That is considerably cheaper....interesting...they charge extra for a lift gate, but you get Free Curb Side delivery....does that mean if you don't pay for the lift gate they just push it out the back? lol! Just curious because my home theater Berklines I bought had the same issue...no lift gate....they just pushed them from the back of the open semi into the middle of the asphalt road and basically left.....luckily no harm was done to them, but I imagine a TV might not fair quite as good lol!

Here, try this link. It's for a tad less that the 3200 you have there....

BTW, I have this link cause that's where I intend to buy it from, not that I make anything from it....

Seggers

https://www.hometheaterstore.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=WD73835


Weird that your link is for hometheaterstore, but when I click on it it changes to modia.com. Hometheaterstore is where I almost bought my 73833 (they also have a retail store near me). Additionally, when I look up the 835 at your link (modia) it has a price of $3800 (not $3200)

Weird that your link is for hometheaterstore, but when I click on it it changes to modia.com. Hometheaterstore is where I almost bought my 73833 (they also have a retail store near me). Additionally, when I look up the 835 at your link (modia) it has a price of $3800 (not $3200)

when i click on the link it takes me to the hometheaterstore and the price is $2899

Jim HTPC what were they showing on the sets there... The one I saw was nice and clean....So im confused as to why they look like that. Is it possable they are not the finished product or lower software or missing software ?

Just trying to figure it all out with why the sets look bad at CEDIA.....:confused:

This is the time for vendors to show off their products to the industry professionals who are selling their stuff. Everyone has a chance and most video displays are calibrated. Even Samsung had the 950 calibrated. Mitsubishi was displaying their standard looped video from Mitsubishi. It was not a Blu-ray off a player. All sets had the sparklies. If you have seen the SilverStar Screen and seen sparklies, then you will see them on these sets too. If you don't know what I am talking about. Don't try to pursue it as it will ruin your experience as that will be all you look at (look for).

If you don't mind sparklies aka screen door effect, then this TV may make you happy. I have sensitive eyes that can see the RBE and sparklies and to me it is annoying.

Can I watch a movie on the Silver Star with sparklies, sure. It's noticeable on light scenes/outdoor daylight than when it's dark. When it's dark I don't see them.

There are different strokes for different folks. My opinion is this should have come out last year. The LCD sets are becoming the better picture choice especially when you factor in cost of ownership.

In my opinion the Sharp AQUA "Limited Edition", Samsung 950, and Sony XBR8 sets were the best for LCD. One might even go out on a limb and say the gap between the Pioneer Kuro and LCD is very small. JVC has a 20mm thick LCD. It's only going to get better with OLED. Sooner than later I hope.

when i click on the link it takes me to the hometheaterstore and the price is $2899

How very strange.

The hometheaterstore link shows up in the address bar for a moment, but then it changes to modia.com and takes me to their home page, where I then have to search for the 835.

Even when I just type in hometheaterstore.com in my browser it takes me to modia.com.

If a do a google search for hometheaterstore and click on that link, it also takes me to modia.com

Wonder why.

when i click on the link it takes me to the hometheaterstore and the price is $2899

I did my homework before I went there today. I saw from searching on Nextag the price at Modia was $2999. Plus $247 tax. Of course the store has it listed for $3599. At first the manager semi-denied this lower price, so I had to show him on the internet. He said he would match that price because he had to. He did mention a delivery and setup charge would be added. But didn't say how much. There is something to be said about buying local, but I have found the cheapest price at digitalcraze.com... $3049... shipped.

http://digitalcraze.com/Details.asp?ProductID=3305

I have not seen Kuro blacks, but we turned off all lights in the showroom and it looked pretty good in dark scenes. I think this new dark chip 4 will make it look better than some competitors, but maybe not quite as good as a Kuro.

I think Home Theater Store was too generic a name, and made it hard to find with internet searches.
But Modia? Sounds like it should have Com in front of it ;-) Think I could've come up with something better.

I did my homework before I went there today. I saw from searching on Nextag the price at Modia was $2999. Plus $247 tax. Of course the store has it listed for $3599. At first the manager semi-denied this lower price, so I had to show him on the internet. He said he would match that price because he had to. He did mention a delivery and setup charge would be added. But didn't say how much. There is something to be said about buying local, but I have found the cheapest price at digitalcraze.com... $3049... shipped.

http://digitalcraze.com/Details.asp?ProductID=3305

I have not seen Kuro blacks, but we turned off all lights in the showroom and it looked pretty good in dark scenes. I think this new dark chip 4 will make it look better than some competitors, but maybe not quite as good as a Kuro.

I think Home Theater Store was too generic a name, and made it hard to find with internet searches.
But Modia? Sounds like it should have Com in front of it ;-) Think I could've come up with something better.

i was quoted $3050 +taxes for the WD73835 at tweeter

More confirmation of the $7K price for the 65"
http://bitstream.soundandvisionmag.com/blog/2008/09/mitsubishi-anno.html

Personally I don't get what people are hoping to see here. There is really not much this has different than an LED lit DLP, if anything.

Wider gamut is no real benefit when all your source material is in a much narrower gamut that any set can render and in fact unless you have a setting to react more like a normal gamut set can truly wreck color accuracy and skin tones.

You are not magically going to get better scene contrast or blacks.

In the end this is just another light source and for DLP usage, shares it's characteristics with LED backlighting which doesn't seem to be enough to save rear projection (which I don't even see in stores anymore).

How very strange.

The hometheaterstore link shows up in the address bar for a moment, but then it changes to modia.com and takes me to their home page, where I then have to search for the 835.

Even when I just type in hometheaterstore.com in my browser it takes me to modia.com.

If a do a google search for hometheaterstore and click on that link, it also takes me to modia.com

Wonder why.

very very strange
i just clicked on the link again and once again i was taken to hometheaterstore web site
and the tv is still $2899

Jim HTPC, do you mean silk screen effect? screen door effect is something else, usually associated with plasmas, where you can see the pixel structure if you stand close enough to the screen. I think what you're talking about is silk screen effect, where you see the texture of the physical screen itself. It has to do with the type of screen used and not the display technology (dlp, lcos, whatever).

Did you check your computer for spyware? You could be hijacked and whenever you try that web address it takes you to modia instead.

i was quoted $3050 +taxes for the WD73835 at tweeter

Digital Craze in no tax ... $3049 period... including shipping

very very strange
i just clicked on the link again and once again i was taken to hometheaterstore web site
and the tv is still $2899

Modia IS Home Theater Store... they have changed their name recently, So all old links will be redirected.

Maybe you need to clear your cache and cookies in your browser if it is still pointing to the old name.

Jim HTPC, do you mean silk screen effect? screen door effect is something else, usually associated with plasmas, where you can see the pixel structure if you stand close enough to the screen. I think what you're talking about is silk screen effect, where you see the texture of the physical screen itself. It has to do with the type of screen used and not the display technology (dlp, lcos, whatever).

There isn't a technical term for it hence words like sparklies, etc. Take a look at it and you will see it. One of the reasons I recommend Black Diamond over Silver Star screens. I believe Vutec is working on a lower gain Silver Star Screen to reduce what I call "sparklies". With Da Lite, Stewart, Vutec, and Screen Innovations all coming out with either new or refined products, it is a good time to have a front projector until OLED creates a 129" diagonal display. Should that ever happen, say goodbye home theater projectors and screens. This of course is my humble opinion.

Please do yourself a favor, and take a look. Like I said, if the "sparklies" doesn't affect you, then it will be a good purchase... maybe not on price, but on the product itself. If you are not immune to "sparklies"... look elsewhere.

There isn't a technical term for it hence words like sparklies, etc.

What you're describing sounds kind of like silk screen effect, but I wonder if it's not a bit of laser speckle. Mitsubishi claims to have solved that, but your post makes me wonder. Curious to see one in person.

The new Sharp RGB LED 65" with 150%+ Color Gamut and one million to one CR is rumored to be $10-$15K MSRP but the same patience eventually rewards one.

I'm curious, what Sharp 65" are you talking about ?

More confirmation of the $7K price for the 65"
http://bitstream.soundandvisionmag.com/blog/2008/09/mitsubishi-anno.html.....


that "confirmation" comes in an article that mentions an upcoming high end $10K 65" pioneer model???????? of which there is no such actual product. So take that article for the errors it may or not contain...........


they probably meant the just announced panasonic th65vx100 monitor due in jan 2009 for $10K. but shows how they can get their "facts" wrong.

I'm curious, what Sharp 65" are you talking about ?

The XS1's (http://gizmodo.com/5045184/sharp-xs1-flagship-ultrathin-lcds-and-d65u--d85u-little-friends-headed-for-us)

I'm curious, what Sharp 65" are you talking about ?The ones that are 10k Euro. :p

Weird that your link is for hometheaterstore, but when I click on it it changes to modia.com. Hometheaterstore is where I almost bought my 73833 (they also have a retail store near me). Additionally, when I look up the 835 at your link (modia) it has a price of $3800 (not $3200)

when i click on the link it takes me to the hometheaterstore and the price is $2899

Stew,

Maybe the IE cache needs to be emptied? I tried my link in your reply and got to where I thought it should be.

I've attached a screen shot.

Seggers

Edit: Very odd. I just empited all my cookies and files, shut down IE6 and brought it back up. Went into google and typed in hometheaterstore, clicked on the first link in the results page.

It took me to the store, where I searched for the 73835 and got to the same page in the link. No redirection...

Actually, you can get a TH-65PZ850U for $5200 bucks (please, don't ask me where, do a SEARCH, isn't hard to find where !).

Mitsubishi needs to do a LOT better on price part.

FYI.... Laservue ad on Youtube. Click Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AQfdb6prrY)

Dan

This thing will have to have the best picture on the market to justify that kind of pricing, even if it can be had on the street with a healthy discount.

That said, maybe it will. I'll keep my fingers crossed. If it does, it may succeed, and then the prices could come down, and the 73" may just be affordable in a couple of years, or, hope against hope, they come out with an 80" set. Now that would be at the top of my wish list.

For now, I'm glad I stopped waiting and pulled the trigger on the 67" Sammy LED DLP back in July. There's just no comparison on the market for performance, features, and size at anywhere near the price point.

(Of course the bulb based Mits are VERY nice, and I don't mean to dis them, but then there's that whole bulb/high velocity spinning color wheel thing.)

Meanwhile, I'll keep my eye on the laservues, and hope they DO have the best picture on the planet.

I'm glad to admit I was wrong when I strongly suspected they were Vaporvue. :)

$7,000 for 65"

lolz

FYI.... Laservue ad on Youtube. Click Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AQfdb6prrY)

Dan

judging from that ad, I think I know what the laservue is aimed at -- people who have $7000 and think they're getting an actual laser TV, as opposed to a laser lit DLP.

Here's a good excerpt from cnet:

4. Eliminating judder is not for everyone. Judder is part of what makes film look like film, so when you remove it, it starts to look like video. Now, some folks like the look of video and contend that it looks more true-to-life. Both Matthew Moskovciak and I are judder-free fans. On the other hand, David Katzmaier likes the effect only in certain scenes--he generally prefers to leave it turned off during Hollywood films and turned on for some other film-based content, such as the nature documentary Planet Earth--because, in some instances, it can really alter a scene, or at least take away from what the director intended the scene to look like. This is called "director's intent," and movie purists would argue that anti-judder tarnishes the viewing experience much in the same way that performance-enhancing drugs might change the outcome of a sporting event. OK, maybe that's a stretch, but I couldn't help myself.

It doesn't make films look more real, it makes them look more like video (aka cartoony)

The thing with 120Hz is that it's not just the panel but a lot of it too depends on how good the algorithm is that the TV's computer uses to artifically produce the "missing" frames to create the "flowing motion" view. The first 120Hz TV's that came out last year did a pretty aweful job at that and I believe that cnet review came from their first review of those models. The mfg's have done a much better job with this years' models to reduce the artifacts and make the picture feel much more solid on 120Hz sets. This is only going to get better with time as TV makers work to refine this computationally-intensive process.

Actually, you can get a TH-65PZ850U for $5200 bucks .

Mitsubishi needs to do a LOT better on price part.


The 65” Panasonic is cheap, but you get what you pay for, it’s not that good. If LaserVue can’t outperform a Panasonic Plasma I don’t see any point, may as well not release it as far as I am concerned.
I was hoping for a Kuro killer in 70”- 80”, but somehow I don’t think that’s going to happen. Oh well back to the waiting game for another year or two. Maybe G10 Kuro will be available in 70” plus.

The 65” Panasonic is cheap, but you get what you pay for, it’s not that good.
.

Have you seen a 65PZ850 ? I have not but there are reports that it's much better than the 750. I have a 50" Panasonic plasma and a 73" Mitsubishi DLP and the picture on the plasma is a lot better. I still want to see the laserview but if it has the "DLP look" and priced much higher than existing DLPs, forget about it.

That is considerably cheaper....interesting...they charge extra for a lift gate, but you get Free Curb Side delivery....does that mean if you don't pay for the lift gate they just push it out the back? lol! Just curious because my home theater Berklines I bought had the same issue...no lift gate....they just pushed them from the back of the open semi into the middle of the asphalt road and basically left.....luckily no harm was done to them, but I imagine a TV might not fair quite as good lol!

I intend to pay for the EW, liftgate and white glove (inside). Then I'm going to use the box to wrap up the KDF and stick it on ebay.....

Only now I have to wait another month, until my money catches up with my spending.....

Seggers

65 incher cost's $6999

http://www.engadget.com/2008/09/06/mitsubishis-65-inch-laservue-priced-at-cedia-6-999/

65 incher cost's $6999

http://www.engadget.com/2008/09/06/mitsubishis-65-inch-laservue-priced-at-cedia-6-999/

just seen it and was like wtf... :(

I thought they would only be a little more pricier than the bulb DLPs...

7K OUCH! Think i will hang onto my Mits 52628 unitl it's dead for good.

recoculous

If the 65" actually does get released this month, what are the chances the 73" gets released before Christmas ??

If the 65" actually does get released this month, what are the chances the 73" gets released before Christmas ??

2% chance.

$7,000 huh? Hmmmm............Very pricey, just like the Sony XBR8, I'm torn.

$7,000 huh? Hmmmm............Very pricey, just like the Sony XBR8, I'm torn.

I'm not a Sony fan, but with your 2 choices I'd personally go for the Sony after watching both of them. I looked for the white random sparkles like on the "YOU TUBE" videos, but didn't have the patience to watch for more than 5 minutes before I moved on.

If the 65" actually does get released this month, what are the chances the 73" gets released before Christmas ??

0%. I suspect it will be sometime during 1Q 2009 (maybe 2Q) before the 73" hits any sales floors, since it's taking this long for the 65" to debut. They probably need to make lots of sales of the 65" first. Also, some of it may depend on the market for 73". I suspect lots of people who want to go that big go for projectors. Does anybody know the sales figures for the various sizes of RPTVs - i.e., what sizes sell the most, second-most, etc.? Bigger is often better, but sometimes room size dictates the TV size - e.g., too big a screen and you can't sit back far enough for a) enough people to see it and/or b) the best picture brightness and/or c) sitting in the viewing sweet spot and not too far too the side. There's also d) room aesthetics, as some rooms are overwhelmed or put off balance by too large a screen, esp. if it's not exclusively a TV/viewing room.

