|
Wilford Cutlery posted:So Rakuten, formerly buy.com, has the Sony w900a for $1,021 today: http://www.rakuten.com/prod/sony-bravia-kdl-55w900a-55-240hz-1080p-3d-internet-led-hdtv/249752861.html drat, that's pretty much the best deal I've ever seen. I got mine for 1800 and thought it was a goddamn steal.
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 14:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 19:12 |
|
|
LorneReams posted:drat, that's pretty much the best deal I've ever seen. I got mine for 1800 and thought it was a goddamn steal. I ordered a used one the same night from them, $1,059 shipped.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 16:54
|
|
|
Completely technologically retarded goon here. I've had the same box tv since 2002 and am looking for a wall-mounted tv about 48-50 inches or so but I need someone to deliver it and set it up. I don't need a SMART tv. Am I stuck with Best Buy for this?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 18:00
|
|
|
jcschick posted:
TheGoatFeeder posted:Read the last few pages to try and get upto speed, but just going to ask my question now. Does your sound system have ARC? Saves looking for a remote.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 18:15
|
|
|
So does anyone have suggestions on where to buy a TV online in Germany?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 18:35
|
|
|
Wilford Cutlery posted:I ordered a used one the same night from them, $1,059 shipped. Well, that didn't last long: EPMUSA posted:Hello,
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 19:04
|
|
|
Wilford Cutlery posted:Well, that didn't last long: That's an especially odd email since you ordered a Sony rather than Samsung TV.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 19:09
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:That's an especially odd email since you ordered a Sony rather than Samsung TV. Yeah, I asked about that and he apologized for the typo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 21:36
|
|
|
$300 to deliver and set up/mount tv per Best Buy?? Seriously?! gently caress that poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 22:07
|
|
|
Mounting a tv isn't hard. Find any yelp reviewed handyman and they will come out and do it. But figure out what you're going to do with the wires first before you call them so they can quote you accurately.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 03:24
|
|
|
So it sounds like the general consensus around here is that UHD's aren't worth it yet. I'm in the market for a new 60-65" Samsung and it looks like the price dropped on their UHD's a bit since the 2014 lineup was announced. Are the other features in their 8500 or 9000 series worth paying a bit of a premium even if UHD content doesn't begin showing up for another couple of years? I guess the way I'm looking at it, it's been about 7 years since I purchased my last tv and I'm not anticipating having to go larger than 65" anytime soon given the size of the room I'll be putting it in. I'd be mad at myself if I spent $2000 on a decent 1080p tv and then 2 years from now 4K content is available and I have to go shopping for another tv. I'd rather just enjoy the benefits of higher definition and better local dimming. I'm also thinking I should go check out these new curved displays to see what all the fuss is about or if they're really just gimmicky.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2014 07:10
|
|
|
Sony 55w900a for $899: http://hotdealselectronics.shop.rakuten.com/p/sony-bravia-kdl-55w900a-55-240hz-1080p-3d-internet-led-hdtv/249752861.html Check the shipping!
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2014 21:06
|
|
|
What a meticulously maintained website.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2014 22:40
|
|
|
uhhh...
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 16:08
|
|
|
I need a 60" 1080p tv with high refresh rate, low input lag, no glare screen, and good picture quality with high contrast. 3D and all that other junk is not really important. Whats the best TV under $2k, preferably under $1.5k?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 16:39
|
|
|
Just to update on my previous posts about running cables through the wall, I followed someone's advice and bought some fish tape from Lowe's. There was conduit run through the wall already for the builders' cable and after some effort I was able to get the fish tape through the outlet and conduit out the other side, then run a 25" HDMI cable through and hook everything up. No more visible wires! The roll of fish tape exploded and almost took my eye out so that was fun. I also had to manhandle the wire and cable far more than I was comfortable but whatever, it worked.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 20:07
|
|
|
MMD3 posted:So it sounds like the general consensus around here is that UHD's aren't worth it yet. I'm in the market for a new 60-65" Samsung and it looks like the price dropped on their UHD's a bit since the 2014 lineup was announced. Don't buy a 4k TV just yet. Its not worth the money yet. The price will come down a lot over the next couple years. If you want something cutting edge get an OLED screen. I think they look better then the 4ks anyways.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 07:39
|
|
|
And bonus, since it's only going to last like 3 years by then 4k will be cheaper when you need to replace it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 15:15
|
|
|
There are RUMORS that Sony is going to continue making the w900a at least into summer since it's been so popular. As far as I'm concerned, as long as you are fine for the 55" size, it's drat near the perfect TV right now and if you are in the market and can snag one, do so.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 15:45
|
|
|
matrim1985 posted:Don't buy a 4k TV just yet. Its not worth the money yet. The price will come down a lot over the next couple years. If you want something cutting edge get an OLED screen. I think they look better then the 4ks anyways. I actually checked out a curved LG OLED last night and was surprised to find that even at 1080p it was like a $6000 display at 55" when the 65" Sony & Samsung 4k's were $4000. It was really really beautiful, but I'm not sure who's going to be buying them when the larger 4K tv's sitting next to it are 33% cheaper. So if I want to look for a 65" 1080p display that is at the sweet spot of value and performance which models should I be looking at from Samsung and Sony? If our budget was $3000-3500 for a 4K tv then how far can we get for $2000-2500 for a 1080p display?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 17:34
