superb, but the quality of standard definition on cable or satellite. Hands down the Sony produced a far better picture than just about any set I looked at, except a very expensive Panasonic model I don't recall at the moment. Most salesmen are glad to blab about the quality of the HDTV picture, but rarely bring up SD picture quality and given the amount of HD content out there I estimated that I'd spend about half my time watching SD material. The dirty secret of most HDTVs is that SD looks like absolute shit on most of them, but the Sony uses an averaging algorithm that does an extremely good job of making SD broadcasts watchable.
I skipped plasma due to the cost and the fact that I felt the picture had the most pronounced screen door effect of any HDTV technology. I liked DLP, but since most HDTVs use a single chip DLP solution there can be a noticable shimmering rainbow effect on the edges of objects during movement as a color wheel must be used to display the full range of colors. I noticed it on several models and decided to skip DLP for the time being and noted that DLP sets will also require costly replacement of their high brightness lamps, just like LCD. Three chip DLP sets, one DLP chip for each of the primary colors, red, gree and blue, would eliminate the rainbow edge effect, but don't expect anything like that for less than $30,000. At some point three chip DLP will be standard, but it will be a while. I really liked the CRT rear projection sets I looked at and they were several hundred dollars less than LCD, plasma or DLP, but everyone I talked to that had one found that picture convergence was a problem (more so than SD rear projection TVs) and that static picture burn-in could be an issue (although I am told that doesn't happen anymore). Also, CRT rear projection TVs are heavier and bulkier than LCD or DLP.
I don't know about the overall reliability of DLP, but I do have a DLP projector that is a few years old and haven't noticed any loss of picture quality or missing pixels. If the quality of the SD picture wasn't as good as it was on the Sony, I would have bought a DLP TV, but nothing I saw with the DLP technology matched the quality of the SD picture from Sony. I don't think that's a limitation of the DLP technology itself so much as Sony finding the best method to display an SD quality picture on a HDTV.
I decided to get a Samsung HLN617W (61.7") DLP back in 2003. While most of my friends had recommended against DLP, I was so impressed by the quality of the image and the workmanship of the unit that I went for it. I am currently using it to type this text.
My friends that went with plasmas are now on their second TVs and a couple have had heat issues with their newer units ($5k Pioneer & Toshiba units, vintage 2005, no less). Anyone that recommends plasma needs to get one and use it as a computer monitor for a few months. What you end up with is an image that is no longer as bright, and lovely screen burn in which isn't covered by the manufacturer's warranty (Remember that you're bombarding phosphorus on a plexi/glass plane).
As for LCD, I have heard a number of complaints about the viewing angle in mixed lighting. Colors morph as you rotate about the unit in a sunlit room. DLP too has issues with this sort of motion, but they are limited to the luminosity and not the hue of the picture (This is much less annoying and needs some getting used to).
LCD also has issues with bad pixels - It is bound to happen on any size screen based on the number of transistors that are backing the viewing pane (Usually 3 per pixel). The latency of LCD technology also causes a "ghosting" effect to manifest itself with fast-paced action shots. Manufacturers have put out displays that are much faster in the past couple of years but they are still a ways from making the overall problem disappear.
If I were chosing a TV today, I would go with DLP again.
I am looking forward to OLEDs being used in big screens: They're thin, much brighter, lighter, more flexible and less intrusive...
I would have to agree with the parent, I've owned a Samsung DLP for over two years, never had to replace the bulb, and my family has been happy with it. With the exception of extreme viewing angles - and you wouldn't want to watch TV from those angles to begin with - the picture quality has been incredible, and we have been very happy with our HDTV.
With that said, I must warn you about burn in, and remind you that it is more of a problem than many would like to tell you. I am sure you already know that as a DLP creates its picture with lights and mirrors, there is no possibility of burn-in. This is important because there are still many broadcasts that do not display HDTV all the time. Network television is atrocious. The show may be in HD, but the commercials are not - and only certain prime-time and sporting events are broadcast in HD. The remaining time, letterbox bars crop the sides to show the programming in its proper format, and over time those side letterbox bars will burn in - from Plasma to LCD, and even the venerable Tube. DLP is the perfect cross-over technology from SD to HD as changing formats will not damage the set. Most of your common programming is not in HD, and HD will not "arrive" until your local and broadcast news shows start broadcasting in HD, and right now it is a political game. I've shown my support for HD with both a DLP and a LCD screen, and I contact my cable carrier to show support for new channels when they arrive, as well as my local television stations when they show local programming in HD. For now, HD is still just a flashy spectacle, but it is not a common technology, and it sure hasn't "arrived" yet.