"Available the end of September, limited distribution, $6999.00


Search: 2008 CEDIA Mitsubishi

"Available the end of September, limited distribution, $6999.00


Search: 2008 CEDIA Mitsubishi

Mits has lost their freaking gdam# minds !

Mits has lost their freaking gdam# minds !

I wouldn't give much weight to the listed prices - once they get beyond limited release distribution where they have early adopter audience & Mits Fanbase you may likely see similar pricing like a Sharp SE94 65" LCD which has been $10K List and they tried to control distribution also which lasted but a few weeks as this chart demonstrates. Patience may bring this thing down to Consumer reality pricing more in line with Panny and Sharp 65" --- even a future 65" Kuro will be bringing Panny Glass with a Pio processing markup that will still have to meet consumer reality.

I would not expect it to get as low as current DLP unless it flops after having been under the OCD anal microscopic scrutiny of this forum. Honeymoons end pretty quick for anything less than stellar on this forum. KURO Serfs Troll and nitpick every panel that threatens their Kingdom.;) We need an early adopter to have someone like UMR Calibrate and report his findings - he's one of the best.

Sharp LC-65SE94U
http://img.nextag.com/image/Sharp-Aquos-LC-65SE94U/5/000/005/880/109/588010977.gif

Panasonic TH65PZ850U
http://img.nextag.com/image/Panasonic-TH65PZ850U/5/000/006/191/151/619115189.gif

Mits has lost their freaking gdam# minds !

Only if they were going for mass market right away. But if, as the story says, it's a limited distribution, the price is perfectly rational. It turns it into a rare elite product, which gets a good image going. Also, if problems develop (as often happens with new technology) there's fewer unhappy customers to deal with.

...We need an early adopter to have someone like UMR Calibrate and report his findings - he's one of the best.

Sharp LC-65SE94U
http://img.nextag.com/image/Sharp-Aquos-LC-65SE94U/5/000/005/880/109/588010977.gif

Panasonic TH65PZ850U
http://img.nextag.com/image/Panasonic-TH65PZ850U/5/000/006/191/151/619115189.gif

From what I saw at CEDIA I would not expect earth shattering results. If I get a shot at one and it looks reasonable I will post the results.

From what I saw at CEDIA I would not expect earth shattering results. If I get a shot at one and it looks reasonable I will post the results.

please tell us more. how do you think it stacks up against current DLPs, the SXRD, and the best flat panels?

please tell us more. how do you think it stacks up against current DLPs, the SXRD, and the best flat panels?

I doubt UMR will answer your question, here's why. Unless he is given access to a sample to test with his equipment, all he can do is react to however Mitsubishi set up their set at CEDIA. That makes it a pure crapshoot. Mitsubishi sets historically are pretty terrible out of the box, so whatever was seen at CEDIA is unreliable to begin with.

What the set looks like out of the box is immaterial to me. All I'm interested in is what the set looks like after UMR calibrates it. I don't think he'll speculate until he's done so. He is so technically astute it really isn't fair to ask him for a hint.

What the set looks like out of the box is immaterial to me. All I'm interested in is what the set looks like after UMR calibrates it.

But there are other aspects that contribute to the image a display is capable of that a calibration can't fix if the potential isn't there. Mits has priced this inline with high end flat panels. Are the capable of the same black levels? Are the viewing angles as good? Have they fully addressed laser speckle, or are the "sparklies" reported earlier an indication they haven't? Geometry? Any chromatic aberrations due to the extreme angles of the shallow cabinet? Is the image sharp & focused across the entire screen?

Given the purity of color that lasers are capable of, they should technically be capable of good post-calibration color if the decoder is decent and Mits has provided the necessary controls. But I would think someone with experience could look at a display and notice if there are some traits that couldn't be fixed with a calibration.

Only if they were going for mass market right away. But if, as the story says, it's a limited distribution, the price is perfectly rational. It turns it into a rare elite product, which gets a good image going. Also, if problems develop (as often happens with new technology) there's fewer unhappy customers to deal with.

I got sucked into the "rare, elite" model with the Sony Q006. Never again. My optical block failed 2 1/2 years into ownership. Most of the other Q006 owners are having the same problem. I hear that the replacement OB has the same design and so I'll see another failure at about the 5 yr point. After dropping close to $15K on this product that Sony has made into an orphan, I doubt that Sony will keep repair parts available after the 3-yr warranty for all of their customers for the Q006 has lapsed (I think that'll be in another 2 years). So, even if I wanted to drop another $6K for a replacement OB, I won't be able to do so. When that happens, I'll be looking for something in the 80 in range and it appears that a laser DLP is the most likely candidate for a reasonable cost/energy use. I won't even be looking at another Sony product. I'm betting that Sir Howard Stringer is taking Sony to be a media company, not hardware

I got sucked into the "rare, elite" model with the Sony Q006. Never again. ...

Sorry to hear your story, although getting back to Mitsubishi products I suppose the analog would be the top-of-the-line 9 inch gun CRT projection sets, which some owners still claim represents an unmatched peak in picture quality. I'm not going to debate the merits of that set but there is a valid market for such products. Of course, leading-edge technology always has its risk.

I don't see how that helps, unless you can turn on/off the light source for each pixel. But if they can do that, well, then they have a true laser display so they don't even need a DLP chip.

If they can only turn it on/off for the entire chip, then sure, you can get some awesome black screen, and fade to black is truly black (look ma, no light!), but not much else.

As everyone knows, the mirror for each pixel can tilt away from the light source and in affect turn the light "off" for that pixel. Current DLP is the same, but with the laser being a more precise light source, you will not have the ambient light that causes the current DLP systems to have the less then desired black levels.

Current DLP is the same, but with the laser being a more precise light source, you will not have the ambient light that causes the current DLP systems to have the less then desired black levels.

But that precise beam is going to have to somehow be diffused to cover more than just one pixel. Once you've diffused it, it's not necessarily precise... it could very well be much like any other light source.

In 2000 Mits released their 1st DLP. It cost more than $10K retail. (WD65000)
In about 2003 they released their 1st 82inch LCOS. Retail cost was $20K. (WL82913)
In 2003 they had a 60inch plasma that cost $16K. (PD6010)
In 2008 they released their 1st Laser TV and cost is $7K. (L65A90)
In 2008 they released their 7th generation DLP and a 65" costs about $1500. (WD65735)

In 2000 Mits released their 1st DLP. It cost more than $10K retail. (WD65000) <----- I paid $8k for my demo floor model
In about 2003 they released their 1st 82inch LCOS. Retail cost was $20K. (WL82913)
In 2003 they had a 60inch plasma that cost $16K. (PD6010)
In 2004 they released their first 73" CRT model with 9" guns. <----- I paid $6k for the WS-73713
In 2005 they released their first 1080p DLP. WD-73927 retail was $7500 <----- I paid $7k for mine
In 2008 they released their 1st Laser TV and cost is $7K. (L65A90)
In 2008 they released their 7th generation DLP and a 65" costs about $1500.

I don't WANT to spend a lot of money, but I am WILLING to spend that much if the perceived value (to me as an individual) is there. I am waiting for the 73" laser (wish there was a larger one), and will buy it if the quality/features/picture equals or exceeds what I feel the cost is worth to me.

I got sucked into the "rare, elite" model with the Sony Q006. Never again. My optical block failed 2 1/2 years into ownership. Most of the other Q006 owners are having the same problem. I hear that the replacement OB has the same design and so I'll see another failure at about the 5 yr point. After dropping close to $15K on this product that Sony has made into an orphan, I doubt that Sony will keep repair parts available after the 3-yr warranty for all of their customers for the Q006 has lapsed (I think that'll be in another 2 years). So, even if I wanted to drop another $6K for a replacement OB, I won't be able to do so. When that happens, I'll be looking for something in the 80 in range and it appears that a laser DLP is the most likely candidate for a reasonable cost/energy use. I won't even be looking at another Sony product. I'm betting that Sir Howard Stringer is taking Sony to be a media company, not hardware

i am sorry but only a person with poor judgement would spend $15K on a tv

i am sorry but only a person with poor judgement would spend $15K on a tv

Really? According to who? How much would you pay for an 80" flat panel as good as the Pioneer Elite 151, that weighed 50lbs, used only 50w to operate and came with a lifetime warranty? I don't know about you, but I'd drive my car until it dropped and come with the 15K.

Your statement is a bit rash and condescending. Now had you said you've never seen a set that was worth 15k TO YOU, fine. Neither have I.

i am sorry but only a person with poor judgement would spend $15K on a tv
:rolleyes: If you can afford it, why not.

RPTV is dead at any price. Its the wife factor.

Not in my house. I have an '01 model Mits 65" RPTV and my wife loves it except for the problems we're starting to have with it. Now we're looking to pick up the 73835. She wants something bigger...:D

:rolleyes: If you can afford it, why not.

right "just say charge it"

Really? According to who? How much would you pay for an 80" flat panel as good as the Pioneer Elite 151, that weighed 50lbs, used only 50w to operate and came with a lifetime warranty? I don't know about you, but I'd drive my car until it dropped and come with the 15K.

Your statement is a bit rash and condescending. Now had you said you've never seen a set that was worth 15k TO YOU, fine. Neither have I.

yes really poor judgment

Here is a link to a Laservue on youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFHYbBEBajk&NR=1

It give a very brief description of the tv. I love the $6,999.99 price just say 7000.00 and be done with it. lol


Mystic

Alright, well I had my heart set on the 73" laservue, but anything over 5k just isn't even worth me thinking about anymore. So is the only real contender in the big sizes for good PQ the 73835? I've been trying to read some of the threads about the set and so far people like it, but I'm not seeing any screenshots on here of the set. I currently have a 60" Philips that I bought from Sam's Club a little less than 4 years ago. How would the black levels of the 73835 stack up to say a 9G Kuro? I live in a rather small town so I can't really do much viewing of the actual sets, closest BB is a little over an hour away. Thanks.

No comparison at all...9 g Kuro way blacker..but much more expensive. 835 are the bang for the buck tv over 60 inches these days !

Here is a link to a Laservue on youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFHYbBEBajk&NR=1

It give a very brief description of the tv. I love the $6,999.99 price just say 7000.00 and be done with it. lol


Mystic

I just watched the clip. I don't think Mits marketing guys would be happy with that guy's presentation quality. Anyway, at "6---9---9-9" (Just be a man and say 7000--you know it's ridiculous) that's too rich for my blood...goin' for the 67'' Sammy LED DLP.

It was fun following this thread for the past several months. Too bad Mits had to go and blow it with the ridiculous price tag. But then again..."dems lazurs ya know".

i am sorry but only a person with poor judgement would spend $15K on a tv

I could say the same thing about a $30K car.
Personally I'd much rather spend $15K on a TV then $30K on any car. I get no enjoyment from any car but plenty from a TV. But another person might have a different perspective and would have no problem spending $30K or $50K on a car yet might not want to even spend $1k on a TV.

I could say the same thing about a $30K car.


I didn't even know it was possible to get a new vehicle for under $30K

I didn't even know it was possible to get a new vehicle for under $30K
:rolleyes:

Oh well; I will just suffer with my CRT RPTV with its rich Blacks, my 35k Avalon and my 200k home that is paid for.
Honestly, as long as the family is not deprived, I could care less what someone pays for this LaserVue.
I own a Mitsubishi and like there product.
If the 73" LaserVue is 8000 and has a superb picture, I will possibly put my RPTV in my study and put this baby in the den.
I am waiting on you guys to make the purchase and give the real reviews;)
Hell, Its just Money. If you can afford it go for it.
Debt free and proud of it.

To bring this back onto track a tad, for anyone who actually went to Cedia, what did you think of the TV?

In your opinion was it woth the asking price and why?

Seggers

Just wait 2 or so years and the laser will cost less than half of the so called $7k

Wow , this is the crasiest thread i ever read!!!!

What it comes down to is , that we all want to make the best decision on a new TV. For some 7000-8000.00 is alot and for some its a petty cash. Mitsubishi really thinks they have the best display and thinks 7000.00 for the 65 justifies the cost for the performance. If it does , and beats a pioneer handsdown in everything that some of us will buy it. Some of us will buy it just to have the latest TECH , and some will go flat panel or standard dlp.


If your on this forum , than you are like everyone wanting to make the best decision for your new TV.

We need to get some real review and calibrated specs on it before we can see what it can. For the youtube videos it looks like a normal DLP. Someone well known needs to review this thing!!!

i am sorry but only a person with poor judgement would spend $15K on a tv

right "just say charge it"
It may come as a shock to you, but there are actually plenty of people out there with more than enough disposable income to actually afford such a purchase without going into debt. While I would agree with the other comments that I have yet to see a TV that I would be willing to pay $15k for, I'm not going to criticize others for having different priorities. Your comment really just comes across as being jealous of those who have more money than you do (you may very well be able to afford the $15k and choose not to - I don't know or care). Also keep in mind that this is an enthusiast forum, so high-end / expensive items are going to tend to garner a lot of interest.

It may come as a shock to you, but there are actually plenty of people out there with more than enough disposable income to actually afford such a purchase without going into debt. While I would agree with the other comments that I have yet to see a TV that I would be willing to pay $15k for, I'm not going to criticize others for having different priorities. Your comment really just comes across as being jealous of those who have more money than you do (you may very well be able to afford the $15k and choose not to - I don't know or care). Also keep in mind that this is an enthusiast forum, so high-end / expensive items are going to tend to garner a lot of interest.

Right on! I never charge anything that I can't pay for...and $15K is not that much money to me.

Everyone has their hobby , i took a brand new 99 eclipse gsx , 30,000.00 car and put 20,000.00 into it , blew some trannys , parts , and then drove it forawhile , and lastly crashed it. That was money down the drain!!!

what did that get me , speeding tickets , racing tickets..... Ill stick to hometheater now , no more tickets , and more people can enjoy it with me.

Check out my beast on youtube!!! BADDEST GSX!!!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4l_ti8dvBl8

I did my homework before I went there today. I saw from searching on Nextag the price at Modia was $2999. Plus $247 tax. Of course the store has it listed for $3599. At first the manager semi-denied this lower price, so I had to show him on the internet. He said he would match that price because he had to. He did mention a delivery and setup charge would be added. But didn't say how much. There is something to be said about buying local, but I have found the cheapest price at digitalcraze.com... $3049... shipped.

http://digitalcraze.com/Details.asp?ProductID=3305

I have not seen Kuro blacks, but we turned off all lights in the showroom and it looked pretty good in dark scenes. I think this new dark chip 4 will make it look better than some competitors, but maybe not quite as good as a Kuro.

I think Home Theater Store was too generic a name, and made it hard to find with internet searches.
But Modia? Sounds like it should have Com in front of it ;-) Think I could've come up with something better.