|
|
|
MMD3 posted:I actually checked out a curved LG OLED last night and was surprised to find that even at 1080p it was like a $6000 display at 55" when the 65" Sony & Samsung 4k's were $4000. I am also looking for a 65" TV. I would like to take a look at the W850A, but I'm not sure of the quality. I currently have a KDL-46HX850, which is decent but I want something bigger now that I've moved into my house with a much larger room. I do occasionally play video games. Is that still a decent model?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 19:46
|
|
|
I've 99 percent made up my mind already, but just to get an official opinion from the thread: Is there a good reason to buy a smart TV vs. a dumb TV + chromecast combo? The latter option is cheaper and every review I've seen of the chromecast says it just straight up makes your TV smart. e. and I have an android phone, too Stealth Tiger fucked around with this message at 17:47 on Apr 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2014 17:34
|
|
|
If you are gonna use Netflix and streaming stuff like Plex from a PC get a roku. Chromecast is neat but not nearly as great as a roku.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2014 17:51
|
|
|
Stealth Tiger posted:I've 99 percent made up my mind already, but just to get an official opinion from the thread: Is there a good reason to buy a smart TV vs. a dumb TV + chromecast combo? The latter option is cheaper and every review I've seen of the chromecast says it just straight up makes your TV smart. Do not make a choice on a TV based on smart features, for or against and with or without. Most TVs don't come in a SmartTV and non-SmartTV version with everything else being the same so you can't directly compare them. Buy a TV based on image quality, size, and price and ignore whether or not it has SmartTV features.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2014 17:53
|
|
|
The best TVs are Smart anyway, but it depends what your budget is.Stealth Tiger posted:I've 99 percent made up my mind already, but just to get an official opinion from the thread: Is there a good reason to buy a smart TV vs. a dumb TV + chromecast combo? The latter option is cheaper and every review I've seen of the chromecast says it just straight up makes your TV smart. You don't use up an HDMI slot. The TV has more horsepower. And there's presumably some kind of effect on your phone's battery. Neither is a real big deal though. The only thing of significance would be that a Smart TV probably has more services.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2014 20:41
|
|
|
Stealth Tiger posted:I've 99 percent made up my mind already, but just to get an official opinion from the thread: Is there a good reason to buy a smart TV vs. a dumb TV + chromecast combo? The latter option is cheaper and every review I've seen of the chromecast says it just straight up makes your TV smart. Are there still TV's worth buying without smart functionality? You have to go really bargain basement to find anything without smart functionality.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 06:52
|
|
|
NihilismNow posted:Are there still TV's worth buying without smart functionality? You have to go really bargain basement to find anything without smart functionality. The middle tier is still full of models that come in both Smart and UnSmart. Upper tier is all Smart now though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 14:34
|
|
|
Smart should not be the desiding factore for getting a TV. How many inches, and picture quality are the most important things. Pay attention to the black levels, watch for brightness around the edges of the screen, how true to life are the colors (is flesh over saturated?). You can calabrate a TV when you get home but only so far.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 16:10
|
|
|
Hey guys, I'm looking to get a TV in the 40-46" range for up to like 600$ or so. 3d and smart are complete nonfactors in my decision, and I won't be using a stereo system at least to start. At the moment I'm looking at the Samsung UNEH5300 and the Vizio M401i-A3. My use case is about a 5-6 foot viewing distance (eyeballing it), no gaming, just a lot of TV dramas and the usual junk streamed via a Roku or Fire TV or whatever using plex. Are there other models I should consider? If not, how much of a difference am I going to see with the Vizio 120hz vs the (I'm guessing?) better picture quality on the Samsung.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 16:23
|
|
|
I've got a Vizio E320-A1 that the light comes on when you press power, but the display no longer powers up. You have to unplug it to get the front line to turn back off. Took off the back cover and am not seeing anything obvious like swollen caps or a blown fuse. Does this sound more like a mainboard problem or a power supply problem?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 04:33
|
|
|
I'm looking to get a new TV to replace the pawnshop Samsung 32'' I got like three years ago. When I hook my PS4/Xbox 360 to it, it displays that it is showing 1920x1080 but I am 99% sure that it is only a 720p tv. I don't have the model number of it on hand but I paid the pawnshop $200 for it so I'm fairly confident it's not a true HD tv. I want to upgrade to a real 1080p TV. I prefer the Samsung brand, as those have been my last two TV purchases and they've always worked really well. My budget is $500. Screen size isn't so important; I sit fairly close to the screen when playing games. I want to put the cpa on screen size at 40'', though smaller is preferable. Does anyone have any suggestions?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 17:18
|
|
|
How close are you sitting to it? I bet you won't be able to notice a difference between 1080p and 720p on that small of a screen.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 17:41
|
|
|
sellouts posted:How close are you sitting to it? I bet you won't be able to notice a difference between 1080p and 720p on that small of a screen. I'm sitting maybe three-four feet away
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 18:05
|
|
|