I haven't lost my mind!
It is backed up on disk...somewhere...
DLP typically have a 170 degree viewing angle (almost perfect) and run $1000 less than the same size LCD. Repair involves replacing the bulb (around $150) every 3-6 years. Lightweight (60 lbs) and thinner than the old projections (12-14 inches).
:( Pricing is about the same as LCD. Typically a 180 degree viewing angle.
LCD pixels burn out - a few aren't a big deal, more get annoying.... LCDs are thinner. (4-5 inches) Typically a 180 degree viewing angle.
Plasma is best for larger screens - 60 inches plus, but Plasma gas leaks over time causing dulling - replace your TV time.
I have a 42 inch SONY WEGA - retails around $1500-$1800 right now - I love it and am happy to have saved over $800 over an LCD or Plasma.
Good Luck.
The AVS Forum is a great place to ask questions like this.
Then again, my TV probably doesn't count as "large". If you want a 50" behemoth, LCD is still prohibitively expensive.
I initially liked the idea of DLP, but it has some problems:
- On many sets, latency is an issue. This was a killer for me, as I had to be able to play video games on the set.
- The bulbs need replacing, and they're a few hundred bucks each, so the ongoing cost is higher than LCD.
- The sets make noise. I'm really picky about noise, I don't want anything with a fan in the living room.
- The micromirrors don't generally fail, but the high speed rotating bits do.
- The rainbow striping can be a bit distracting.
- Visibility in daylight is problematic.
The downsides of LCDs:
- Contrast ratio not as good as DLP, but getting close.
- Price is high if you want to go over 40".
I don't see response time as an issue on the latest generation of LCDs. Certainly I've had no problem playing ultra-fast racing games. Picture is vibrant, strong saturated colors, and the brightness means there's no problem with daytime viewing. I haven't noticed viewing angle being an issue either, certainly no more so than it is with DLP.
The downsides of plasma:
- Short lifetime.
- Gridlike mask over the picture.
- Can't use it for video games.
- Not a good idea to use it for extensive viewing of letterboxed material.
- Heat, energy consumption.
Downsides of CRT:
- Weighs a ton.
- Energy consumption, heat.
- Takes up lots of space.
- Full of nasty chemicals, you'll pay someone to take it away at the end of its lifetime.
If you need a big screen and can't afford LCD at that size, projection LCD might be an option.
Interestingly, each technology seems to have one company that has a clear lead. Sharp are the technology leaders for LCD. Samsung are the leaders for DLP. Panasonic are the best for plasma. Sony are the best for CRT. I haven't seen enough LCoS sets to conclude who's the leader there...
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
The only sorta "gotcha" with the LCD, is that the fan noise is sort of obnoxious... but I only notice it when there's no other sound in the room -- if I mute the receiver, or when it's cooling off. When my 7.1 surround sound is on (not even cranked up, just on) the noise isn't noticeable.
Also, folks will complain that the bulbs in LCD TVs will burn out. That is true (though it'll be a while)... but it's user-serviceable. That's right, you can pop off the cover and replace the bulb yourself. Bulbs aren't cheap, but if you tend to upgrade all your hardware every three to five years, you only have to do it once (if at all).
Now I'm not saying that LCD is better than DLP, I'm just saying that I've been really happy with my Hitachis, and I give it my "stamp of approval".
--brian
You should consider conventional tube TVs. Consumer Reports found that the Sony KV-34HS420 ($1200) had HDTV picture quality that could only be matched by $3000+ Plasmas, and $5000+ LCDs/DLPs. This is a very recent development; last year the only wide screen HDTV conventionals were mediocre.
The downside is that they're smaller (34-inches), very heavy (200+ pounds), and voluminous.
None of the alternatives can beat conventionals in that metric.
Daniel
I can second the Wega experience. Standard cable looks like shit on most HDTVs and Sony and Panasonic are some of the only companies that do post-processing efforts to make the image look "correct" on the higher resolution screens. I myself could not afford the 50" model I settled for a 42" model. Works great and unlike my last rear projection, it has survived 3 moves without a problem.
... unless you can accept the compromises, like not being able to use it in a lit room.
I have an LCD panel and a projector. The projector is a good one, but is just not bright enough to use in the daytime without pulling the blinds.