Why do so many people spout about black levels. Shadow detail is far more important. Forcing things to black kills shadow detail. Look around you, do you see any "black hole" blacks- NO. There is a reason video black is not full off raster. If you are making your set display video black as full off black then you are killing shadow detail. Blacker then black video is rare. Film, which I think everyone says is a standard to compare to, does not have blacker than blacks.

It may come as a shock to you, but there are actually plenty of people out there with more than enough disposable income to actually afford such a purchase without going into debt. While I would agree with the other comments that I have yet to see a TV that I would be willing to pay $15k for, I'm not going to criticize others for having different priorities. Your comment really just comes across as being jealous of those who have more money than you do (you may very well be able to afford the $15k and choose not to - I don't know or care). Also keep in mind that this is an enthusiast forum, so high-end / expensive items are going to tend to garner a lot of interest.

trust me i can afford that tv and more.i own my own pool service in south florida and make that and more in 1 month.but i am financialy responsable .

Why do so many people spout about black levels. Shadow detail is far more important. Forcing things to black kills shadow detail. Look around you, do you see any "black hole" blacks- NO. There is a reason video black is not full off raster. If you are making your set display video black as full off black then you are killing shadow detail. Blacker then black video is rare. Film, which I think everyone says is a standard to compare to, does not have blacker than blacks.

The trick is to have the best black WITHOUT losing shadow detail. I believe this is what everyone is discussing with the Kuro. They can have an absolute black and it actually be black without losing the shadow detail that so many other sets do if their brightness is set too low. Of course it's all about perception as well. Most folks will never notice the difference in real world scenarios where they are not sitting in a pitch black room to watch a movie. Most folks would have to see a side by side comparison with both professionally calibrated to see a difference. MHO

Not in my house. I have an '01 model Mits 65" RPTV and my wife loves it except for the problems we're starting to have with it. Now we're looking to pick up the 73835. She wants something bigger...:D

Let's hope it is the TV she is talking about and doesn't try to replace anything else....lol! Sorry, sorry....immature moment, but I thought it was funny. :p

No comparison at all...9 g Kuro way blacker..but much more expensive. 835 are the bang for the buck tv over 60 inches these days !


Not unless you can find them for under $2K like a good Sammy or Mits DLP, either bulb or LED.

Why pay more for a smaller set if the picture isn't any better? :rolleyes:

Why do so many people spout about black levels. Shadow detail is far more important. Forcing things to black kills shadow detail. Look around you, do you see any "black hole" blacks- NO. There is a reason video black is not full off raster. If you are making your set display video black as full off black then you are killing shadow detail. Blacker then black video is rare. Film, which I think everyone says is a standard to compare to, does not have blacker than blacks.

Sounds like "the zone system" that all us B&W photographers had to learn in class. Expose for the shadows (low density of silver particles), develop for the highlights (high density of silver particles). If your exposure range is not the ideal 5 f-stops from shadows to highlights, then if your picture is too contrasty (i.e., more than 5 f-stops difference between bright and shadow), underdevelop the film - the shadows will get slightly darker, but the highlights will come down even moreso to the acceptable brightness, since development time proportionately affects the film in relation to the density of the silver; if your picture is not contrasty enough, then increase your development time - the shadows will get slightly lighter, but the highlights will be even more pushed to an appropriate brightness so the print will have 5 levels of brightness from dark to light and exhibit an acceptable contrast range.

But if you fail to expose for the shadows, there is nothing you can do to bring details back into the picture that the silver grains didn't capture.

Or so I remember (unless I got that all backwards).

trust me i can afford that tv and more.i own my own pool service in south florida and make that and more in 1 month.but i am financialy responsable .
Clearly you're missing the point.

<sarcasm>
I guess you must not be extravagant with anything, so you must buy store brand food, drive the least expensive car you can find, live in a very modest home, buy your clothes at WalMart or the Thrift store, etc.
</sarcasm>

The point is that what is financially responsible varies from situation to situation and person to person. Some of us don't have a spouse and kids to feed, don't have any debt, put plenty of money into our retirement funds, have enough savings to survive being out of work for an extended period of time, and still have lots of disposable income left over. In such a situation, I certainly wouldn't consider spending a big chunk of money on something like a $15k TV financially irresponsible (though I would probably consider it somewhat foolish given how fast the technology continues to change, but it's their money). On the other hand, if someone is living paycheck to paycheck, has debt piling up, regularly has late payments, a spouse, children, etc. and goes and finances a $1000 TV, then they ARE being financially irresponsible.

Hopefully the difference is clear :rolleyes:.

Anyway, $7000 for the 65" LaserVue? I'll have to see it before making a final judgement, but I suspect one of these isn't in my future given the other options that are or soon will be available (a 65" Kuro seems likely for 10G).

Clearly you're missing the point.

<sarcasm>
I guess you must not be extravagant with anything, so you must buy store brand food, drive the least expensive car you can find, live in a very modest home, buy your clothes at WalMart or the Thrift store, etc.
</sarcasm>

The point is that what is financially responsible varies from situation to situation and person to person. Some of us don't have a spouse and kids to feed, don't have any debt, put plenty of money into our retirement funds, have enough savings to survive being out of work for an extended period of time, and still have lots of disposable income left over. In such a situation, I certainly wouldn't consider spending a big chunk of money on something like a $15k TV financially irresponsible (though I would probably consider it somewhat foolish given how fast the technology continues to change, but it's their money). On the other hand, if someone is living paycheck to paycheck, has debt piling up, regularly has late payments, a spouse, children, etc. and goes and finances a $1000 TV, then they ARE being financially irresponsible.

Hopefully the difference is clear :rolleyes:.

Anyway, $7000 for the 65" LaserVue? I'll have to see it before making a final judgement, but I suspect one of these isn't in my future given the other options that are or soon will be available (a 65" Kuro seems likely for 10G).

i understand.................................................. ..........................to each his own i guess

Everyone has their hobby , i took a brand new 99 eclipse gsx , 30,000.00 car and put 20,000.00 into it , blew some trannys , parts , and then drove it forawhile , and lastly crashed it. That was money down the drain!!!

what did that get me , speeding tickets , racing tickets..... Ill stick to hometheater now , no more tickets , and more people can enjoy it with me.

Check out my beast on youtube!!! BADDEST GSX!!!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4l_ti8dvBl8

My Modded 06 C6 Vette will give it a run for it's money.

.but i am financialy responsable .

Wow.

The trick is to have the best black WITHOUT losing shadow detail. I believe this is what everyone is discussing with the Kuro. They can have an absolute black and it actually be black without losing the shadow detail that so many other sets do if their brightness is set too low. Of course it's all about perception as well. Most folks will never notice the difference in real world scenarios where they are not sitting in a pitch black room to watch a movie. Most folks would have to see a side by side comparison with both professionally calibrated to see a difference. MHO

I don't think you got the point, there is no "absolute black" in video (there is raster even on a black screen), not even on my CRT-RPTV which you have to agree has better blacks than a Kuro. The only absolute black I see is if it isn't receiving a signal. If you have absolute blacks you've turned the brightness down too much. Most sets go plenty black for most purposes. Kuro blacks are marketing hype. Just like selling a sports car because it goes very fast- not essential to everyday uses. I like my set for, among other things, its dynamic range. That includes whites with a large range with no crush, just as important. Black is only one step in that range. Again, you can't beat a CRT for shadow detail and AFAIK white detail. We'll see what this Laser can do. If I get a chance to see one, I'll let you know how it compares to my set. I think Mitsubishi would still be making CRT-RPTVs as their flagship display if there was still a market for them. Hopefully this Laser will be better.

I don't think you got the point, there is no "absolute black", not even on my CRT-RPTV which you have to agree has better blacks than a Kuro. If you have absolute blacks you've turned the brightness down too much. Most sets go plenty black for most purposes. Kuro blacks are marketing hype. Just like selling a sports car because it goes very fast- not essential to eveyday uses. I like my set for, among other things, its dynamic range. That includes whites with a large range with no crush, just as important. Black is only one step in that range. Again, you can't beat a CRT for shadow detail and as AFAIK white detail. We'll see what this Laser can do. I think Mitsubishi would still be making CRT-RPTVs as their flagship display if there was still a market for them.

I don't know what set you have, but the Elite 151 has a better ANSI contrast ratio than any RPTV I've ever seen. When reviewers have measured its black level, it comes out to .001, apparently near the limits of the device they measure with. Marketing hype, hardly. The shadow detail of a CRT RPTV at appropriate level of brightness is inferior to the 151. The 151 may not be a solid as a tube CRT, such as the Sony 34XBR960, but anyone who makes claims such as yours with a RPTV is living in the past.

I had a calibrated Elite 510 that had one of the finest black levels of any CRT RPTV. The Elite 151 is the first fixed pixel display I've seen that is in that league, with better brightness and shadow detail. I do not agree that a CRT RPTV "has better blacks than a Kuro". Look at the opening of the last Pirates movie, on BD in a completely dark room, and you'll see the 151 has caught and passed CRT RPTV.

Boy you sure are hooked on black levels and ANSI contrast is rediculous. It's just a measurement of how much brighter the white is than the black/gray. How bright a set goes is irrelevent. Next you'll be telling me a Kuro is better than the theater because it goes blacker and brighter. How can a Kuro go blacker than a crt that isn't putting out any light? If my room is black and my set isn't getting a signal you can't see that it is there. Again irrelevent to video. I'm sure my set can match a Kuro for black levels, also irrelevent. The Kuro is not the "holy grail" anymore than my set is. Maybe the laser will be or come closer.

PS, I've seen the Kuro, you haven't seen my set. BTW those reflections are a killer. The Sony 34XBR960 is not in the same league with my set. You're not the only nonbeliever, Qualia owners told me how much better their sets are, they hadn't seen my set either.

http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/39233/97/

$7,000 for a 65" DLP RPTV? No way!

The price of a 65" LCD flat panel TV has dropped to about 4 to 5k (Sharp) and as low as 2 to 3k for a certain brand that may be in bankruptcy (Olevia).

To sell, the 65" laser dlp should street for 2 to 3k and the 73" for under 4k.
Prices will fall, fall, fall, or they will shut down the production line. Remember, lasers actually cost less than bulbs, at least according to the laser manufacturers.

IB

While we're discusing the "virtues" of the Kuro, let's discuss what will make the Laser better. No reflections off the screen, as I mentioned a killer for me. Motion blur not a problem as DLP is even faster than CRT- which has no problem. However there is the same problem as plasma as compared to a CRT, it is a fixed panel resolution. If one is not sending them 1920x1080, which will be most of the time, the processor of the signal for scaling will have a lot to do with PQ. CRT does not need a processor. Whatever resolution is sent to it is what is displayed, no artifacts. IE, 1200x1080, 1400x1080, 1600x1080 etc. This is a one reason why displays in the store are hooked up to 1920x1080 sources. As far as color quality, and what makes a RPTV-CRT better than a standard CRT, is the phospher/laser color has to be compromised as on plasma also.

I guess the real point is if Laservue is to be the savior of rear projection it must have a dramatically declining cost curve. Generally that is driven by increasig volume in new technology. I don't really see where Mits will get any volume to drive costs down. The flat panel technologies are being driven down by huge efficiences of scale given their volumes.

This maybe a crazy thread but so is the Mits Laser price point. You can buy the Sammy 72A650 for about 2K delivered. If they really want to sell their 73 inch laser for 10k then it seems they have problem with their value equation. By the time the Mits 73 is availible if ever then you maybe able to buy the Sammy for $1600... 5 to 6 times the price does not sound reasonable to me.

Anyone who is not willing to pay more for the best is not a true videophile. I think there are enough out there to push the laser through till its price can drop if it truely is better. Look at Sony's SXRD. Started out at $15k and rapidly declined from there. Unfortunately it was not the best and was frought with bugs.

Anyone who is not willing to pay more for the best is not a true videophile. I think there are enough out there to push the laser through till its price can drop if it truely is better. Look at Sony's SXRD. Started out at $15k and rapidly declined from there. Unfortunately it was not the best and was frought with bugs.

I think the jury is completely out on whether the Mits Laser is the best. No other supplier is standing still. The highest price rarely buys the best. Often it only buys brand prestige. In this case we are talking about mass market consumer goods and Mits is hardly a prestige name anymore. If they are not careful they could loose shelf space for their products altogether. They may still be a legend in their own minds, I suggest they take a hard look at market share and brand perception here in the states.

The trick is to have the best black WITHOUT losing shadow detail. I believe this is what everyone is discussing with the Kuro. They can have an absolute black and it actually be black without losing the shadow detail that so many other sets do if their brightness is set too low. Of course it's all about perception as well. Most folks will never notice the difference in real world scenarios where they are not sitting in a pitch black room to watch a movie. Most folks would have to see a side by side comparison with both professionally calibrated to see a difference. MHO

I wouldn't bother with him if I were you - considering he watches his 73" Mitsu from 15" feet away (almost twice the recommended distance) and in a very bright room. Those two items should tell you the tale, though the CRT Mitsu is a fine set (if properly maintained and aligned often, which gets to be very expensive, so very few actually do it).

Just wait 2 or so years and the laser will cost less than half of the so called $7k

Based on initial reports from CEDIA, why is anyone assuming it will make it 2 years?

CRT is still the only display that can have true blacks as the guns can be cut off completely resulting in absolutely zero light output, however running a CRT in cut off usually results in some black crush or loss of shadow detail. Good digital displays can easily better CRT shadow detail when a CRT is set up for absolute blacks but not even the G9 Kuro can have zero light output on a black screen. We will have to wait for the G10 Kuro for true black from a digital panel as they are supposedly the first Plasma that can turn its pixels off completely.

I am a black addict and don’t mind a little loose of shadow detail in order to get true blacks, however in areas other then absolute blacks CRT, both direct view and rear projected, has well and truly been eclipsed by other technologies.

HT Guys podcast show notes:

Mitsubishi
Saw the LaserVue DLP. Color and contrast looked good but there was a distracting shimmering that made the Silk Screen Effect look worse. The best way to describe the effect is it looks like the effect you get when you point a laser pointer at something that diffuses the beam. This is a first generation so it should get better. Some Facts about the LaserVue:

* 1/4 the power of Plasma
* 1/3 the power of LCD
* 1/2 the power of DLP
* Available late September early October via dealers only
* $7000

When you factor in the price. Pick up the regular DLP instead. It did not look $4000 better.

Boy you sure are hooked on black levels and ANSI contrast is rediculous. It's just a measurement of how much brighter the white is than the black/gray. How bright a set goes is irrelevent. Next you'll be telling me a Kuro is better than the theater because it goes blacker and brighter. How can a Kuro go blacker than a crt that isn't putting out any light? If my room is black and my set isn't getting a signal you can't see that it is there. Again irrelevent to video. I'm sure my set can match a Kuro for black levels, also irrelevent. The Kuro is not the "holy grail" anymore than my set is. Maybe the laser will be or come closer.

PS, I've seen the Kuro, you haven't seen my set. BTW those reflections are a killer. The Sony 34XBR960 is not in the same league with my set. You're not the only nonbeliever, Qualia owners told me how much better their sets are, they hadn't seen my set either.

