Lifespan of current LCD models - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 17 Old 12-08-2012, 12:00 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
Herve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 953
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
First let me say that 3 years ago we bought a 32" Sharp Aquos TV to use as a computer monitor. The TV has been trouble-free, even though we have used it 24/7 for at least 12 hours per day. This fact is very encouraging, but 3 years is not very long in the grand scheme of things.

My wife and I are considering replacing our 20-year-old 36" Toshiba CRT ("tube") television with a modern-day LED LCD TV, so we've gone to various stores to look at what's out there and, of course, have discussed the various TVs with sales people. One of their universal claims is that one should absolutely buy a warranty with any new TV. Now we did that with our Aquos -- a 4 year warranty which runs out next year -- and if there are no problems with the TV, we can even put the cost of the warranty toward our next purchase, which is nice.

But when I tell the various sales people about our 20-year-old Toshiba TV, every single one of them says that there is no way that a new TV will last that long. To which I then say, well, how long will it last? Then they say that they don't know, but they would never warrant a TV for more than four years. So then I say, do you think it's reasonable to expect that the TV will fail within 6 years down the road? And they essentially say "it's more of a probablility than a possiblilty".

We paid $2400 for our Toshiba, but the thing has worked without a hitch for the past 20 years and the picture still looks remarkably good, but not, of course, as good as the present TVs. But I do not want to be spending 3 grand every 5 or 6 years ............ which the sales people claim is a reasonable cost for continuous TV ownership! If my math is correct, if you have a failure every 5 years, that's 4 TVs over 20 years and 4x3= 12 grand, versus $2400 for our Toshiba.

So my question to the forum is simple. What will the average lifespan be of a $1k TV versus a $4K TV?

Edit.
While I'm at it, does any particular manufacturer stand out as making the most long-lived LED LCD TVs (Sony, for example)? I think we'd take this information seriously into consideration, even if that particular manufacturer's TVs did not have the best image.
Herve is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 17 Old 12-08-2012, 12:38 PM
Member
 
mndwgz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: SW FL
Posts: 71
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
9 or 10 year old 27" JVC LCD still going strong even after the last 5 years in in a steamy bathroom. It's doing duty outside now in the lanai. Around $900 at the time.
8 year old 32" Visio LCD doing just fine in the garage, covered in sawdust, spray paint, ambient temperature over 90 degrees all the time where it sits. etc. It did monitor duty for 6 years. $700 back then.

The 60" DLP Panny was $2600 6 years ago and it might get and hour or two of use now on it a week, with a new bulb put in last year maybe I'll get another 20 years out of it, but it's just too big to justify keeping even though I have the space for it.
The 4 year old 50" $700 LG plasma will take over bedroom duty when the next living room unit is purchased.

I look at it kind of opposite; at $100 a year cost of ownership for those compared to what I paid recently, $200 for a 32" Westinghouse LED now in the steamy bathroom, that I hope lasts 5 years, seems like a bargain.
The 70" or 80" Sharp still seem reasonable for what you're getting if they last at least 5 years and IMHO those warranties they sell you aren't worth it.

YMMV
mndwgz is offline  
post #3 of 17 Old 12-08-2012, 01:39 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
Herve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 953
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by mndwgz View Post

9 or 10 year old 27" JVC LCD still going strong even after the last 5 years in in a steamy bathroom. It's doing duty outside now in the lanai. Around $900 at the time.
8 year old 32" Visio LCD doing just fine in the garage, covered in sawdust, spray paint, ambient temperature over 90 degrees all the time where it sits. etc. It did monitor duty for 6 years. $700 back then.
The 60" DLP Panny was $2600 6 years ago and it might get and hour or two of use now on it a week, with a new bulb put in last year maybe I'll get another 20 years out of it, but it's just too big to justify keeping even though I have the space for it.
The 4 year old 50" $700 LG plasma will take over bedroom duty when the next living room unit is purchased.
I look at it kind of opposite; at $100 a year cost of ownership for those compared to what I paid recently, $200 for a 32" Westinghouse LED now in the steamy bathroom, that I hope lasts 5 years, seems like a bargain.
The 70" or 80" Sharp still seem reasonable for what you're getting if they last at least 5 years and IMHO those warranties they sell you aren't worth it.
YMMV
Thanks very much for taking the time to post your experience with you various TVs. A TV in the bathroom, eh?biggrin.gif You're definitely not going to miss any part of a show or movie, are you?