The panel is **waaaaaayyyyyy** brighter, and while much smaller, is used during the day or early evening.
when i was faced with this decision several years ago, i eventually bought a Sony PVM2950 -- its picture quality alone makes the various "downsides" of CRT worth putting up with. shopping around is really important with pro gear; i finally found mine for half the first price i was quoted.
Have you considered getting a projector instead?
We recently spent about $1000 on a InFocus DLP projector and love it. The picture is large enough (100" diagonal where we placed it) that we can have a dozen friends over to watch a movie. When we turn it off, it goes away, rather than continuing to dominate the room.
What type of screens work as a computer monitor for a video presentation/Powerpoint/some web browsing.
The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
I've measured the latency of a Samsung DLP for playing video games, and it was about 150 ms with an analog input signal (the usual thing people hook up from a PS2/Xbox/Gamecube). That's 9 frames of lag at 60 fps, which can have a significant effect on gameplay.
Providing a digital input signal cut that by half, but it can be still hard to play fast-reaction time games, and requires component video cables and progressive-scan output support from your game and console.
It seems that DLP technology necessarily lags video processing, the additional lag for analog is for deinterlacing which affects all HDTVs, although some HDTVs provide "game modes" which cut out deinterlacing lag. Not this Samsung DLP however.
Be aware that the audio is "artificially" delayed to match the video in these TVs, which you can tell by hooking your game console audio directly to a stereo. Doing this can help play music games, even though what you hear will be out of sync with what you see, it will be in sync with the game console which is judging you.
Just a warning with LCD Projection sets. Roughly every four to six months you will need to replace the lamp which costs ~$400 CAD (at least for the one used in the panasonic unit I have). They are considered consumables and not covered under warranty.
Go there. It's like Slashdot for home theater nerds.
My other first post is car post.
The data available on the web can allow you to compare some attributes those products but it will not tell you what you really like and will spend money on. Look at different display technologies. Have the sales people plug in different things into the display to see how they look. Note the differences between how normal TV, 720p and 1080i are rendered. Play with the options to see how they change the picture. Note the lighting where the display is demoed. Is is too dark? Then it might be that the display will not work in the room where you expect to use it.
I too did tons of research before making my purchase, and the SONY KFE50A10 was probably the best. I may be biased towards Sony (I've always like them), but Consumer Reports agreed with me. The March '06 issue compared big screen tvs and out of 40-50 different ones, the KFE50A10 was in the top 3-4.
I've had it for about a month now, and love the picture I get on it (HDTV or standard cable), there's a wide angle, and light from outside doesn't affect the picture. The other thing that sold me on it was it had the highest rating out of all the tvs for sound... I don't have a receiver, speakers and subwoofer yet, so this was also kind of a big deal.
They're also coming down lots in price. When they were first released in November '05, they were around 4,500 ($Cdn), I got mine at 2,500 and recently saw them as low as 2,300.
The only downside is the 200$ bulb has to be replaced every once in a while... not sure how long, but while searching some A/V forums, it wasn't until tens of thousands of hours of use. The Sony models make it easy though, you don't need to pay a technician to do it for you.
Try to track down that issue of Consumer Reports at your local library or visit www.consumerreports.org (requires subscription to see ratings).
Cheers,
Brad
I too bought this set recently. Great TV.
Donald Roeber
Generating 2048 Bits of Randomness...
Since there are plenty of comments so far, I'll keep mine short. I'll second the Sony Wega rear-projection LCD someone else mentioned. My parents recently picked up the 55" version and it's very nice. It has a fairly easily replacable bulb (not sure what the life is like) and the light distribution is uniform. Looks great with standard and HD content. I personally have a 32" Syntax LCD that I got for 700 bucks a while ago. Again, HD and SD content look great. There is a small amount of light leakage in the corners, but it's only noticable if you happen to stare at the corners of the screen. DVI in works great with my computer. You mention getting something "smaller," so if you're talking 42" or under, I'd recommend a straight LCD. I've heard very nice things about the Westinghouse 32" and 37" LCD sets. Very good price/quality ratio. Also, the newer 37"s do full 1920x1080. Someone else somewhere mentioned that LCD pixels burn out over time. I'm not sure what they're talking about, because my understanding is that either the pixels work or they don't. If they do, the only thing you need to worry about is the backlight going out.
This guy's the limit!