Bill,

What TV do you own ?

CRT is still the only display that can have true blacks as the guns can be cut off completely resulting in absolutely zero light output, however running a CRT in cut off usually results in some black crush or loss of shadow detail. Good digital displays can easily better CRT shadow detail when a CRT is set up for absolute blacks but not even the G9 Kuro can have zero light output on a black screen. We will have to wait for the G10 Kuro for true black from a digital panel as they are supposedly the first Plasma that can turn its pixels off completely.

I am a black addict and don’t mind a little loose of shadow detail in order to get true blacks, however in areas other then absolute blacks CRT, both direct view and rear projected, has well and truly been eclipsed by other technologies.

Not to mention that CRT floats black levels as well. Which is why Bill stated he only see's absolute black on a screen with no input. ;)

...Saw the LaserVue DLP. Color and contrast looked good but there was a distracting shimmering that made the Silk Screen Effect look worse...

Why on earth would Mits use the same screens on Laservue than on their DLPs? :confused: SSE is one of the biggest downfalls of microdisplays!

Not to mention that CRT floats black levels as well. Which is why Bill stated he only see's absolute black on a screen with no input. ;)

Good CRT’s do not “float black’, that’s a sign of poor supply regulation which is just poor design or cheap components. Dirty or poor quality optics does result in poor ANSI contrast which in turn causes pollution of blacks with bright content on screen.

All Plasma float white due to power supply limitations, this results in dynamic compression. High average picture level scenes have much lower white levels then low average picture level scenes; the difference in white level is can exceed 30% and is the cause of the “dirt whites” people complain about with Plasma.
Plasma’s can also has issues with phosphor lag and dither noise, no display technology is perfect and probably wont be for many years.

Why on earth would Mits use the same screens on Laservue than on their DLPs? :confused: SSE is one of the biggest downfalls of microdisplays!


Micro displays are typically very bright, if you dim them down to more modest levels suitable for dim viewing conditions SSE is reduced or eliminated. A neutral density filter will normally be required to achieve this. Black levels can also be dramatically improved in this way as well.

Anyone who is not willing to pay more for the best is not a true videophile. I think there are enough out there to push the laser through till its price can drop if it truely is better. Look at Sony's SXRD. Started out at $15k and rapidly declined from there. Unfortunately it was not the best and was frought with bugs.

Hmmmm...

Didn't realize that "videophile" was defined economically. :eek:

So if you appreciate and know what the best is, but can't afford it, you're not a videophile? :rolleyes:

Fortunately for the rest of us around here, most videophiles are not elitists and share their expertise and knowledge with the common folks. :)

Micro displays are typically very bright, if you dim them down to more modest levels suitable for dim viewing conditions SSE is reduced or eliminated. A neutral density filter will normally be required to achieve this. Black levels can also be dramatically improved in this way as well.


I think this has to do with the fact that the screen on these is actually a projection screen that meeds some sort of texture to it to be able to focus an image on. Imagine how it would look if the image was projected from behind on a smooth sheet of glass.

Of course there are degrees.... :)

I think this has to do with the fact that the screen on these is actually a projection screen that needs some sort of texture to it to be able to focus an image on. Imagine how it would look if the image was projected from behind on a smooth sheet of glass.

Of course there are degrees.... :)My RP-CRT doesn't have any sort of silk screen effect. How come they could avoid SSE with old tech, but can't with microdisplay based RP units?

My RP-CRT doesn't have any sort of silk screen effect. How come they could avoid SSE with old tech, but can't with microdisplay based RP units?

That depends on which theory of SSE you subscribe to: the textured screen cause, or the narrow angle on the primary mirror cause. If it's the former, it's because they used lenticular screens instead of textured screens. If it's the latter, it's probably because older CRT sets were generally much deeper and used less shallow angles. Or maybe something else. :D

Good CRT’s do not “float black’, that’s a sign of poor supply regulation which is just poor design or cheap components. Dirty or poor quality optics does result in poor ANSI contrast which in turn causes pollution of blacks with bright content on screen.

All Plasma float white due to power supply limitations, this results in dynamic compression. High average picture level scenes have much lower white levels then low average picture level scenes; the difference in white level is can exceed 30% and is the cause of the “dirt whites” people complain about with Plasma.
Plasma’s can also has issues with phosphor lag and dither noise, no display technology is perfect and probably wont be for many years.

If that's true then CRTs would display absolute blacks since they can do this on an all black screen. However if you display an image on the screen on a CRT you will no longer have absolute blacks. Having said this, I don't understand what you are saying but CRTs don't float blacks??? :confused:

As far as the downsides to plasma goes I'm well aware of a handful of them as I see them regularly. The plasma limiter and such isn't too hard to miss :)

Micro displays are typically very bright, if you dim them down to more modest levels suitable for dim viewing conditions SSE is reduced or eliminated. A neutral density filter will normally be required to achieve this. Black levels can also be dramatically improved in this way as well.

Dimming the picture down may reduce SSE but doesn't eliminate it. Your obviously an exception to this rule as 99.9% of people out there won't go to the extremes that you have done with your custom modifications. Not to mention that Laservue is being touted as a display the brighter and more vivid than plasma which obviously will bring out SSE in bright scenes if they use the typical microdisplay screen. Personally I'd much rather have a glass type screen in a light controlled room rather than a matte screen with SSE to defer reflections. But I'm just one opinion I suppose.

Anyone who is not willing to pay more for the best is not a true videophile.

And anyone that overpays is an idiot.

There's a big difference between paying more and overpaying. Even if the Laser is better, I doubt it will be that much better to justify a $10,000 (or so) price for a 73" display. You can get a really good 73" display right now for 1/3 of that. Will it be 3 times as good as some of the displays available now? I doubt it.

You can get a really good 73" display right now for 1/3 of that.

Or 1/5, if you shop carefully. :D

And anyone that overpays is an idiot.

There's a big difference between paying more and overpaying. Even if the Laser is better, I doubt it will be that much better to justify a $10,000 (or so) price for a 73" display. You can get a really good 73" display right now for 1/3 of that. Will it be 3 times as good as some of the displays available now? I doubt it.

You beat me to the punch on this one. I haven't seen any reviews yet, of people who have actually seen a Laservue doing OTA,cable, sat, dvd, etc., that can say this technology is better than either plasma or lcd. Why someone would pay 10K for a first generation tech IS an idiot-agreed!

My local dealer just advised that they expect to have the Laservue in their store on 10/3. Reading between the lines, apparently Mitsubishi has not yet released firm pricing.

Well, I've seen the $7k quoted most places. Swanni just ran with it today from another article in PC Magazine. I'm sure the LaserVue blows the Sharp away in PQ. However, most people will opt for the $4k (or more realistically $2k) display over the $7k one.

http://www.tvpredictions.com/mitsubishi090908.htm


Mitsubishi's 65-Inch Laser TV: $6,999
The set will be available at the end of the third quarter.
By Swanni

Washington, D.C. (September 9, 2008) -- Mitsubishi says its first Laser HDTV will be a 65-inch model that will retail for $6,999 and should be available in the next several weeks in the United States.

That's according to an article by PC Magazine.

The price tag will be steep compared to similar-sized LCD and Plasma sets. PC Magazine notes that a Sharp 65-inch LCD HDTV now retails for around $4,000.

But Mitsubishi, which is billing the set as 'LaserVue,' said it will revolutionize the high-def industry by offering crisper pictures and more vivid colors. The television, which uses a laser light engine to display images, will consume one-third of the power of a Plasma HDTV.


Mitsubishi's Laser TV.

Mitsubishi is also expected to introduce a 75-inch model of the LaserVue set this year, but has yet to reveal pricing and launch details.

The company says the Laser TVs will have the capability of displaying 3-D movies, games and TV shows.

And anyone that overpays is an idiot.

There's a big difference between paying more and overpaying. Even if the Laser is better, I doubt it will be that much better to justify a $10,000 (or so) price for a 73" display. You can get a really good 73" display right now for 1/3 of that. Will it be 3 times as good as some of the displays available now? I doubt it.

I think there IS a market for a $10K 73" laservue, since there's just no flat panels that size in that price range. Provided that the laservue yields SOME improvement in PQ, some people WILL pay 3-4x for that extra 10% of performance, plus the form factor and "new hotness" factor. That's just the nature of the enthusiast market.

OTOH, I have a hard time seeing a market for a $7K 65" laservue. All indications so far is the laservue just ain't all that and still has the usual drawbacks -- SSE, viewing angle. There are simply better alternatives. Someone will say "but, but I have a bright room and can't stand plasma reflection. LCD has motion blurs and lousy blacks. I'd rather deal with SSE, light drop off, possible RBE, and 1st gen problems/failure." But that will be an exceedingly small group of people.

Bill,

What TV do you own ?

Mitsubishi 73713.

If the Laservue has SSE, it just lost me.

Hmmmm...

Didn't realize that "videophile" was defined economically. :eek:

So if you appreciate and know what the best is, but can't afford it, you're not a videophile? :rolleyes:

Fortunately for the rest of us around here, most videophiles are not elitists and share their expertise and knowledge with the common folks. :)

Did I hit a nerve? :) You're putting words in my mouth. Calm down. I was just saying we are willing to, doesn't mean we will, can or have to. Geez. I'm sure all of us "have" paid more for our sets than our non videophile friends have.

If the Laservue has SSE, it just lost me.

IF you believe that SSE is due to the mirror, it could have more SSE than other DLPs due to the shallow cabinet. And I can't help but wonder if it has any laser speckle mixed in there. That being said, SSE is one of the first things I noticed when looking at DLPs in the store, but something I haven't noticed AT ALL once I got it in my home.

IF you believe that SSE is due to the mirror, it could have more SSE than other DLPs due to the shallow cabinet. And I can't help but wonder if it has any laser speckle mixed in there. That being said, SSE is one of the first things I noticed when looking at DLPs in the store, but something I haven't noticed AT ALL once I got it in my home.It's the nature of the screen material.

It's the nature of the screen material.
Yes, I understand that theory. There's also this one (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9612454#post9612454). That's why I said "if you believe...".

I was just reading the last of the ultimate av mag cedia highlights and they spoke nothing of the mistubishi laser TV!!!! They talked about how good sonys and sharps RGB LED backlit LCDs were.


My hopes for the mitsu 73inch are dead now , sniff , sniff, sniff

That depends on which theory of SSE you subscribe to: the textured screen cause, or the narrow angle on the primary mirror cause. If it's the former, it's because they used lenticular screens instead of textured screens. If it's the latter, it's probably because older CRT sets were generally much deeper and used less shallow angles. Or maybe something else. :DI'd guess it's the former, not the latter. My RP-CRT is about as shallow as they ever made 'em.

IF you believe that SSE is due to the mirror, it could have more SSE than other DLPs due to the shallow cabinet. And I can't help but wonder if it has any laser speckle mixed in there. That being said, SSE is one of the first things I noticed when looking at DLPs in the store, but something I haven't noticed AT ALL once I got it in my home.

7K is an expensive hope.....

Seggers

SSE is all about the screen.

One of the guys over at Satellite Guys was at CEDIA and when asked about the LaserVue's black levels, he had quite the different opinion.

"I haven't them all but the Laserview is mindblowing true blacks... I seriously doubt anything can touch it. Todayis my last day so I'll reserve judgement but I can't imagine a better CR"

Just one person's opinion, but he did spend time looking at it and appears to have liked what he saw. I'll ask him to expand on that because it leaves a lot open to interpretation.

SSE is all about the screen.

There is more to it then just the screen IMHO. Micro display RPTV’s use one small projection lens, the difference in angle between light emanating from one edge of the lens compared to that from the opposite edge is small.
With a CRT RPTV there are three lenses spaced a significant distance apart and each lens is about three times the size of the micro display lens, therefore the light striking the screen surface comes from a large range of angles.

The screen surface is made up of tiny facets that reflect light in a range of directions to improve viewing angle, obviously the narrow angles from the miro display lens tend create a much more focused output towards the viewer then the broad angles from the three large CRT lenses, with the result that these individual facets are much more noticeable to the viewer.

I am not an optical engineer but this is my theory on the SSE issue, it seems very plausible to me.

Did I hit a nerve? :) You're putting words in my mouth. Calm down. I was just saying we are willing to, doesn't mean we will, can or have to. Geez. I'm sure all of us "have" paid more for our sets than our non videophile friends have.

Just sayin'...:)

Even if I thought the Laservue is superior to my $2K 67" Sammy Led DLP, which might make me a videophile (Only if it really IS superior?) doesn't mean I'm willing to pay the extra $5K.

But I SO appreciate the difference. :D

If that's true then CRTs would display absolute blacks since they can do this on an all black screen. However if you display an image on the screen on a CRT you will no longer have absolute blacks. Having said this, I don't understand what you are saying but CRTs don't float blacks??? :confused:



I should have clarified, there are two facts affecting float on a CRT, one is light scatter from the thick glass front plate on a direct view CRT or the projection lenses in a RPTV, the second is power supply modulation with load. Poor supply regulation results in a negative float whereby black level drops with high average picture level scenes. Cheap CRT TV’s tend to have this problem but good ones don’t.
The positive float due to light scatter is not really a problem as your eyes can’t see black when the screen is showing bright content.

Isn't Samsung releasing a new line of LED DLPs in 2009? Hopefully they'll be busting out a 50"....And the same goes for LaserVue, but they'll be probably cost twice as much. As it stands, DLP based technology seems to be the closest thing to CRT, well as far as motion/response time goes for that matter

Isn't Samsung releasing a new line of LED DLPs in 2009? Hopefully they'll be busting out a 50

Or 65" for that matter.

I wouldn't bother with him if I were you - considering he watches his 73" Mitsu from 15" feet away (almost twice the recommended distance) and in a very bright room


15ft would be about perfect for a 73in. Even 12ft is a little to close imo and more suited for a 65.

Originally Posted by WaveBoy
Isn't Samsung releasing a new line of LED DLPs in 2009? Hopefully they'll be busting out a 50

I think most opinions in this forum is a 50" RPTV is gone for good. The market for 50" is saturated and thin is in. Once flat panels in the 65" to 75" range become affordable to most people, RPTV will be gone for good. All IMHO.

Originally posted by Grendell
Or 65" for that matter.

I doubt they will make a model 2" small than the one they have. It's nice to have a 67" choice out there.

Or 65" for that matter.

Too big for me, give me 50", with better color, better blacks and a better viewing angle...LCDs are out of the question since they have a ways to go tech-wise. And plasmas still can't deliver CRT motion/response time. LED DLP on the otherhand can, but their problem(with me atleast) is that they're limmited in sizes usually going from 61" and up and of course the dreaded viewing angle(although LaserVue has corrected this apperantly)

Ugh...I guess if LED DLP and LaserVue don't pump out a 50" display, i'm guessing i'll have to lean towards Plasma.
Until then, i'm sticking with my Sony 32" Wega trinitron CRT SDTV, and 'if' there isn't any LED DLP and LaserVue sets coming out in the 50" range, i'll just wait for Samsungs and Panasonics new Plasma Spring Line up....I mean i was set on getting the Samsung 550 plasma...but eh.