Anyway, I'm encouraged by what you say about longevity.

As far as a warranty goes, there are two local retailers who have non-pro-rated warranties which, if they are not used, can be put toward the purchase of anything in their stores. So if you buy even the most expensive warranty, you're in a pretty good position. If the TV fails during the warranty period, you get the TV fixed or replaced. If the TV makes it beyond the warranty period, you've got the price you paid for the warranty to buy anything else in those places. As I said previously, we bought a $270, 4-year warranty on the Aquos TV/monitor. If the TV makes it through the warranty period, we can use the price of the warranty to buy either another TV, PS3, movies, a sound bar, or whatever. IMO, this is not a bad deal. In fact, with this type of warranty, it makes the most sense to buy one that has the longest period as possible, as long as the buyer indeed shops for other things at that store.
Herve is offline  
post #4 of 17 Old 12-08-2012, 05:51 PM
Member
 
Flatliner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 174
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
I'm in the process of upgrading a seven year old 532H Olevia LCD which is still working perfectly. It experienced an issue shortly after I originally purchased it, was promptly replaced by the manufacturer, and the replacement has been completely trouble free ever since. Fast forward to over a month back when I purchased a new Vizio E601i-A3 from Costco. At the time, I figured I would break my rule of never buying extended warranties as I could get three additional years on top of the first two (Costco added one) for around $60. My logic was that even if it only lasted the covered five years, my cost of ownership would only be around $200/yr (the Vizio was under 1K). Anyway, just after the first month, the set failed. Since it was purchased from Costco with their generous 90 day return period, I received a full refund. Anyway, the lesson I took from both incidents is that extended warranties are not really worth it because, with modern electronics, if they are going to fail, they will generally do so within the first year (often fairly quickly) while still under the original warranty. If they don't fail in a short time period after purchase, the chances that they will last quite a long time without failure goes up dramatically.
Flatliner is offline  
post #5 of 17 Old 12-08-2012, 06:55 PM
Newbie
 
gist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 14
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The new lcd/led panels are good for 80,000 hours,that's 38 years at 8 hours a day.
gist is offline  
post #6 of 17 Old 12-09-2012, 12:55 AM
Newbie
 
ikisat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by gist View Post

The new lcd/led panels are good for 80,000 hours,that's 38 years at 8 hours a day.

They're mostly rated at 100,000 hours now, same for plasmas. These ratings are of course 100% meaningless since there is no standard for how they're rated and the rating on the LED panels is strictly based on the LED bulbs supposed half life and the Plasma ratings are on the phosphors half life... says absolutely nothing about any of the other components in the TVs or what their lifespans are expected to be. About the only worse measure they could be using is basing it on when the plastics will decay.
ikisat is offline  
post #7 of 17 Old 12-09-2012, 05:31 AM
Member
 
Flatliner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 174
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikisat View Post

They're mostly rated at 100,000 hours now, same for plasmas. These ratings are of course 100% meaningless since there is no standard for how they're rated and the rating on the LED panels is strictly based on the LED bulbs supposed half life and the Plasma ratings are on the phosphors half life... says absolutely nothing about any of the other components in the TVs or what their lifespans are expected to be. About the only worse measure they could be using is basing it on when the plastics will decay.

+1
Flatliner is offline  
post #8 of 17 Old 12-09-2012, 06:38 AM
Member
 
mndwgz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: SW FL
Posts: 71
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikisat View Post

They're mostly rated at 100,000 hours now, same for plasmas. These ratings are of course 100% meaningless since there is no standard for how they're rated and the rating on the LED panels is strictly based on the LED bulbs supposed half life and the Plasma ratings are on the phosphors half life... says absolutely nothing about any of the other components in the TVs or what their lifespans are expected to be. About the only worse measure they could be using is basing it on when the plastics will decay.