There's a 42" LCD for $1999 that does 1080p. That's significantly larger than the 32" analog 4x3 set I have now and given how much wall space I have to put a set against I doubt I could fit anything larger than 50" anyway.
Also, I would hold out for a set that can receive 1080p via digital inputs, and display it at 1080p. The first generation of 1080p is quite tricky (some receive only up to 1080i and internally convert to 1080p, check AVSForums) but I don't think there will be a better home theater video standard than 1080p for quite some time.. At least until home fiber is ubiquitous..
(and for all the 1080p hatas, 1080p24 utilizing proper 3:2 pulldown should be sUPER hAWT for movie watching... And if I wanted p60, I'd boot up my HTPC...)
Just one small correction - LCOS is not LCD, it is a different technology. Liquid Crystal on Silicon. JVC and Sony are probably the two biggest providers of LCOS sets and projectors (Sony calls thiers SXRD).
I did the same this past January and arrived at the same conclusion and bought the same TV. I paid $2200.
If you can afford it, the Sony LCos is even better, but at $3300 in 50", I could not justify it.
I decided to get a large screen TV this past Christmas. Here is how I went about it.
First, I learned about the technologies. That part was easy, and obviously you don't need me to repeat all the material that's out there. I boiled it down to either LCD rear projection, DLP, or plasma. I wasn't interested in CRT rear projection due to the price, weight, and need for professional alignment / calibration, LCD because of the size limitations, or CRT because of the size limitations and weight / size.
Second, I went to stores and evaluated different TVs which use different technologies. You can read AVSforum and all of the various professional magazines about this stuff, and they will measure black levels and white levels and everything else, but really those evaluations are nearly uselless. Those sorts of technical reviews myopically focus on individual aspects of the picture and their ratings rarely consider the overall image quality. The quality of a TV picture is really subjective, so it should be evaluated that way in terms of your buying decision. It's not always easy to do this in stores, but I decided that if I was going to buy a $1500 - $3000 tv set, the retailer was either going to help me do that, or not get my business. So I brought DVDs with me of a couple of movies that I am well familiar with and which had characteristics that would help me decide. These included:
Spider Man -- Action movie with very vivid colors and tons of sweeping action, to verify color and motion reproduction.
Sin City -- Probably the most black ever in any movie, good for, obviously, measuring black levels.
The Fellowship of the Rings -- an excellent, very sharp DVD transfer, just for image quality and again because I've seen it so many times.
(Yes, I realize that DVDs will display at 480p on these sets, and HD is 720p or 1080i, but the majority of programming I'll watch on this TV will be DVDs, and DVDs are the only media I can really control. Besides, the store always has Discovery-HD or that awful Charlotte Church video fed across all their HD sets, so it's easy to compare among the HD feeds.)
Then I went to the stores. I looked at rear-projection LCD and DLP first, since they had some compelling advangages -- similarly priced and lightweight. As it turns out, neither of these was that great. Both of those suffer from poor black levels (black looks gray) and restricted viewing angles (if you're not pretty close to perpendicular to the screen it will look dim). In addition, DLP sets have a sort of shimmering optical effect that I noticed and just didn't like. The best of the rear-projection sets was the Sony KDFE42A10 LCD RP -- it definitely had the blackest blacks and the best color reproduction -- but even so, I wasn't completetely satisfied watching movies like Sin City on it, and I still hated the picture degradation when sitting more than 45 degrees off center from it. Still, it was just about good enough. But I needed to look at plasmas.
So I went and looked at plasmas, and it was just absolutely night and day. I had spent a good deal of time looking at the rear projection sets, and each usually was better than the others in one aspect. But the plasma sets were almost all universally better than the RP sets. Colors were more vivid, blacks were blacker, the picture was smoother despite the physically lower resolution [1], and there were absolutely no shimmering effects. They weren't all free of artifacts, to be sure: some of them seemed to have slower response times, and got jaggies or pixelation in fast-moving scenes in Spider Man or when the Discovery-HD feed showed waterfalls for example. The best of the pack overall turned out to be the Panasonic TH-42PX50U. It was about $8000 higher than the Sony RP-LCD, but its picture quality just couldn't be denied, and that's what I wound up purchasing.
And about plasma... I read all about burn-in and screen lifetime, and decided neither was a big issue. I was careful to keep
Lamps in LCD projection sets are rated at 5-10,000 hours, minimum. To be replacing twice a year you'd have to leave your TV on 24/7, and have really bad luck with bulb life. Average expected life, with normal viewing habits (I dunno, 4-6 hours per day) should give you 4-6 YEARS of bulb life.