Boy you sure are hooked on black levels and ANSI contrast is rediculous. It's just a measurement of how much brighter the white is than the black/gray. How bright a set goes is irrelevent. Next you'll be telling me a Kuro is better than the theater because it goes blacker and brighter. How can a Kuro go blacker than a crt that isn't putting out any light? If my room is black and my set isn't getting a signal you can't see that it is there. Again irrelevent to video. I'm sure my set can match a Kuro for black levels, also irrelevent. The Kuro is not the "holy grail" anymore than my set is. Maybe the laser will be or come closer.

PS, I've seen the Kuro, you haven't seen my set. BTW those reflections are a killer. The Sony 34XBR960 is not in the same league with my set. You're not the only nonbeliever, Qualia owners told me how much better their sets are, they hadn't seen my set either.


Different technologies bill. A kuro is like have a large tube tv. Something a rp-crt could never come close too. There's pro's and con's to everything. The main thing that made me want digital is HD. Rp-crt never could achieve the "being'' there effect that digital has. But besides that when it comes to pure PQ crt is tough to beat especially at larger screen sizes.

Too big for me, give me 50", with better color, better blacks and a better viewing angle...LCDs are out of the question since they have a ways to go tech-wise. And plasmas still can't deliver CRT motion/response time. LED DLP on the otherhand can, but their problem(with me atleast) is that they're limmited in sizes usually going from 61" and up and of course the dreaded viewing angle(although LaserVue has corrected this apperantly)

Ugh...I guess if LED DLP and LaserVue don't pump out a 50" display, i'm guessing i'll have to lean towards Plasma.
Until then, i'm sticking with my Sony 32" Wega trinitron CRT SDTV, and 'if' there isn't any LED DLP and LaserVue sets coming out in the 50" range, i'll just wait for Samsungs and Panasonics new Plasma Spring Line up....I mean i was set on getting the Samsung 550 plasma...but eh.


If you can and have enough distance, BUY a tv :) ANYTHING will probably blow the 32 tube away for screen size and wow factor. :) You would never go back to the crt with a 50in plasma.

If you can and have enough distance, BUY a tv :) ANYTHING will probably blow the 32 tube away for screen size and wow factor. :) You would never go back to the crt with a 50in plasma.

LED DLPs have the upper advantage for motion/response time though, and that's what annoys me since i dont want to settle for a 61"

Plasma on the otherhand(while better than LCD in this area) still isn't as good as CRT. And motion/response time and of course color and blacks are a huge deal to me for videogames. So as it stands, LED DLPs and LaserVue displays will most likely never getter small in size, but will plasmas improve with their motion? like i said i'll probably just wait till the new spring lineup.

But really, give me a 50" LED DLP or LaserVue and i'll be happy....Or a Plasma that can deliver CRT motion/response time

Different technologies bill. A kuro is like have a large tube tv. Something a rp-crt could never come close too. There's pro's and con's to everything. The main thing that made me want digital is HD. Rp-crt never could achieve the "being'' there effect that digital has. But besides that when it comes to pure PQ crt is tough to beat especially at larger screen sizes.

A CRT-RPTV is like having a small theater. :) Does the theater not seem like "being" there to you? I'll have to see with the LaserVue. BTW I haven't watched Directview tube for 30 years. When I saw that first large screen CRT-RPTV with no reflections, brighter and better color among other things, I was sold.

PS, a Kuro is not like having a big tube CRT, It isn't as good. OH no he didn't!! :D

LED DLPs have the upper advantage for motion/response time though


I would have to see that to believe it but i know the color wheel dlp i had was poor at motion. Something was off. Dlp also uses reflection, but i don't know if that was the cause or poor processing. I also noticed poor motion with the sxrd. Plasma is quite good with motion, not perfect though.

DLP response time even blows CRT out of the water, look it up. Three chip DLP is the ultimate but laser may be so fast we won't need it.

15ft would be about perfect for a 73in. Even 12ft is a little to close imo and more suited for a 65.

Actually, you'd be wrong. In order to get the full benefit of 1080p from a 73" display, you need to be sitting closer than 10'. From 15' away, you'd need a 115" display. Even from 12' you need a 100"+ display.

http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.png

The guys on the EngadgetHD podcast were raving about the LaserVue. It was the first thing they covered during their CEDIA discussion.

Actually, you'd be wrong. In order to get the full benefit of 1080p from a 73" display, you need to be sitting closer than 10'. From 15' away, you'd need a 115" display. Even from 12' you need a 100"+ display....

You need to add that this is only valid with the very best input, such as top-quality Blu-ray. With the normal mix of signals most people have, one would be staring at a lot of signal noise being so close. But each of us can of course choose for themselves.

15ft would be about perfect for a 73in. Even 12ft is a little to close imo and more suited for a 65.
I view a 73" from 10', and honestly, 8' seems even better to me (though not practical for my setup). At 15', you may as well have a 720p display... you won't notice any improvement with 1080p.

You need to add that this is only valid with the very best input, such as top-quality Blu-ray. With the normal mix of signals most people have, one would be staring at a lot of signal noise being so close.
While Blu-ray does look incredible, regular old HD from cable/sat/OTA is just fine. Even upconverted SD DVDs look decent. Sure, SD from sat/cable looks like @ss, but fortunately we're far enough along that we don't have to watch much of that any more. It also looks like @ss on my smaller displays. No amount of lipstick will fix that.
But each of us can of course choose for themselves.
Indeed. :)

70” at 9’ here and I want to go to 80” if possible, no trouble with noise at all with any source, although there was when I had a 57” CRT RPTV. For 15’ I would want a 100” screen.
If I had to sit 15’ back from a 73” to get a decent picture I would be looking for a better display.

Here's the photo from CEDIA (http://www.hometheatermag.com/news/508mitsline/index.html) that was mentioned earlier (I think):

http://tommycatkins.com/laservue_cedia.jpg

The black of the bezel and stand clearly stand out from the black on the screen. Certainly doesn't look like a $7,000 set should look.


Don't look for blacks where the picture does not call for black. The TV is not
trying to produce black in the left 2/3 of the picture. On the right site where
the guy has his hand you can see that there is hardly any distinction to the
black bezel. The same thing we can see in the upper right corner where
there is hardly a distinction between the guys hairs and the bezel. I would
say this is an excellent black level performance.

Klaus

Don't look for blacks where the picture does not call for black. The TV is not
trying to produce black in the left 2/3 of the picture. On the right site where
the guy has his hand you can see that there is hardly any distinction to the
black bezel. The same thing we can see in the upper right corner where
there is hardly a distinction between the guys hairs and the bezel. I would
say this is an excellent black level performance.

Klaus

Although it may be due to the photo itself, I disagree. I think you should see more surface details in his hair and jacket collar. In other words, shadow details are missing.

Don't look for blacks where the picture does not call for black. The TV is not
trying to produce black in the left 2/3 of the picture. On the right site where
the guy has his hand you can see that there is hardly any distinction to the
black bezel. The same thing we can see in the upper right corner where
there is hardly a distinction between the guys hairs and the bezel. I would
say this is an excellent black level performance.

Klaus


There is absolutely NO WAY you can tell that from a photograph of one display, shown on another display. :rolleyes:

What if the camera crushes blacks, or your display at home does, or whatever? :cool:

Wasn't this technology supposed to offer a cheaper entry point for consumers? $7k is too high IMHO.

http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/39233/97/

$7,000 for a 65" DLP RPTV? No way!

The price of a 65" LCD flat panel TV has dropped to about 4 to 5k (Sharp) and as low as 2 to 3k for a certain brand that may be in bankruptcy (Olevia).

To sell, the 65" laser dlp should street for 2 to 3k and the 73" for under 4k.
Prices will fall, fall, fall, or they will shut down the production line. Remember, lasers actually cost less than bulbs, at least according to the laser manufacturers.

IB

Although it may be due to the photo itself, I disagree. I think you should see more surface details in his hair and jacket collar. In other words, shadow details are missing.

The subject was about how good the Mits can do blacks and that's what
I was trying to point out. Shadow detail is another issue, but it can hardly be
judged from this kind of photo.

@ moonhawk
If the camera would crush blacks, then the bezel would also be crushed. We
are looking at the difference between the black in the projected image and
that of the bezel. This difference is certainly very slim.

Klaus

Originally Posted by Stew4msu
Actually, you'd be wrong. In order to get the full benefit of 1080p from a 73" display, you need to be sitting closer than 10'. From 15' away, you'd need a 115" display. Even from 12' you need a 100"+ display....

What some people seem to forget is some people actually live in the room where there TV is. There is space to lay down, ruff house, play with the WII, etc. Who cares if it's not the perfect distance. I set 14' away from a 50" right now. If I get a 73" TV, I may not get the "full benefit" of 1080P, but I still get 23" more of TV. There is no choice but 1080P at this size anymore.

The subject was about how good the Mits can do blacks and that's what
I was trying to point out. Shadow detail is another issue, but it can hardly be
judged from this kind of photo.

@ moonhawk
If the camera would crush blacks, then the bezel would also be crushed. We
are looking at the difference between the black in the projected image and
that of the bezel. This difference is certainly very slim.

Klaus

Not necessarily, as the bezel and the TV screen will photograph differently.

I wonder how long it wil be before the mods shut this thread down. It has been fun though.

Anyway, I currently have a 60 that I/we sit about 15 feet from. Not the best and I am aiming for a 73 (still not as good, but much better than a 60). If not the LV (not likely now), then the 73835.

As much as I'd love to have a 50 foot monster on the other wall, the wife veto'ed all the FP stuff. Plus it would have been a frakking nightmare to wire up (including from the HTPC that I already drilled one hole in the wall for :) ) along with having to re-jig the entire room.

I will move the TV stand forward a couple of inches to allow for better access to the 3 plates of spagethi at the back.

My point is that we don't all have the luxury of sitting right on top of a TV, so we do the best we can with what we have.

Seggers

Now this is what a screen shot should look like (from FP-CRT, screen shot wars thread). No crushed blacks or whites, detail in the shadows. No "Black Hole" blacks.

It's crazy, because a 65" LaserVue HDTV cost almost 3 Times more than the current Samsung 61" LED DLP.:eek:
And for what? Better Color, Better Blacks, a much better Viewing Angle, Slimmer design at 10", Lower on Electricity and more environment friendly...er, wait a sec'. Damnit I want one, but for $6999, there's no way in hell. And it's hard enough for me to even think of spending $3000 for an HDTV.

Calm down people, and take some deep breaths.

The TV isn't out yet, so lets all wait for informed reviews & opinions.

As for the price, it's all still guess work... and, if it did start out at $6999, the price, as with all similar products, would soon begin to drop and become affordable.

I love following the news on Mits LV but am tired of the short term, uniformed views which many in the thread are taking.

Lets just wait and see.

M.

DLP response time even blows CRT out of the water, look it up.


Nothing beats crt for response time imo. I had a dlp and i thought there was some lag in gaming. My rear projection lcd i thought was better.

It isn't the DLP chip that creates lag. It is the digital video processing that pretty much every digital TV does these days.

CRTs are faster because they don't have the digital video processing.

Actually, you'd be wrong. In order to get the full benefit of 1080p from a 73" display, you need to be sitting closer than 10'. From 15' away, you'd need a 115" display. Even from 12' you need a 100"+ display.


So with a 50in what would the distance be? 5feet? :) What about a 32in tube tv? 3ft? Any charts like that are purely subjective, manufacturers want people to believe 8ft is enough distance for a 73. 8ft is 50in-55in range imo. I view at 12ft and find it is good for 50in-65in. 73in at 8-9ft would be like the front rows at a movie theater.

So with a 50in what would the distance be? 5feet? :)

6 feet.

What about a 32in tube tv? 3ft?

4 feet (psst. It's all on the chart).

Any charts like that are purely subjective, manufacturers want people to believe 8ft is enough distance for a 73.

Actually, it's not subjective. It's based on what the human eye can and cannot see and it's not provided by manufacturers. HERE'S (http://www.carltonbale.com/2006/11/1080p-does-matter/)a link to the article.

8ft is 50in-55in range imo.

That is subjective.

I view at 12ft and find it is good for 50in-65in. 73in at 8-9ft would be like the front rows at a movie theater.

Well, I'm 13' away from my 126" display and it's nothing like the front row of a movie theater. The whole display is within my field of vision, which is not the case when you're in the front row at a commercial theater.

Now, if you don't have a 1080p display, don't have enough room for the right display, or don't care to take full advantage of the resolution, then sit any distance you want (and save some money by getting a 720p display). No biggie. But don't try and brush off the science of it as subjective, just because you don't like it.

I can afford it, but the question is whether it's worth it? Or maybe I'll be better off w/ the Sony XBR8 or Samsung A950. Hmmm..decisions...decisions!

...I view at 12ft and find it is good for 50in-65in. 73in at 8-9ft would be like the front rows at a movie theater.

I've tried sitting much closer to my TV than normal just as an experiment. I selected a distance at which I could not quite see the individual pixels on my 52 inch 720p D-ILA. If I recall it was about 6 feet, which would be about 1.4 times the diagonal size of my TV. I tried various types of input, and made sure I sat level with the center of the screen.

I didn't like it at all. On HD I found it uncomfortable to be looking at such a wide angle, and it looked much less smooth than I'm used to. And on SD, even though the angle was narrower, the signal noise was awful.

Of course newer sets (mine is 3 years old) have better video processing. And even though I couldn't see individual pixels I'm quite prepared to accept that a good 1080p image would look smoother. But none of this gets around the angle problem, and the newer sets can only do so much with an imperfect signal. So for me, a distance of twice the diagonal size of the TV is about the closest I have any desire for. I've confirmed this multiple times in stores, including the one I purchase from, a small high-end AV store with good feeds and lighting.

But we all have a right to make our own choices.

I think owen said he views a 70in at 9ft. And wants bigger? I believe he also said dvd is unwatchable. I personally don't feel 1080p is wasted unless you sit real close. I can see the difference at 12ft on a 60in. Would you agree the charts are based on 'minumum' viewing distance? Ideal distance is another thing, but i agree it's probably based on preference.

I think owen said he views a 70in at 9ft. And wants bigger? I believe he also said dvd is unwatchable. I personally don't feel 1080p is wasted unless you sit real close. I can see the difference at 12ft on a 60in. Would you agree the charts are based on 'minumum' viewing distance? Ideal distance is another thing, but i agree it's probably based on preference.

This calculator (http://myhometheater.homestead.com/viewingdistancecalculator.html) gives you various viewing distances, including those recommended by THX and SMPTE.

It appears to cover all bases.

I can see the difference between 720p broadcasts and 1080i broadcasts from 15ft and so can everyone else who watches my set. . Then there is BR which looks even better. There is an obvious difference between SD and HD from 35ft on the other end of my room. I think those charts are not correct. Like Zeus, I don't think 1080i/p is wasted at any distance.