Nice first post. ++1

My current home office PC monitor is a 2006 40" LCD Bravia I found by the dumpster 4 years ago. I opened up the back and found it had been hit by lightning. A new $4.59 current limiter soldered back in and trouble free since. (would have only cost me $0.99 if I had ordered 1000 biggrin.gif ) I think most people consider their electronics disposable because there is a newer, more feature , shiny with bell-and whistles, gotta have unit constantly being flogged at them. My garage TV doesn't reside in it's original plastic, it didn't fit over the cabinets, so I knocked together a 3/8" smoked lexan skin for it, after it had started the green screen problem, and I tore into it. Routine maintenance doesn't seem to be on the list of things to do to today's electronics, but pulling the back off every couple of years and giving them a good dust cleaning works for me.
I'm one of those "if it's broke, fix it... if it ain't broke tear into it anyways" kind of guys.
mndwgz is offline  
post #9 of 17 Old 12-09-2012, 07:29 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
Herve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 953
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by mndwgz View Post

Nice first post. ++1
My current home office PC monitor is a 2006 40" LCD Bravia I found by the dumpster 4 years ago. I opened up the back and found it had been hit by lightning. A new $4.59 current limiter soldered back in and trouble free since. (would have only cost me $0.99 if I had ordered 1000 biggrin.gif ) I think most people consider their electronics disposable because there is a newer, more feature , shiny with bell-and whistles, gotta have unit constantly being flogged at them. My garage TV doesn't reside in it's original plastic, it didn't fit over the cabinets, so I knocked together a 3/8" smoked lexan skin for it, after it had started the green screen problem, and I tore into it. Routine maintenance doesn't seem to be on the list of things to do to today's electronics, but pulling the back off every couple of years and giving them a good dust cleaning works for me.
I'm one of those "if it's broke, fix it... if it ain't broke tear into it anyways" kind of guys.
I like your attitude.

I disagree about the "wonderful" advance in technology next year, and year after that, etc.

On occasion I connect a DIY HDTV antenna to our 32" LED full-array, back lit, but no local dimming, Aquos TV/computer monitor
( http://thetvreview.com/sharp-aquos-lc32le700un-32-inch-1080p-120-hz-led-hdtv-review/ )
to take a look at the 6, I think, OTA HD stations available locally. Most are 1080i, with a couple 720p.

Using our PC as an HTPC, we also watch the occasional BD movie on it.

The image on our Aquos is, to my eyes, very similiar to what we see on TVs in today's showrooms. In short, to my eyes, there have not been great advances in image quality over the past three years and I have no desire whatsoever to upgrade this TV/monitor.

If three years ago we had bought the same TV in a much larger screen size to repalce our Toshiba tube tv, we would not be looking around to replace it today. I doubt if the image produced by even the new OLED TVs are going to be that much better looking than the current top of the line Elite, Samsung, Sony, etc ............... to the point of wanting to spend another several thousand on the new thing, anyway.
Herve is offline  
post #10 of 17 Old 12-09-2012, 09:10 AM
Newbie
 
gist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 14
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
absolutely meaningless,not sure why they even tell consumers that.lcd,s have supposedly a long span as well,but from first hand evidence,it's not true,and I don't even go near the vivid setting.
gist is offline  
post #11 of 17 Old 12-09-2012, 09:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Cap'n Preshoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Cinco Ranch West (Houston suburb)
Posts: 1,122
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
The LCD/LED "display" is designed to last 80~100,000 hours, though the manufacturer's warranty is only 12 months (approx. 8760 hours). When you think about it, the warranty period is the same as that for most PC's (both desktops and laptops) and the expected life expectancy of the newer hard drives is coincidentally 80~100k hours. How many of them actually last more than 5 years is really not the issue. The issue is that the rapidly changing (advancing) technology renders them obsolete long before they actually wear out.

Just look at the current state of the art in Television broadcasting. Not long ago most of the old CRT-style sets were rendered obsolete by FCC rule changes requiring all broadcasters to switch to 100% digital. Of course you could get the little $40 convertors, but the sets themselves were obsolete.

