GolfHos

I know this has been talked about before. At least I think it has. We are remodeling and my splurge is a new TV.

Here are the parameters: don't want to spend more than $1500 and not smaller than 32" (prefer "40 or better)

I know you all know your stuff and have some TV's that fit that range so I'm interested in hearing your opinions.

does it have to be wall mounted?   $1500 is kind of the funny # right now in the game.  staying under it with a wall mount doesnt get that much (in 1080p screen size).  staying under it with a a microdisplay can get you a lot more screen.

what do you plan to use it for (ratio of TV, movies, games, computer monitor, etc)
if you use it for TV will most of it be 'still tv' like network shows , or fast motion TV like sports
is your room low light or high light ?
how far away do you plan to sit from the device ?

etc etc etc

We are not a heavy TV watching family. Doesn't have to wall mount but that is a nice option, no gaming, TV shows and sports both, I would say the light will be moderate. Been looking at the Sony Bravia or Vizio comparable at Costco. Didn't think about Plasma before reading a comparison. Now I'm more confused than ever.

if light isn't that extreme and you aren't stuck with a wallmount i would definitely at least "look into"   microdisplay  lcds , lcos,  or dlps.   you can easily move into the 55" 1080p range instead of probably 42" , maybe 46" at most on a wallmount unit (at least for a name brand.... which is important if you care aobut getting in home service on a service plan)

for clarity, a 55" vs a 42" will offer about 70% more screen size.   :)
 

Is the Bravia a microdisplay? Or is that another animal all together.  Clearly I'm stupid about this stuff. Last TV I bought was 17 years ago. Sony. Paid $60 from my room mate

bravia is just the 'flag' under which sony sells its 'best' hdtvs right now.  like the 'wega' tag of years ago.  it is not specific to a specific 'architecture' or technology.   although, they certainly make many* more models of flat panel lcds than  microdisplays

So you are saying, microdisplay lcd will give me the best bang for my buck?

not at all.  i'm saying microdisplay anything will give you FAR more 1080p screen size in the budget you are in.    i would lean towards microDLP or microLCOS  over microLCD  if you plan to use the TV for sports. $.02

Okay - thanks for the input. I will do a little more research.

ps,  if you go under 40", you better be sitting about 6, maybe 7 feet away to get all the detail.  sitting further away unless you have above 20/20 vision you'll be losing detail.

Steggie, aske's been very helpful to me on this same subject.  Here's what it comes down to for me:

Feature set, resolution and screen size for the same money - DLP > LCD/Plasma.  It's pretty tough to wall mount DLP although it is possible.  For me and my budget DLP made more sense.  I'm getting a very good quality 1080p DLP at 56" for just over $2K.  This just isn't possible with LCD/Plasma.

Plus wall mount puts the display another 12-18" away from the seating area in my living room and, as aske mentioned, every foot makes a difference.

Having said all that, if you're not going to invest in HD at the receiver/DVD player/programming source then there's really no point in buying a HD display.

I'm actually looking for a flat screen to wall mount in the bedroom.  From the little bit of research I've done it's very tough to get 40" or greater in LCD/Plasma at that price point unless you're agnostic about resolution and/or having true HD (it sounds as if you are and basically so am I in that room).  I'd be interested in knowing which model you settle on.  As I do more research I'll pass it along also.

(http://www.duncans.tv/images/Texas-Instruments-Believe.jpg)


Serving no purpose.  Going away.

I agree.  I went with plasma because the picture quality was noticeably (to me anyway) better - but its not for those trying to stick to such a budget.  I was advantaged enough (no kids) to be able to shell out the extra cash, not everyone is.


But I shall disagree here.  If you plan on getting significant use out of the display, get HD.  If you don't get HD (1080i at least), the thing becomes significantly less useful in the future.  If you really don't need a new display - then don't buy one.  Getting a 'new' non-HD display right now as your main viewing display would be foolish IMO.  For secondary purposes it would be ok, but for your main display - get HD, even if you don't need it yet.

Rick, I didn't necessarily mean Steggie should go buy a SD display (which is very tough (impossible??) to do at that size in flat panel anyway).  What I mean is that buying a HD display without having any HD programming is a waste of money.  The picture quality is pretty bad especially as you get up beyond 40".  I made the CC guy put their whole wall on a DirecTV SD channel today and pretty much none of the displays impressed at all.  Granted, there are always SD channels you're going to want to watch but at least it's not all of them. 

So... if you buy a $1500 HD display you should at least pony up for HD sat/cab if not some sort of HD media too.  JMO.  YMMV. 

Regarding going cheap...  I'm looking at a 37" 720p Vizio (http://www.circuitcity.com/ssm/Vizio-37-LCD-HDTV-VX37L/sem/rpsm/oid/185206/catOid/-12869/rpem/ccd/productDetail.do) for the bedroom.  $800 at CC.  Good enough for what it's for and leaves me $$$ left over to get another HD receiver for the bedroom.  It's definitely not the be-all-end-all unit but it'll do.

I very much agree with this.

We have a Sony Bravia 48" LCD.

A device like this only serves to prove just how crappy the SD picture quality really is.  The image imperfections are amplified...what you didn't notice before will just bother the hell out of you now. 

HD is just SOOOOO much better.

Getting a 48" Bravia to do SD is a bit like buying a Maserati Grandturismo to do the kid's carpool.

BTW, 48 inches is HUGE.  We have it in a large room that is something like 20X30 with most seating ~6 feet away, and it still overwhelms the room.   It seemed so puny at the store next to all the big ol' 50+ inchers...but I truly should have got something closer to 40 inches.

 :o :o :o [sm_shock]

no way. 

:)

I dunno.  Six feet is pretty close.  I think 40" might be about right.

Unless...

(http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/6/62/MartyFeldman.jpg)

no.  i've just never heard someone buy an hdtv, sit it down, and THEN say... "i wish i'd gone smaller"

Gotcha.

Sounds like he needs room behind the couch to hold copulation chautauquas.  Sorta like Beyond Thunderdome but without that bitch who ruined Ike's life. 

ROFL (+1)

behind the couch is our game table, where we play strip scrabble, and then the piano, then the dog's area, then the bowling alley...

 ;)