I think

You're entitled to your opinion, but opinions rarely trump science. If they did, this site might be AVOforum.com

You believe your charts, I'll believe my eyes. We're both happy. :) You know, this might have something to do with the true resolution of HDTV- http://archive.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=326565#post326565

I can see the difference between 720p broadcasts and 1080i broadcasts from 15ft and so can everyone else who watches my set.

Even if anyone believed you, you lost all credibility with that statement, as almost everyone on AVS knows, most of the public cannot tell the difference in upconverted 480 and true HD on a TV.

SMPTE and THX have both scientifically proven that everything will look 720p at BEST from the 15 feet you claim.

I think that says more to the quality of the sets they are viewing than the people themselves. I'm sure if they did this test with the Laservue (see that, back on topic), they wouldn't say that. Did you read my previous post?

It isn't the DLP chip that creates lag. It is the digital video processing that pretty much every digital TV does these days.

CRTs are faster because they don't have the digital video processing.

So as it stands, CRT is obviously the best when it comes to this...And LCD has to be last. And I'm guessing DLP beats out Plasma...But what about 'LED' DLP if there's even an actual difference.

Anyways, when in the hell will HDTVs perform as well as CRTs regarding motion/response time?:mad:

Or what about laser DLP?

I've tried sitting much closer to my TV than normal just as an experiment. I selected a distance at which I could not quite see the individual pixels on my 52 inch 720p D-ILA. If I recall it was about 6 feet, which would be about 1.4 times the diagonal size of my TV.
I say get a new TV. I've viewed a 57" Sharp LCD FP for two years from 8.5' and a 65" would be easy especially in Dot Mode 1:1 - I can get within inches before I can see pixels and often none with BD or HD DVD.

IMO it confirms the THX Viewing mode for those that have a 1080 display and feed it source. My biggest regret was not going 65" about a week later as it would have certainly been cheaper then trying to go bigger two years later by having to buy another larger LCD and now tempted by RGB LED Sharp 65" but hoping this LV could be the Holy Grail we're always seeking here but a double price of the other Diamonds seems hard to justify. :)

If you think you have an outstanding TV, you need watch the new BR version of 'Kill Bill". I would sure love to see this one on the Laservue. Wow!

The thin bezel on the 65" Laservue would be a perfect fit in my setup. But even if this set's street price was close to $5K, I couldn't justify spending that much. Around $3K seems to be justifiable for a great set.
The main issue I have though is that this will be the first generation. Regardless of how great it is when it's released, the 2nd generation set will be much better. Both by having the kinks and flaws of the 1st generation fixed, which is inevitable for any 1st generation technology, and the pricing should be better as well.

I say get a new TV. ..

It's cheaper to repeat the experiment in stores, as I described. As I also described, new sets are better but not that much. No, West, my TV is not the problem. The input is.

I think that says more to the quality of the sets they are viewing than the people themselves. I'm sure if they did this test with the Laservue (see that, back on topic), they wouldn't say that. Did you read my previous post?

Doesn't matter - science rules. Unless everyone has about 20/1 vision, that size at 15 ft will be 720p or less in resolution - and since 20/20 is more the norm, what you have stated is impossible.

The guys on the EngadgetHD podcast were raving about the LaserVue. It was the first thing they covered during their CEDIA discussion.

Considering I have personally had conversations with 4 sets of the best eyes in the Industry who saw it a CEDIA and they all gave it a big thumbs down and that "it looked like hell", saying the colors were off and it "just didn't look good", there are only two explanations to that :

1) They are sucking up to Mitsubishi trying to get one in their house to play with

2) They are blind or clueless as to what a picture is supposed to look like, but of course they rave about the 9th Generation Kuros who's colors are not correct.

I have even spoken with the person who manages the Television Department for a MAJOR chain that will have these next month. He told me "the only people who will buy one of these is those who want to brag about it to their friends about having the latest and greatest. If they actually took the time to look at the set, they would see there are far better options"

When I combine those, with the people that posted here after viewing the set at CEDIA, I don't get the sense of anyone recommending it - if they actually looked at the set.

Can't these companies find a bloody way to make thinner CRT HDTV displays? It seemed like SED was going to be the closest thing to it, since it was a combination of CRT and Plasma, but that tech is dead in the water.

Anyways, i'm sticking with my CRT for now....I guess I'll just wait and see what rolls around next Spring for the New Plasma Spring Line up from Samsung and Panasonic...

And what a bummer about that 'big thumbs down for LaserVue' comment based on what those 4 guys were saying.

Originally posted by seggers:
I wonder how long it wil be before the mods shut this thread down. It has been fun though.

This threads been going since January, why should they shut it down a couple months before the TV comes out? Just because it's getting a little snippy and elitist is no reason to close it down. :)

Viewing a 70” from 9’ give a 30 degree viewing angle, the minimum recommended for THX viewing, it’s like sitting about two thirds back in a cinema where most people like to sit and definitely not anything like front row.
A 73” from 15’ is like viewing from out in the foyer.

Comparing 720p video with 1080 video is an invalid test. The only way to make valid comparison between 720 and 1080 resolution without other factors corrupting the results is to use the same 1080 source and display for both tests.
The best way to achieve this is the take high quality 1920x1080 video, downscale it to 1280x720 to strip out all resolution above 1280x720 and then scale back up to 1920x1080 for comparison to the original 1080 video, both on the same 1920x1080 display. This way the only thing that has changed is resolution; all other factors including the display remain the same.
I have done this test many times with various video sources and it’s not easy to pick the difference between the scaled down 720 version and the original 1080 version on a 70” screen at 9’ with my 20:20 vision. At 12’ I can’t pick it at all, and at 15’ 1080 looks little different to 1080 downscaled to 720x576.


Bob, try connecting you 73” Mitsubishi to a PC and display a 1920x1080 test pattern. You will find that the 1080 horizontal line pattern will be a flickering blur due to interlacing and the 1920 vertical line pattern will be just grey mush. You will be lucky if the set will resolve a 1400 line pattern with any degree of clarity. Fixed pixel 1080 displays clearly resolve these patterns without issue.

It's crazy, because a 65" LaserVue HDTV cost almost 3 Times more than the current Samsung 61" LED DLP.:eek:
And for what? Better Color, Better Blacks, a much better Viewing Angle, Slimmer design at 10", Lower on Electricity and more environment friendly...er, wait a sec'. Damnit I want one, but for $6999, there's no way in hell. And it's hard enough for me to even think of spending $3000 for an HDTV.

A properly calibrated Samsung LED set will only use ~80 watts of power.. Laserviews use how much??.. Also, there is no proof yet of the blacks being better, or the color being better, even in the case of TV's that are compliant to HDMI 1.3 standards, there is no material that takes full advantage of 12 bit colors.. There is NO TV to compare with yet!! Only statements from a few people that saw a overcalibrated prototype at a trade show.. Lets just settle down and see what these sets are like. :) I am anxious too!! Just remember that even when the first Samsung LED's came out, even their 50 inch was around $2100 - $2300 - these things may come down in price as well (provided Mits keeps making them...)

It isn't the DLP chip that creates lag. It is the digital video processing that pretty much every digital TV does these days.

CRTs are faster because they don't have the digital video processing.

This is a mythical/factual statement.. Even the signal going the CRT needs to be processed if it comes from a digital signal, and if it's a High Def signal, there is a possibility of lag... When DLP TV's first came out, CRT's were still sitting on the top of TV food chain.. DLP being a digital technology required the analog signal that older traditional TV used to be converted to a digital signal. For some time the processors on DLP sets could be observed next to a traditional CRT television with a lag time issue.

Fast forward to today.... Go into even your local Wal-Mart (actually really good place to observe this), and notice the High Def TV's they have tuned to the same thing. You will notice that some of these units - be it plasma or LCD, will have a small lag behind other sets. This is best observed when there is a quick change between scenes or camera shots. Most high quality TV's have very fast DSP's on them now that do NOT induce any noticable lag. A good test of this - videogames!! :) I am a DLP owner, and a PS3 owner.. There is a test in Rockband to see if there is any lag with your set, and mine passes flawlessly..

So as it stands, CRT is obviously the best when it comes to this...And LCD has to be last. And I'm guessing DLP beats out Plasma...But what about 'LED' DLP if there's even an actual difference.

Anyways, when in the hell will HDTVs perform as well as CRTs regarding motion/response time?:mad:

They Do :)

Nothing beats crt for response time imo. I had a dlp and i thought there was some lag in gaming. My rear projection lcd i thought was better.

Lag has nothing to do with display technology. That is more due to image processing (scalers, picture enhancement, etc.). There's no easy way to know how much lag a display is going to have, because those numbers aren't published, and there's nothing available to consumers to make any educated guesses. All you can do is ask those who have or have tested that particular display (or possibly one similar by the same manufacturer), but so many don't use their displays in a way that would make this obvious, that you are likely to get "it's not a problem" answers in cases where it very well could be. I have significant lag just going through my AVR (which has a Reon processor) before the signal even gets to the TV.

But as far as DLP vs. CRT... a DLP mirror can switch in 10 microseconds. The phosphor decay time (from being energized to returning to dark) is generally several milliseconds. A DLP mirror needs to move many times for just one frame, but still... it is plenty fast for practical purposes, and can outperform CRT in this aspect. It's the electronics upstream of the actual display hardware that may be the problem.

EDIT: oops, I see there is already a whole page of responses on this issue. :o

There's already several responses on this, but I'll chime in...
Any charts like that are purely subjective, manufacturers want people to believe 8ft is enough distance for a 73. 8ft is 50in-55in range imo. I view at 12ft and find it is good for 50in-65in. 73in at 8-9ft would be like the front rows at a movie theater.
They are not subjective. They are from organizations that provide guidelines for movie theater design and certification (which have become guidlines for home theaters). They also have guidelines for maximum FOV (front row) which result in MUCH wider viewing angles. Take a look at this spreadsheet (http://www.carltonbale.com/home-theater/home-theater-calculator/)... it shows both.

I think owen said he views a 70in at 9ft. And wants bigger?
My new set is 73", and I view from 10'. Assuming a good source, I think 8' is closer to ideal. Upscaled DVD is still enjoyable to me, but it's not Blu-ray either.
Would you agree the charts are based on 'minumum' viewing distance? Ideal distance is another thing, but i agree it's probably based on preference.
They are based on MAXIMUM distance. Depending on which charts you are looking at (I prefer this one (http://s3.carltonbale.com/distance_chart.html), as it takes into account viwing angle and resolution), the two THX numbers are based on maximum recommended distance (the distance they recommend you not exceed for the back row), and the maximum allowed distance (the maxium distance they allow for the back row to give you THX certification. MINIMUM distance isn't shown on this chart. See the spreadsheet linked above for that.

You believe your charts, I'll believe my eyes. We're both happy. :)
In my case, my eyes pretty much agree with the chart, but you are right, no one should go against their eyes. You should do whatever feels comfortable to you.

I can see the difference between 720p broadcasts and 1080i broadcasts from 15ft and so can everyone else who watches my set.
On what size display? Unless it's over 80", then you and all your friends must all have much better than 20/20 vision, assuming equal quality broadcasts of comparable content.

Ok, one more post on this (off topic) viewing distance/size issue... out of curiosity, I plugged in my 19" (4x3) PC monitor and approx 18" viewing distance in to the spreadsheet, and I'm at a much greater viewing angle than my 73"/10' TV ratio (but I am still within the maximum angle, they suggest no more than 0.9'). At home, I have a 24" 16x9 PC display, and I view it comfortably from pretty much the same distance.

So those of you who think the recomended size/distances are so outlandish, what distance are you viewing your PC monitor at? If it's closer to the recomendations than what you find comfortable for your TV, why is one ok and the other not? Do you feel like you have to "move your head back and forth" to work on your PC? Personally, I spend MUCH more time looking at a computer monitor than I do watching TV. If this 45° angle at work all day doesn't bother me, the 30° I have at home watching TV certainly isn't.

Great point - finally. Hell, my 30" Apple Cinema display looks great at 18" for detailed work.

73" at 8 feet looks great on my 736. Gives me a cinema like effect for good content. Granted - if the input is crap SD than it looks horrible.

Open your intuition on viewing distance. Take a look at Dali's painting, "Gala overlooking the Mediterranean Sea". Look at the pixel size and ask yourself how far back you have to stand to average out the pixels. Go her:

http://www.authenticsociety.com/about/GalaMediterraneanLincoln_Dali

...So those of you who think the recomended size/distances are so outlandish, what distance are you viewing your PC monitor at? ...Do you feel like you have to "move your head back and forth" to work on your PC? ....

I never have to watch moving video on my monitor, except on small areas of it. I can look around at whatever rate is comfortable to me. More important, at least in my experience, the data feed between the computer and monitor is not subject to the transmission limitations of satellite or cable.

A properly calibrated Samsung LED set will only use ~80 watts of power..

The 46" A950 uses 136W calibrated, according to CNET's review.

I doubt they will make a model 2" small than the one they have. It's nice to have a 67" choice out there.

Huh? Samsung is going to make a 67" LCD? Where did you hear this?

Boy you sure are hooked on black levels and ANSI contrast is rediculous. It's just a measurement of how much brighter the white is than the black/gray. How bright a set goes is irrelevent. Next you'll be telling me a Kuro is better than the theater because it goes blacker and brighter. How can a Kuro go blacker than a crt that isn't putting out any light? If my room is black and my set isn't getting a signal you can't see that it is there. Again irrelevent to video. I'm sure my set can match a Kuro for black levels, also irrelevent. The Kuro is not the "holy grail" anymore than my set is. Maybe the laser will be or come closer.

PS, I've seen the Kuro, you haven't seen my set. BTW those reflections are a killer. The Sony 34XBR960 is not in the same league with my set. You're not the only nonbeliever, Qualia owners told me how much better their sets are, they hadn't seen my set either.

Yes, I am telling you that a quality BD on the Elite 151 is better than the theater. A source that can go blacker and brighter comes closer to what the eye sees in real situations. Go outside on a sunny day. Can a movie theater come close to that level of brightness? Not a chance. While I realize that film has higher resolution, when its blown up on screen it ends up being less detailed. If you don't see more detail on your Mits with a high quality BD than what the same movie looked like at the theater, well you must have much higher quality theaters than we have here.

A movie theater is bigger, other than that it is inferior. "Film like" is immaterial to me. What the image looked like live is the ultimate goal. On the Elite I see a closer representation of what I see live than what I see projected at the theater.

At $7000 the standard the Laservue must equal or exceed is the Elite 151. It's a pretty lofty goal indeed. I hope they do as I want a screen bigger than 60".

@ Varmint and Grendell: The those posts were about DLPs, not LCDs.

Yes, I am telling you that a quality BD on the Elite 151 is better than the theater. A source that can go blacker and brighter comes closer to what the eye sees in real situations.

You can tell me whatever you want.

Fact is, the color on the Elite 151 is incorrect and the CCA in the Pioneer does not allow it to be set correctly either.