I think it's probably reasonable to expect 10 years or more "life" from one of the new sets, but the technological churn rate is likely to make them obsolete long before they wear out.

Just my 2¢ worth

The PAY TV industry does not hold the patent on poor customer relations, but Comcast in particular has succeeded in making an art form of it.

Cap'n Preshoot is offline  
post #12 of 17 Old 12-09-2012, 01:59 PM
Senior Member
 
thiao's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 256
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by gist View Post

The new lcd/led panels are good for 80,000 hours,that's 38 years at 8 hours a day.

This is an untrue and very misleading statement.

What it refers to is that a CCFL (cold cathode florescent tube) or LED (light emitting diode), if it does not fail, at + or - 80,000 hours of operation, will still produce half of its initial luminance....nothing more.

What is of significance is that the MBTF (mean time before failure), of each and every component in an assembly (e.g. transistor, integrated circuit, CCFL/LED, capacitor, resistor, inductor etc.) , must be accounted for, in order to predict life expectancy, in a product.

However, not including the other assemblies (e.g. power supply, main board, TCON etc), in a1920 x 1080 panel, besides the back lighting, their are numerous integrated circuit drivers and millions of thin film transistors.

While we engineers have sophisticated models to predict product lifetime, it's not anywhere close to what was stated.
thiao is offline  
post #13 of 17 Old 12-09-2012, 02:20 PM
Senior Member
 
johncourt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 388
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Herve View Post

I like your attitude.
I disagree about the "wonderful" advance in technology next year, and year after that, etc.
On occasion I connect a DIY HDTV antenna to our 32" LED full-array, back lit, but no local dimming, Aquos TV/computer monitor
( http://thetvreview.com/sharp-aquos-lc32le700un-32-inch-1080p-120-hz-led-hdtv-review/ )
to take a look at the 6, I think, OTA HD stations available locally. Most are 1080i, with a couple 720p.
Using our PC as an HTPC, we also watch the occasional BD movie on it.
The image on our Aquos is, to my eyes, very similiar to what we see on TVs in today's showrooms. In short, to my eyes, there have not been great advances in image quality over the past three years and I have no desire whatsoever to upgrade this TV/monitor.
If three years ago we had bought the same TV in a much larger screen size to repalce our Toshiba tube tv, we would not be looking around to replace it today. I doubt if the image produced by even the new OLED TVs are going to be that much better looking than the current top of the line Elite, Samsung, Sony, etc ............... to the point of wanting to spend another several thousand on the new thing, anyway.


We're not going to see any significant or even minor, advances in TV PQ until 4K. 1080p is 1080p, whether it's from 2008, 2011, 2012, 2013 or 3013.

TV's have gotten thinner and lighter, but some people assume that there will be a concomitant increase in PQ. How is that possible? You have the same number of pixels. There is no increase in resolution. You can boost the brightness and color but that will simply generate a more artificial looking and/or less detailed picture.

As far as longevity, the last LCD laptop I owned, I used for nearly 9 years without issues, with daily use of 8 hours or more. Perhaps the panel lost some brightness in the 9th year of service, but I can't confirm that. It's still in the garage and could be fixed to work again but the point is, the panel never failed.
johncourt is offline  
post #14 of 17 Old 12-09-2012, 04:42 PM
Member
 
rexian96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 143
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by johncourt View Post

We're not going to see any significant or even minor, advances in TV PQ until 4K. 1080p is 1080p, whether it's from 2008, 2011, 2012, 2013 or 3013.
TV's have gotten thinner and lighter, but some people assume that there will be a concomitant increase in PQ. How is that possible?

It's of course possible. Number of pixels alone does not indicate the quality. Consumers used to make the same mistakes when choosing digital cameras as well. They thought an 8MP tiny compact would be better than a 6MP SLR with several times larger sensor of the same generation.

There is a lot more to PQ than just pixels - how dark or bright a pixel can be (brightness / contrast), refresh rate (action / sports), response time (mostly for gamers), how close is the color production to the reference material, do all pixels have the same property (uniformity of the screen), clouding / flashlighting (LED), image retention / buzzing (plasma) come to mind. Ability to easily calibrate (e.g. built-in blue filter) is also very important as it allows the owner to get the best PQ out of the TV.