Yeah, replacing bulbs sucks, and they can be in the hundreds of dollars, and yup, they're not warrantied. But 4-6 months? I'd return that TV pronto. Something's either wrong with the TV, or you're running it inside of your oven. My Sony WEGA is over a year old, with 6-8 hours viewing daily, and it's as bright as ever. I've seen 3 year old models still with their original bulbs.
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
...jaggies or pixelation in fast-moving scenes in Spider Man or when the Discovery-HD feed showed waterfalls...
Actually, that's an artifact of MPEG encoding. I watch a lot of nature shows and can't tell you how many times I've seen that in shots of running/rippling water, even on my vintage-2000 56" SDTV. On smaller or blurrier screens you don't tend to notice it as much, but on any sort of large or higher-quality display, it's painfully obvious. So if you feed an SD signal to a very high quality plasma display, it's going to stick out like you wouldn't believe. But that's just a testimony to the quality of the display more than anything. It'll faithfully reproduce all the flaws in your source material in excruciating detail. Heh...
True 1080p resolution TVs don't have 1080p inputs yet. A couple of HP displays do but they aren't displaying the full resolution properly.
Save your pennies until this fall if this feature is of value to you.
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
If you're getting blocking artifacts during periods of high motion, then it probably has 0 to do with your TV. It's more is likely to be a video compression problem. It takes more bits to represent a rapidly changing scene, and if there aren't enough bits, you get blocks. Are you watching digital cable, satellite, or cheap DVD? Some channels, especially less popular ones, tend to be sent overcompressed.
I'm guessing that a lot of people who get a plasma TV tend to upgrade to digital cable or satellite at the same time and find that HDTV compression isn't a mature technology yet.
since I don't watch TV standing up
Do you play video games? Do you play Dance Dance Revolution or other games using a floormat? Do you plan to buy a Wii console?
I have researched this question out of my own interest in the past couple of years, and let me divide your question into two parts:
1. Should I buy a DLP, LCD, or DILA? These competing display technologies all have their strengths and weaknesses. In an effort to be objective, the *general* consensus for DLP units are that they offer higher contrast and a sharper image, but at the cost of the "rainbow effect". LCD units offer more vivid, saturated color, but at the expense of higher black levels. DILA units, called SXRD when under the Sony brand, tend to share the strengths and weaknesses of LCD's. Now for my subjective opinion, I prefer an LCD because I am quite happy with the rich image, and the rainbows of DLP color wheels render them unwatchable for me. Even on DLP's with a high-speed color wheel, although the alternating red, green, and blue components of the image are not consciously visible, I found that I get a headache after watching it for 90 minutes or so. So I strongly prefer LCD's to DLP's, although this is a question on the order of Ford vs. Chevy, domestic vs. imported, Windows vs. Mac, Ginger vs. Mary Ann...
2. Should I get a flat-screen, rear projection, or front projection unit? This is another important question that you didn't explicitly consider in your post, but it's essential when you want a large-format screen. A flat-screen, which may include LCD's and plasmas, may offer the most vibrant and saturated image, but at a higher cost per inch of screen real estate than other options. Rear projection TV's pass light through an LCD, DLP, or DILA filter to form an image on the back side of a (usually) black screen. Front projection TV's can create an image of arbitrary size, depending on the projection distance, with a tradeoff between image size and quality. The Achilles heel of front projectors is ambient light - the image gets washed out when it must compete with other light sources. Projection units tend to give you more image for your money than flat screens.
After extensive research, I selected a Sanyo PLV-Z4 for my TV. It is an LCD front projector with good contrast with future-compatible features (particularly HDMI with HDCP) and an attractive price. I painted a neutral grey screen using Screen Goo. I found that the image is sparkling when the room is completely light controlled, with deep blacks and rich color. I use a screen diagonal of 84", even though the unit could be enlarged to 100" or so, because I prefer image quality over size. My living room is flooded with ambient light, so I convinced myself that I should be doing other things during daylight hours, like working or being active outside. Ambient light problem solved. 8)
What works for me may not necessarily be the best thing for you, but I've been quite happy with it. Good luck.
I've been reading with interest about the new LED DLP system that Samsung will have out soon (within a month I hear), instead of a mechanical color wheel filtering a white light, it apperently has Red/Green/Blue LED's which can switch on/off very fast, will last 20,000+ hours, and will be cooler and more efficent; (less heat, no need for a fan, etc.)