The black is terrible on the Elite due to the filter Pioneer places on the glass to reduce the Black Level. Thus the black looks Magenta at lower light levels and Magenta is NOT on the Grey Scale.

At least the color is right in the Theater.

So you can talk about lower blacks all you want, but the truth is, it only has lower Magentas and the color is not correct.

I'll stick with true blacks and colors that are correct, thank you.

ulimateavmag.com "Black level, detail and color are second to none. If you insist on the best at any cost, look no further." Look at the grey scale and D65 color points post calibration. Also, a well know calibrator here at AVS, if not the most well known, happens to think the 9G is at the top of the food chain as of right now. The screen coating appears to be an issue with some, like RBE, and if it bothers you, fine. I never said the Elite was perfect. It's just better than anything on the market, excluding FP, to me.

You are entitled to your views and I respect them. The issue you raise is not a problem for me. Ultimately my point is not to convince you or anyone else how good the Elite is, it's to point out that for $7000 the Laservue will have to lap the field. We can agree to disagree about who the current leader may be.

The Pioneers are not even in the race as far as I am concerned; no way will I go back to a 60”. If or when Pioneer can sell me a 70” plus model, then I will take interest.

IF THE 65 is reported at 7000 what is the 73in?!?!?! I'm truly heart broken at this point.

i just reserved 1 65" laservue at my local tweeter coming mid to end october
probably will not buy it but if i decide to then i know ill have one waiting for me

Too big for me, give me 50", with better color, better blacks and a better viewing angle...LCDs are out of the question since they have a ways to go tech-wise. And plasmas still can't deliver CRT motion/response time. LED DLP on the otherhand can, but their problem(with me atleast) is that they're limmited in sizes usually going from 61" and up and of course the dreaded viewing angle(although LaserVue has corrected this apperantly)

Ugh...I guess if LED DLP and LaserVue don't pump out a 50" display, i'm guessing i'll have to lean towards Plasma.
Until then, i'm sticking with my Sony 32" Wega trinitron CRT SDTV, and 'if' there isn't any LED DLP and LaserVue sets coming out in the 50" range, i'll just wait for Samsungs and Panasonics new Plasma Spring Line up....I mean i was set on getting the Samsung 550 plasma...but eh.

You seem to be obsessing about motion and using that as an excuse to stay with CRT.
My last too main displays have been CRT RPTV’s and I still own a 34” HD CRT, all where drive from home theatre PC’s. The 34” direct view has noticeable phosphor decay issues, when I put something bright on a dark background and move it around quickly with the PC mouse the slow decay of the screen phosphor leaves obvious trails. The CRT RPTV’s where much better in this regard, they must use faster decaying phosphor. It was also easier to get good blacks on the RPTV’s.
Refraction in the thick front glass of the flat screen on my CRT direct view causes a glow around bright objects, and like all wide screen CRT’s geometry and convergence are far from perfect. You can get much better convergence and geometry on a CRT RPTV because they are fully adjustable.

Current Plasmas are not that bad, I’ll bet that if you lived with a decent one for a week you would not want to give it up and go back to your CRT.
If you really want a 50”, why not take a Plasma home for a while, you can return it if you don’t like it. 50” RPTV’s are finished.

My new set is 73", and I view from 10'. Assuming a good source, I think 8' is closer to ideal. Upscaled DVD is still enjoyable to me, but it's not Blu-ray either.


Is 10ft the maximum you could go back? Could you back further if you wanted? It would be interesting to note if people sitting this close is out of preferance or size-room limitation.

No, my sofas are against the back wall. So I can't sit further. But I certainly could have bought smaller if I wanted to.

Is 10ft the maximum you could go back? Could you back further if you wanted? It would be interesting to note if people sitting this close is out of preferance or size-room limitation.

On my 126" display, I have the ability to sit anywhere from 1' - 20' away. Although there is seating at 18', I prefer the 13' seats.

IF THE 65 is reported at 7000 what is the 73in?!?!?! I'm truly heart broken at this point.

I've read on a few sites that the 73" will be $10K.

[QUOTE=egrady;14641903]A movie theater is bigger, other than that it is inferior. "Film like" is immaterial to me. What the image looked like live is the ultimate goal. On the Elite I see a closer representation of what I see live than what I see projected at the theater.

QUOTE]

This is getting really off topic... but...

No. Part of the look and feel of 24 frame film (and now video) helps to suspend your belief. You don't want to watch a movie that looks LIVE. Another photographer that I shoot with has a great saying, "Video is what the eye sees and film is what the mind sees". A perfect example is to watch any of the "behind the scenes/making of" features on a DVD or Blu-ray, etc. They're almost all shot on "video". Look at how cheesey it seems, it all seems like over/crappy acting.

i just reserved 1 65" laservue at my local tweeter coming mid to end october
probably will not buy it but if i decide to then i know ill have one waiting for me



I went to Tweeter in CT yesterday and Laservue isnt even in their system. They know about it from what they've heard , but checking the computer doesnt show anything.

I wish all Tweeters operated the same

[QUOTE=egrady;14641903]A movie theater is bigger, other than that it is inferior. "Film like" is immaterial to me. What the image looked like live is the ultimate goal. On the Elite I see a closer representation of what I see live than what I see projected at the theater.

QUOTE]

This is getting really off topic... but...

No. Part of the look and feel of 24 frame film (and now video) helps to suspend your belief. You don't want to watch a movie that looks LIVE. Another photographer that I shoot with has a great saying, "Video is what the eye sees and film is what the mind sees". A perfect example is to watch any of the "behind the scenes/making of" features on a DVD or Blu-ray, etc. They're almost all shot on "video". Look at how cheesey it seems, it all seems like over/crappy acting.

You miss my point. I want my monitor to reproduce reality as much as possible. I realize film is not ment to look like a direct HD feed. But, when it comes to reproducing what the eye sees live I stand by what I said. Here is an example. Say a football game was filmed with 35mm and that film was shown in a theater. Would that look as good as a live HD feed of an NFL game on CBS on the 151?

I agree with you on the artistic intent issue, I just want my monitor to be able to reproduce reality as closely as possible when that is the intent. If I now see the wires holding up the flying monkeys, I'll just have to live with it.

I've read on a few sites that the 73" will be $10K.

Meh tired of this. Until it is able to be purchased I won't quote MSRP as the correct price or some website stating a price for the 73" when it hasn't even been given an MSRP as far as I know.

Anyone seen a review coming out of CEDIA on the Laservue?

I've read on a few sites that the 73" will be $10K.

thanks.... i'm waiting for the reviews and maybe a price drop.

Doesn't matter - science rules. Unless everyone has about 20/1 vision, that size at 15 ft will be 720p or less in resolution - and since 20/20 is more the norm, what you have stated is impossible.

I was talking about people who said they can't see the difference between upconverted DVD and HD. There has also been a test where people said there wasn't enough of a difference between analog and HDTV to make them upgrade. Now I'm sure we all agree that that seems fishy. Or again, quality of the HDTVs.

Viewing a 70” from 9’ give a 30 degree viewing angle, the minimum recommended for THX viewing, it’s like sitting about two thirds back in a cinema where most people like to sit and definitely not anything like front row.
A 73” from 15’ is like viewing from out in the foyer.

Comparing 720p video with 1080 video is an invalid test. The only way to make valid comparison between 720 and 1080 resolution without other factors corrupting the results is to use the same 1080 source and display for both tests.
The best way to achieve this is the take high quality 1920x1080 video, downscale it to 1280x720 to strip out all resolution above 1280x720 and then scale back up to 1920x1080 for comparison to the original 1080 video, both on the same 1920x1080 display. This way the only thing that has changed is resolution; all other factors including the display remain the same.
I have done this test many times with various video sources and it’s not easy to pick the difference between the scaled down 720 version and the original 1080 version on a 70” screen at 9’ with my 20:20 vision. At 12’ I can’t pick it at all, and at 15’ 1080 looks little different to 1080 downscaled to 720x576.


Bob, try connecting you 73” Mitsubishi to a PC and display a 1920x1080 test pattern. You will find that the 1080 horizontal line pattern will be a flickering blur due to interlacing and the 1920 vertical line pattern will be just grey mush. You will be lucky if the set will resolve a 1400 line pattern with any degree of clarity. Fixed pixel 1080 displays clearly resolve these patterns without issue.

Owen, did you read my post about the real resolution of HDTV? Most 1080 broadcasters aren't even sending out full resolution. The closer I get from 15ft, the more I start seeing pixels and artifacts. There are statistics and then there is reality. Btw, my 73" does a minimum 1600 lines- tested. Good enough for everything but Full BR and that is even debateable about how much resoltion is really there. I've seen BR that doesn't look very good. Also there is a lot more to picture quality than resolution. Resolution is down the list. You may be right that I'm not seeing the full 1920 lines (if there really ever are that many) but beleive me I can see a difference.

BTW why would Bob or I want to hook up our 73" TV to a computer? I've got a 1920x1200 24" Dell monitor for that. Oh and I don't watch movies on the Dell. My CRT looks better for that.

Those of you discusing response time, throw out the processor and you still have motion blur to contend with on plasma and LCD.

Owen, did you read my post about the real resolution of HDTV? Most 1080 broadcasters aren't even sending out full resolution. The closer I get from 15ft, the more I start seeing pixels and artifacts.
The THX and SMPTE recommendations are based on viewing angles, not resolution. They were originally intended for film, where resolution generally isn't the limiting factor. They are intended to give a recommended field of view to be comfortable and involving to the viewer, based on their research. It just so happens that the size/distance ratio for a person with 20/20 vision to fully resolve 1080x1920 resolution roughly coincides with the minimum viewing angles set by THX and the SMPTE, probably not so conicidentally. Obvously, if you are dealing with a lot of sub-par content, you may want to sacrifice optimum viewing angle for the benefit of masking the flaws of sub-par content. That doesn't invalidate the recomendations, it just means there are multiple factors you need to take into account for your specific situation.

They are what they are. Not sure why so many seem to have a problem with them. If they don't work for you, then don't use them.

BTW why would Bob or I want to hook up our 73" TV to a computer? I've got a 1920x1200 24" Dell monitor for that. Oh and I don't watch movies on the Dell. My CRT looks better for that.
Perhaps to make use of the computer as a DVD player, DVR for TV, to play computer games on a really large screen, etc. The computer doesn't have to be used just for web browsing and reading email ;).

The THX and SMPTE recommendations are based on viewing angles, not resolution. They were originally intended for film, where resolution generally isn't the limiting factor. They are intended to give a recommended field of view to be comfortable and involving to the viewer, based on their research. It just so happens that the size/distance ratio for a person with 20/20 vision to fully resolve 1080x1920 resolution roughly coincides with the minimum viewing angles set by THX and the SMPTE, probably not so conicidentally. Obvously, if you are dealing with a lot of sub-par content, you may want to sacrifice optimum viewing angle for the benefit of masking the flaws of sub-par content. That doesn't invalidate the recomendations, it just means there are multiple factors you need to take into account for your specific situation.

They are what they are. Not sure why so many seem to have a problem with them. If they don't work for you, then don't use them.

Excellent post!

Owen, did you read my post about the real resolution of HDTV? Most 1080 broadcasters aren't even sending out full resolution.

My post was in response to this post of yours.
I can see the difference between 720p broadcasts and 1080i broadcasts from 15ft and so can everyone else who watches my set. . Then there is BR which looks even better. There is an obvious difference between SD and HD from 35ft on the other end of my room. I think those charts are not correct. Like Zeus, I don't think 1080i/p is wasted at any distance.

There are good reasons for why you see what you do, but using two different video sources to compare 720 with 1080 is flawed as I pointed out.
As far as I know your Mitsubishi is incapable of displaying 720p natively, it must convert to 1080i-540p further complicating any comparison.


The closer I get from 15ft, the more I start seeing pixels and artifacts.

I am not surprised, I saw the same thing on my CRT RPTV’s and still do on my 34” HD CRT direct view, that’s because CRT displays use very basic 8bit video processing. When I upgraded to a 70 SXRD I was delighted to find the pixilation and artifacts that I was used to seeing had magically vanished never to return. DVD’s and poor quality SD feeds where dramatically improved, even without using any noise reduction.




Btw, my 73" does a minimum 1600 lines- tested. Good enough for everything but Full BR and that is even debateable about how much resoltion is really there. I've seen BR that doesn't look very good. Also there is a lot more to picture quality than resolution. Resolution is down the list. You may be right that I'm not seeing the full 1920 lines (if there really ever are that many) but beleive me I can see a difference.

Even high end CRT projectors struggle to get 1600 lines with any significant contrast, convergence, focus and astigmatism adjustments need to be spot on. Then there is vertical resolution to worry about.
1080 HD video from any source never has 1920x1080 visible resolution, it just has 1920x 1080 pixels which is not the same thing at all. Likewise 720p video does not have 1280x1080 visible resolution, although 1080 downscaled to 720 will yield better results then video captured at 720p. Having said that, a good CRT RPTV that is tuned to perfection can have sufficient resolving power to show almost all of the available detail in 1080 video
If you use a PC to downscale 1080p from BluRay to 1280x720 and back up to 1920x1080i for display on your 1080i TV you will find you cannot see any loss of detail in the 720 scaled version compared to the original at 15’ on a 73” screen.
I did a similar experiment with a 1920x1080 crop from a digital photo taken with my Nikon digital SLR camera. I scaled the crop down to 1280x720 and back up to 1920x1080 and compared the original and scaled versions side by side on a 70” 1920x1080p display, no way I could see the loss of resolution at 12’ let alone 15’, and there is nothing wrong with my vision. I can resolve a 1920x1080 resolution test patterns at 9’ no problem, but I cant at 12’.


BTW why would Bob or I want to hook up our 73" TV to a computer? I've got a 1920x1200 24" Dell monitor for that. Oh and I don't watch movies on the Dell. My CRT looks better for that.

Apart from the ability to play all kinds of media, the upscaling and video processing capabilities of a well set up decent spec PC are very impressive. The ability to create custom RGB gamma curves to correct the displays gamma and grey scale is invaluable. Almost all displays need gamma correction and grey scaling tweaking beyond what is possible in the service menu for best performance, and many are way off without it.

My two (unscientific) cents:

I view my 67"Sammy LED DLP from about 10-11 feet. At that distance I can see a slight difference when I set my Dish DVR to output 720 for a 720 channel, and 1080 for a 1080 channel, both, of course upconverted by the set to 1080P. From the kitchen, about 10 feet further back I can see no difference.

But from the kitchen, even all the way to the back wall--about 30 feet--I can easily tell the difference between any SD and any HD content.

My last eye exam I still tested 20-20 but I can assure you, it ain't what it used to be. :)

At the risk of getting really of topic, I thought I would post a link to an excellent article about screen size and viewing distance. Although written for those planning a front projection home theater it also applies to large screen RPTVs. It has nothing to due with resolution.

The Most Important Decision to Make For Your Home Theater (http://www.projectorcentral.com/projection_screen_size.htm)

Dan

I was trained by mitsubishi last week in los angeles on repair of the Laservue.
You guys are gonna love this: They made everyone sign a non-disclosure agreement so that we wouldnt talk about the details of the product.