Just about any TV sold in the past few years will deal with 1080p signals just fine, even if it's actually 1366x768 (which has basically supplanted 'true' 1280x720 panels). http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/ is a fairly exhaustive set of test images. Use your PS4 to test your TV; even though there's an offline set so you don't have to have Gold and use IE, the 360's scaler makes a mess of anything high-res. Note also that the TV's image processing (motion interpolation, overused sharpening, less than 4:4:4 chrome subsampling) can damage your picture as well. sellouts posted:How close are you sitting to it? I bet you won't be able to notice a difference between 1080p and 720p on that small of a screen. Neither light nor human vision works the way any thought process that would produce this comment would require them to. Most of those distance charts are garbage because they assume your eye works like, and maps cleanly to, the pixels on your LCD (which is such a flawed assumption that it is not even wrong) and discount the visual cortex's ability to resolve line thicknesses and angles far narrower/subtler than the distribution of photosensors on the retina suggests. dont be mean to me fucked around with this message at 18:20 on Apr 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 18:16
|
|
|
HonorableTB posted:I'm looking to get a new TV to replace the pawnshop Samsung 32'' I got like three years ago. When I hook my PS4/Xbox 360 to it, it displays that it is showing 1920x1080 but I am 99% sure that it is only a 720p tv. I don't have the model number of it on hand but I paid the pawnshop $200 for it so I'm fairly confident it's not a true HD tv. I want to upgrade to a real 1080p TV. I prefer the Samsung brand, as those have been my last two TV purchases and they've always worked really well. My budget is $500. Screen size isn't so important; I sit fairly close to the screen when playing games. I want to put the cpa on screen size at 40'', though smaller is preferable. Does anyone have any suggestions? The TV is telling you what signal it's getting, not what it's displaying. Most 720p TVs accept a 1080p signal, they just scale it. Anyway, you probably want a Samsung FH5000. It only comes in 39", but it has a really nice price. http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-UN39F...=Samsung+FH5000 There's also the F5000 series. They come in a bunch of different sizes, but both the 32" and 40" currently cost more than the FH5000. They're 2013 models so stock is running out and you end up with 3rd party vendor prices. http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Delectronics&field-keywords=Samsung%20F5000 sellouts posted:How close are you sitting to it? I bet you won't be able to notice a difference between 1080p and 720p on that small of a screen. Even so, matching the console's output and letting it do the work is better.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 18:19
|
|
|
Sir Unimaginative posted:Just about any TV sold in the past few years will deal with 1080p signals just fine, even if it's actually 1366x768 (which has basically supplanted 'true' 1280x720 panels). Thanks for the calibration site. That's something I've always neglected to do, because I have no idea how it works and to me it's always just been "looks good enough, let's look at some pretty lights" and now that I'm looking at putting down some serious money on a TV, I want a quality product and the best performance for my money. Before, I was in college and didn't really care but now I'm out of school with a good job and a salary that lets me do things beyond hoping I will have enough money to make next month's rent so I can afford to be choosy now. Aphrodite posted:The TV is telling you what signal it's getting, not what it's displaying. Most 720p TVs accept a 1080p signal, they just scale it. Thanks for the suggestions! I'll definitely take a look at these. My grandmother had a huge 60+ inch Samsung tv and my god that thing looked glorious when playing PS3 stuff on it. Everything looked impossibly smooth compared to everything else I'd seen. It was such a difference that my brain actually had to work on processing that kind of input because I had literally never seen anything that nice before on a television. Edit 2: Sweet Jesus the FH5000 is $378, that's a ludicrously good price HonorableTB fucked around with this message at 18:23 on Apr 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 18:19
|
|
|
Sir Unimaginative posted:Neither light nor human vision works the way any thought process that would produce this comment would require them to. Most of those distance charts are garbage because they assume your eye works like, and maps cleanly to, the pixels on your LCD (which is such a flawed assumption that it is not even wrong) and discount the visual cortex's ability to resolve line thicknesses and angles far narrower/subtler than the distribution of photosensors on the retina suggests. Cool, do you have any sources or articles on this? I've seen those viewing distance/perceivable resolution charts referenced so many times I've always taken them as valid.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 18:28
|
|
|
I'm looking to get a bigger TV because right now I have a 32" and my viewing distance is 8ft and television and movies work fine at this distance but trying to play video games of any kind causes me to strain my eyes and gives me a headache. All the size calculators suggest 55"-60" for 8ft distance but what I'm trying to find is the minimum size I can get away with to eliminate the need to strain my eyes rather than to get the optimal percieved pixel density or whatever. Is there a calculator or science to finding the right size for this? If it's any help, right now I have to scoot up to like 3-4ft away to be comfortable. I guess you could maybe extrapolate a good size for 8ft from that? StickFigs fucked around with this message at 18:56 on Apr 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 18:53
|
|
|
My viewing distance is 8 feet and my old 46" Samsung ln46a650 seemed to do just fine. I only upgraded to a new samsung F8500 50" plasma because I wanted a newer panel.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 19:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 19:12 |
|
|
My stance is always buy as biggest as you can afford & fit because you will always wish you have gone bigger.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 19:57
|
|