So the set will be quieter, use less power, produce less heat, be brighter, much less 'rainbow' effect, last 10x longer (no bulb to burn out, no phosphors to burn in)... and only be a bit more expensive.
Judging from my 15 year old VCR that still works perfectly, has never needed cleaning, and has never eaten a tape; Samsung makes good stuff. (only thing was the memory price fixing thing, but I can forgive them that, as that's not something blatantly obviously morally wrong)
I'm curious, have you ruled out a rear projection set? These aren't quite as sleek and stylish as the newer flat-panel formats, but they're based on reliable technology.
I've had a Toshiba 40H80 for about 6 years now. You've probably seen them, they were used in a lot of Best Buys as early HD demo models. At the time I got it mainly because it was the most affordable true HDTV I could find, and despite reading a few mixed reviews online mine has been great. I've been watching actual HD broadcasts since about 2002 or 2003 and they look great, whether the signal is native 720p or downconverted 1080i.
The gotchas with rear projection sets are that the individual guns can become misaligned after moving the set around, but I've never had too much trouble realigning them. Game consoles have long warned about playing video games on projection sets, but with modern games it's very rare for any part of the screen to be continuously be showing the exact same image. I've seen no burn in over 6 years of light-to-moderate N64 and Gamecube play.
The ultimate plays for Madden 2006
After doing a ton of research on this topic, my friend ended up getting the 60" Sony SXRD (LCoS), currently $3300 at Fry's, $3400 when he bought it a few months back. Good picture and viewing angle, no wobulation (unlike the DLP sets), the only real ding against it was that it didn't accept a 1080p signal on any input. (Everything gets upconverted to 1080p.)
The set looks great for HD stuff, but he's got Dish Network, and non-HD stuff is nearly unwatchable between the upconversion and the giant compression artifacts.
The original poster really should be asking the AVS Forum and not Slashdot about this...
JRjr
and I've been very happy with it. It's fairly basic as projectors go, but it does the job well enough for me, and although I can see the rainbow effect it doesn't bother me.
Best way to demo the rainbow effect is to get a small patch of light colour surrounded by a lot of dark. Then you can look rapidly left to right and as your eyes move you'll get the different R,G and B parts of that light spot. The effects are similar to mouse trails.
I think whether or not the rainbow effect bothers you could depend on the way you watch films (and you won't know that until you think about it next time you're watching one). If your eyes are constantly darting around the screen picking up detail from all over, then it could be a problem. OTOH, if you just stare at the middle of the screen and pick up other stuff with peripheral vision then it probably won't be. It isn't a problem for me at all and I'm in the latter category.
FWIW, the X2 is plugged into a Media Centre PC with the sound wired into a standard hifi. Surround sound is something I plan to get eventually (a friend brought a surround system round for the Ringathon I hosted) but it's low priority in my life at the moment.
On the projector front though, the only thing I'd do differently is to get a 16/9 projector instead of a 4/3. It's mainly for watching films, and the horizontal stripes are more annoying than the vertical stripes I'd get with a 4/3 show on a 16/9.
yes, but we're boycotting Sony this year, aren't we?
Like the parent poster I also bought a Sony Grand Wega Rear Pro (in my case the 42" model), I have been very happy with my purchase.
When comparing diffent screens I found was that unless I wanted to spend at least double the price of the Wega there wasn't any real increase in picture quality by going to plasma or LCD and even at double the cost the quality wasn't THAT much better IMHO.
I also found that most plasmas and LCD's looked really poor on SD interlaced content, as the parent poster mentioned SD (especially cable/sat) content looks good on the Wega. Most dealers will either show HD content or progressive scan DVD's, when evaluating screens put on the crappiest interlaced content you can find as that is what you're likely to be watching a good deal of the time.
As far as general picture quality goes, CRT's can offer better picture quality and if you were looking at 32" screens this could be an option. Thing to remember is that no one makes good CRT's anymore. The good CRT's I saw had been sitting on a showroom floor for over 12 months and were also more expensive then the 42" Wega. IMHO, the greater emersive effect of a larger screen is well worth the slight drop in quality.
I was worried about viewing angle and brightness on the Wega but found that the viewing angle doesn't even come close to being a problem in my lounge room and the brightless level is fine (I don't even have curtains). Ironically my wife complained at first that the Wega was too bright when the lights were out.