1st time I have ever seen that. freakin nutz.

I can say, however, that the product is shipping in the 3Q of 2008. U do the math.
They wouldnt talk about price though.

At the risk of getting really of topic, I thought I would post a link to an excellent article about screen size and viewing distance. Although written for those planning a front projection home theater it also applies to large screen RPTVs. It has nothing to due with resolution.

The Most Important Decision to Make For Your Home Theater (http://www.projectorcentral.com/projection_screen_size.htm)

Dan

Dan, thanks for the link, I found it to be more enlightening than I would have ever guessed. Definitely made me "stop" and think more before plunging into something that I was not absolutely sure about. Very much appreciated!

It would be nice if some of the guys could post what the linear horizontal distance is of there Samsung LED sets like the 61" and 67" models and the Mits Laser if known?

Changeling

...They are what they are. Not sure why so many seem to have a problem with them. ...

The "problem" so many of us have is that they are not presented as you describe, but rather as absolute answers to the many questions on this forum as to appropriate size of TV. Furthermore, when one tries to present the wider view, one is met by insults, abuse and distortion. If everyone replied in the balanced manner you just did, there would be no "problem".

Dan, thanks for the link, I found it to be more enlightening than I would have ever guessed. Definitely made me "stop" and think more before plunging into something that I was not absolutely sure about. Very much appreciated!

It would be nice if some of the guys could post what the linear horizontal distance is of there Samsung LED sets like the 61" and 67" models and the Mits Laser if known?

Changeling

I sit about 10-11 feet back from my 67" LED DLP. Closer would be better, but the room layout makes that impractical. And they don't make the TV any bigger, at least not yet.

I enjoyed that link from Dansyacht as well--but I had never thought about the issue with constant screen height changing the width.

Maybe it would be wiser to keep constant screen width, and let the height vary with format. That way, you wouldn't have to compromise your distance, which could also compromise the placement of your surround speakers. :eek:

Not being in the market for FPs, I'm thankful I don't have that dilemna, as televisions generally use a constant width. :)

Owen, the pixels and artifacts I am seeing are from the source. I could sit much closer if I wanted to when watching BR. Glad you like your 70" SXRD. Thank goodness for us that nothing will ever make us have to trade sets or viewing distances. :)

dropped by Costco for some grocery and saw a 65" Sharp Aquos for $4300 (no 120hz processing). It looked pretty damn good -- at least on the sunrise earth programs they were showing. It held up well against a 60" Pioneer plasma next to it. The lone Samsung DLP remaining on display looked rather drab and dull by comparison (usual caveats apply).

the laservue has a tough haul.

The Costcos near me all have terrible HD feeds. Blown up and split too many times.

I can see the difference between 720p broadcasts and 1080i broadcasts from 15ft and so can everyone else who watches my set. . Then there is BR which looks even better. There is an obvious difference between SD and HD from 35ft on the other end of my room. I think those charts are not correct. Like Zeus, I don't think 1080i/p is wasted at any distance.

I think you are imagining you see a difference but you really don't. Do a few blinded tests with your friends and then report. You remind me of a audiophile here on AVS who was convinced he could hear a difference in expensive speaker cable. That is, until he did an actual blinded test and then realized after the test results were examined that he was actually worse than a coin toss. At least he admitted it here on AVS.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=12255179#post12255179

Did you see my post about real resolutions of HDTV? I think 15ft is fine for seeing the difference between these real resolutions. I may not be able to see full 1920x1080 BR (it isn't really that also and my TV can't do that many lines anyway) but I can see the difference between it and HDTV also.

PS, I've had plenty of people tell me they can see the difference. GIVE IT UP, MOVE ON. I'm not arguing with your stats ( there are three kinds of lies- white lies, black lies and statistics) don't argue with our eyes.

I hope someone soon can see one of these TVs in the store (Magnolia/Best Buy is supposed to carry them - or was going to when they were supposed to come out this summer) so we can go back to the topic of this thread. That's the only way we'll know if it's overpriced - i.e., is it twice as good as TVs half its price?

It doesn't have to be twice as good, a lot of people will pay for 10-20% better.

It doesn't have to be twice as good, a lot of people will pay for 10-20% better.

I agree. But the thread title is "Mitsubishi's 65-inch Laser TV prototype Revealed! Overpriced?" And my thought was: "What does overpriced mean?" and "Overpriced compared to what?" Some would say that most of the larger TVs are overpriced, so then the word by itself in reference to the 65" LaserVue becomes meaningless. So I figured that if the TV is going to cost 2x as much as a great-quality DLP RPTV, then for it NOT to be overpriced, it should be 2x as good as other DLP RPTVs. Now, how one defines or determines that a TV is overall 1.2x or 1.5x or 2x as good, and hence can justify costing 1.2x or 1.5x or 2x the price, is another question. Do a lot of incremental improvements justify doubling the price? Are one or two factors overwhelmingly the things that determine a TV's relative value, regardless of its other better or worse qualities? Or is value more an arithmetic increase than a geometric increase - i.e., it is not that the LaserVue is worth twice as much as a regular great-quality DLP RPTV, but that its better technology is worth paying an extra $3,500 for.

I would pay around 4k for a 65" Laser if it was light years better than my Mits 52628.

My 52628 will be three years old in Nov of 08 and so far not one problem with it, still has the factory bulb, and was calibrated by Craig Rounds.

So I figured that if the TV is going to cost 2x as much as a great-quality DLP RPTV, then for it NOT to be overpriced, it should be 2x as good as other DLP RPTVs.

That's where you and anyone else made your first mistake.

Higher Quality in Audio and Video is not like the Richter Scale for earthquakes where a 6.4 earthquake is 2x a 6.3 earthquake.

As you move up in quality, the increases are small and incremental - and taking big jumps in money to get there.

So anyone that thought this set would be 2x as good as the best RPTVs was bound to be disappointed.

The real question remains is it even 1x as good as the best RPTVs and thus far only 1 public report of anyone looking at the set at CEDIA has said it surpassed that 1x level (which makes one wonder what Engadget was looking at - or how qualified they were to even comment).

That's where you and anyone else made your first mistake.

Higher Quality in Audio and Video is not like the Richter Scale for earthquakes where a 6.4 earthquake is 2x a 6.3 earthquake.

As you move up in quality, the increases are small and incremental - and taking big jumps in money to get there.

So anyone that thought this set would be 2x as good as the best RPTVs was bound to be disappointed.

The real question remains is it even 1x as good as the best RPTVs and thus far only 1 public report of anyone looking at the set at CEDIA has said it surpassed that 1x level (which makes one wonder what Engadget was looking at - or how qualified they were to even comment).

I was being a bit simplistic, I know, but as I explained, the price increase could be an arithmetic one, not a geometric one. In any case, the value or (over)pricedness of this TV is truly in the eyes of the beholder.

tell me something that ISN'T overpriced...

tell me something that ISN'T overpriced...

I've been pretty impressed with Bob Evans' meals lately...you really seem to get a lot for your dollar there. ;-)

$7K for an RPTV--not so much.

tell me something that ISN'T overpriced...

If you buy it it is not overpriced.

If you buy it it is not overpriced.

oh it's priced correctly alright. you just overpaid :)

When the 73835 can be had for around 2900, I would expect the LV 73 to have no more than a 1200 premium on that. Any more and it is overpriced.

But maybe I'm just tight.....

Seggers

For what its worth .... I just spoke to a local dealer who called his Mitsu Rep about the LV65. The Rep told him it will not be out for another 2-3 months.

For what its worth .... I just spoke to a local dealer who called his Mitsu Rep about the LV65. The Rep told him it will not be out for another 2-3 months.

i hope that is incorrect lol

tell me something that ISN'T overpriced...

the 6 ft hdmi cables i bought from monoprice.com were not overpriced.

the 6 ft hdmi cables i bought from monoprice.com were not overpriced.

The 67" Sammy HL67A750 I bought for $2050 was not overpriced. :D

Nor the 65" Toshiba I bought for $1200.

the 6 ft hdmi cables i bought from monoprice.com were not overpriced. those should be 0.50cents

The 67" Sammy HL67A750 I bought for $2050 was not overpriced surely you jest

Nor the 65" Toshiba I bought for $1200. Should cost about $500-$600

those should be 0.50cents

surely you jest

Should cost about $500-$600
I don't think that Sammy is over priced at all...and what kind of POS can you get for $500-$600? :rolleyes:

:rolleyes:those should be 0.50cents

surely you jest

Should cost about $500-$600


I take it you won't be buying the Laservue? :eek::rolleyes::D

I take it you won't be buying the Laservue?

At least not until they're out for a couple years... sounds like he sticks to second-hand components interconnected with left over coat hangars.

:D

Should cost about $500-$600

Duh. Now it should. It's over 1 year old and used.

ummmm :confused:

Still confused?

First off (don't be offended) I don't think that most of you guys know much about business and how things are run so I'll just comment briefly because it will probably erk some people anyway.

Mitsubishi selling the new laser set for the price some are suggesting is rediculous, you can buy 65" CD/plasma for under $5,000, Sharp sells a 65" model at Costco for 1K less than that.

Above all a company has to be competitive or have a "niche" in an industry to control there destiny. A laser view with a 30 or 40 % better everything would have that position but if you think any company is going to come out with a technology that much better, dream on! First off they have to be able to move forward technology wise or they compete against themselves, thats why consumers get little pieces of technology every year instead of giant leaps.
If (strong if) that technology turns out to be something special do you absolutely believe that companies like Sony, Samsung, Panasonic, etc, have not already, or, in the process of examining the possibilities of said technology !

If Mits misses the upcoming holidays (Christmas) it would be a disastrous business mistake since companies depend on that particular time of year for a good part of there total income, not to mention it's relevancy to there "bottom line", read that as stock price of the company. If they miss this type of launch date it is directly associated with a big problem with the product!

Changeling

First off (don't be offended) I don't think that most of you guys know much about business and how things are run so I'll just comment briefly because it will probably erk some people anyway.

Mitsubishi selling the new laser set for the price some are suggesting is rediculous, you can buy 65" CD/plasma for under $5,000, Sharp sells a 65" model at Costco for 1K less than that.

Above all a company has to be competitive or have a "niche" in an industry to control there destiny. A laser view with a 30 or 40 % better everything would have that position but if you think any company is going to come out with a technology that much better, dream on! First off they have to be able to move forward technology wise or they compete against themselves, thats why consumers get little pieces of technology every year instead of giant leaps.
If (strong if) that technology turns out to be something special do you absolutely believe that companies like Sony, Samsung, Panasonic, etc, have not already, or, in the process of examining the possibilities of said technology !

If Mits misses the upcoming holidays (Christmas) it would be a disastrous business mistake since companies depend on that particular time of year for a good part of there total income, not to mention it's relevancy to there "bottom line", read that as stock price of the company. If they miss this type of launch date it is directly associated with a big problem with the product!

Changeling
its funny how everyone is talking about how screwed mits is becuase the price is so *overpriced*.
I didnt see anyone calling for the end of Sony cause they had an 11" TV going for $2500.

First off (don't be offended) I don't think that most of you guys know much about business and how things are run so I'll just comment briefly because it will probably erk some people anyway.

Mitsubishi selling the new laser set for the price some are suggesting is rediculous, you can buy 65" CD/plasma for under $5,000, Sharp sells a 65" model at Costco for 1K less than that.

Above all a company has to be competitive or have a "niche" in an industry to control there destiny. A laser view with a 30 or 40 % better everything would have that position but if you think any company is going to come out with a technology that much better, dream on! First off they have to be able to move forward technology wise or they compete against themselves, thats why consumers get little pieces of technology every year instead of giant leaps.
If (strong if) that technology turns out to be something special do you absolutely believe that companies like Sony, Samsung, Panasonic, etc, have not already, or, in the process of examining the possibilities of said technology !

If Mits misses the upcoming holidays (Christmas) it would be a disastrous business mistake since companies depend on that particular time of year for a good part of there total income, not to mention it's relevancy to there "bottom line", read that as stock price of the company. If they miss this type of launch date it is directly associated with a big problem with the product!

Changeling

Some of us know a lot about business AND the English language.

its funny how everyone is talking about how screwed mits is becuase the price is so *overpriced*.
I didnt see anyone calling for the end of Sony cause they had an 11" TV going for $2500.

1) nobody is saying Mits is screwed. The pricing is screwed up. Big difference.

2) I would buy the 11" OLED if I had money to throw around. I'd get several, in fact. One for the kitchen, one for the bathroom, etc. They're entirely different niche products.

I wouldn't get the laservue, from what I've heard so far. I'd be more interested in the LED backlit, 10 bit panel, new Sharp LCD

.



Above all a company has to be competitive or have a "niche" in an industry
If Mits misses the upcoming holidays (Christmas) it would be a disastrous business mistake since companies depend on that particular time of year for a good part of there total income, not to mention it's relevancy to there "bottom line", read that as stock price of the company. If they miss this type of launch date it is directly associated with a big problem with the product!

Changeling

I would go so far as to say that if MITS misses the Holiday selling season, that the Laservue may never come out.

The LaserVue Website still says it's coming Fall 2008. Maybe. Or maybe the Mits people are biting their fingernails and trying to figure out if they should change the Webpage info to Winter 2008 (or would that be Winter 2009?) or Spring 2009.

I'm curious as to why so many folks are obsessing over prices when those same folks don't seem to be interested in purchasing the TV at any price. Why is that?

Originally Posted by Changeling
First off (don't be offended) I don't think that most of you guys know much about business and how things are run so I'll just comment briefly because it will probably erk some people anyway.

Mitsubishi selling the new laser set for the price some are suggesting is rediculous, you can buy 65" CD/plasma for under $5,000, Sharp sells a 65" model at Costco for 1K less than that.

Above all a company has to be competitive or have a "niche" in an industry to control there destiny. A laser view with a 30 or 40 % better everything would have that position but if you think any company is going to come out with a technology that much better, dream on! First off they have to be able to move forward technology wise or they compete against themselves, thats why consumers get little pieces of technology every year instead of giant leaps.
If (strong if) that technology turns out to be something special do you absolutely believe that companies like Sony, Samsung, Panasonic, etc, have not already, or, in the process of examining the possibilities of said technology !

If Mits misses the upcoming holidays (Christmas) it would be a disastrous business mistake since companies depend on that particular time of year for a good part of there total income, not to mention it's relevancy to there "bottom line", read that as stock price of the company. If they miss this type of launch date it is directly associated with a big problem with the product!

Since you are the expert on business what successful business are you running on a global scale and what is the stock price of your company? LaserVue isn't Mits only product or product line, I think most business people would take that into consideration. Mits is introducing a new tech at a high price, not a shocking revelation. If the market doesn't respond, they will adjust. That's what a business does.

The equity market (for items much more important to Mitsubishi Electric than LaserVue) and the collapse of its stock price in the past year (with a big decline in the past 90 days) will play a much bigger role as to what Mitsubishi does with LaserVue than the competition's prices or any non-buyer's comments that are posted here.