Bad points...
The blank level are not black enough for me, this appears to be a problem on all LCD's that I looked at (even the really expensive ones). The screen is somewhat susceptible to lip sync errors, by this I mean that there is about a 1 frame video delay on the Wega (which is not noticable) but if there is another 1 frame video delay upsteam from the broadcaster then you might notice it. The lip sync thing can irritate me (I work in broadcasting so I'm pretty fussy) but my wife can never tell.
Australian? Join EFA
What's wrong with the old fashioned tech?
Hi, anyone up to date with the availability of OLED TVs? The promise is great, the colours are magnificent, the power consumption a nuclear plant or three less than of all other technologies (especially CRT and Plasma), and it's the flattest technology available. However, I still have no firm availaibility date for those.
Cheers, g.a.g
Hurricane Application Group, Dept of Meteorology Control, Ministry of Proactive Defense
Resolution is important -- the current mainstream HDTVs only do 720P. They advertise support for 1080i, but they do it at 720p. Pixels squish and "fuzzy pixels" (is this what you saw? Might have been due to a NON-NATIVE screen resolution)interlacing... yum!
Be sceptical of the media used to demo TV's... if you were viewing the same media on 2 TVs that support different resolutions, one of these TVs has an artificial resolution. You would need 2 streams of media for the same content, but different resolutions, to make a blind judgement on quality.
I waited, and was not planning to go HDTV this year: HD DVDs were not settled yet, the HDCP fiasco, little content, and the fact that these things will get better and cheaper. Also note that HD supports 1080p, and that is the ultimate ceiling for the current spec: anything you buy today that can't handle 1080p, will be obsolete in just a few years. And if you think it doesn't matter for 1080i - it does. 1080i looks "perfect" on a 1080p screen, while on a 720p screen a 1080i image looks fuzzy.
I was going to wait... that is until I saw the Costco deal on the Sceptre 42" Naga LCD:
1080p, HDMI/HDCP, VGA, DVI, component, 2 tuner inputs....plenty of inputs, screen is GREAT... $2200 shipped. This is not in-store gasp!) so I researched it and bought it online, sight-unseen (I was a nervous wreck). NOTE that if you don't like it you can cart it to the Costco store (NO RETURN SHIPPING OR RESTOCKING FEE). Frickin sweet!
As with any HD model you consider, you want to check the forums the HD community has on that model. Learn what to look for, and know in advance what bothers other people. There are flaws in the Sceptre (cheap plastic finish... if that's my only complaint, it's not a complaint...). This model's HD tuner outputs to 2 speakers... no digital out. This isn't a problem for me as my tuner is the Comcast HD box (which routes 5.1 to my amp) but this bothers some people in the forums.
There are other 1080p screens out there... the next cheapest though is at least $4800. If your budget limits you to 720P screens, don't rule out the Sceptre. I have a media PC hooked up to it also, and I'm composing this from an odd vertical angle (sittng on the floor 6' away, below the center) and it looks fine.
This is going to be one of those TVs that changes the market. Everyone is going to have to drop HD prices faster, and shove last year's sub-1080p screens out the door discounted.
Thanks for all the replies (I'm the original poster/asker).
AVS Forum has been recommended, but that is a flashy, blinky place with confusing instructions for newbies.
I spent 10 minutes carefully explaining (after registering and getting the email response) and then was confronted with some sort of error message. Uh-huh, Okaaay.
The following is what I tried to send:
http://ask.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/05/21/0
Since you guys are apparently the experts, well, here I am with possibly dumb questions.
I've ruled out plasma due to cost so it's now down to DLP and LCD. But wait, there's LCD projection also (Sony, I think, maybe others)! I'm still confused.
My application will be for a smaller room and I'm thinking that 42" would be a decent size. I don't need an internal HD tuner as there aren't over-the-air HD broadcasts in my area. I'd like to be able to output my computer's display (I do CAD work often, but usually it's just email and browsing) to the TV with a PIP of whatever is being broadcast.
Having looked at DLP options, I am impressed with the size, technology and relative cost but the "millions of tiny moving mirrors" and the limited vertical viewing angle worries me. LCD seems to be a better choice in that regard, but I find that they are more expensive. I also have fairly high-end LCD computer monitors and have noticed dead pixels recently.
In addition, I'm in Canada. Model numbers are not always the same, so I think many of us get confused when doing comparisons.