OP spent $2400 20 years ago which is probably equivalent of 10 grand or more. For this money he can easily have TVs (multiple, as none will last that long) for next 20 years and with way better PQ.
rexian96 is offline  
post #15 of 17 Old 12-09-2012, 05:01 PM
Senior Member
 
johncourt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 388
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by rexian96 View Post

It's of course possible. Number of pixels alone does not indicate the quality. Consumers used to make the same mistakes when choosing digital cameras as well. They thought an 8MP tiny compact would be better than a 6MP SLR with several times larger sensor of the same generation.
There is a lot more to PQ than just pixels - how dark or bright a pixel can be (brightness / contrast), refresh rate (action / sports), response time (mostly for gamers), how close is the color production to the reference material, do all pixels have the same property (uniformity of the screen), clouding / flashlighting (LED), image retention / buzzing (plasma) come to mind. Ability to easily calibrate (e.g. built-in blue filter) is also very important as it allows the owner to get the best PQ out of the TV.
OP spent $2400 20 years ago which is probably equivalent of 10 grand or more. For this money he can easily have TVs (multiple, as none will last that long) for next 20 years and with way better PQ.

Refresh rate on lcd panels has little to no effect on our perception of motion blur.

Clouding and flashlighting are inherent problems with lcd/led technology that have not gone away, much less decreased significantly, in recent years.

How much has PQ improved in high quality lcd/led panels since the inception of 1080p? I would say not at all, or only very slightly. There is greater consistency in the manufacturing of lcd, ie fewer dead pixels, but overall there is not any more information to be squeezed out of tv's.

4K and 48 fps films will improve the picture noticeably. Otherwise, we're mainly paying more money for thinness, light weight and marginally effective "smart" tv functions.
johncourt is offline  
post #16 of 17 Old 12-10-2012, 09:04 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
Herve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 953
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by johncourt View Post

Refresh rate on lcd panels has little to no effect on our perception of motion blur.
Clouding and flashlighting are inherent problems with lcd/led technology that have not gone away, much less decreased significantly, in recent years.
How much has PQ improved in high quality lcd/led panels since the inception of 1080p? I would say not at all, or only very slightly. There is greater consistency in the manufacturing of lcd, ie fewer dead pixels, but overall there is not any more information to be squeezed out of tv's.
4K and 48 fps films will improve the picture noticeably. Otherwise, we're mainly paying more money for thinness, light weight and marginally effective "smart" tv functions.
To a certain point I agree with everything you say.

I forgot to mention that my wife and I have another LCD TV in front of our treadmill that we've had for about 5 years. It's a 37" Viewsonic 136?x 72?, CFL unit that cost around $900. (That amount would buy a fantastic TV today.) It's been trouble-free. By today's standards, Its image quality is marginal, but it's perfect for playing whatever when we're on the treadmill. Blacks are grey, but whnen it's on we're more concerned with keeping our breath than image quality.

About 4 or 5 years ago I remember seeing a 65" Sharp 1080p TV at a local Costco. The price was $15,995. In short, I was not impressed with the image quality, but I'm sure the set was not calibrated to the best that it could be. The calibrators on this forum would be much more able to state how much improvement there has been in LCD image potential over the past years since the inception of good 1080p sources.

I went over to our daughter and son-in-law's home yesterday evening. In August of 2010 they bought a Samsung UN65C8000, which was at that time the top-of-the-line Samsung TV. I brought over some BDs that I had burned and wanted to test for playback on their Samsung BD and Sony PS3 players.

Well, to my eyes, that "old" set looked every bit as good as what I've seen in any showroom during the past couple of weeks. Yes, blacks are not perfect, but they're somewhat-to-significantly better than our 32" Aquos. Contrary to what purists like, I like the so-called "smooth motion" effect. We watched the beginning of "Battle of the Bulge" over the PS3. Seating distance was about 7 feet. I could not believe how fantastic the image, in every respect, we saw was. The interpolation that the TV must have been doing was, as far as I could tell, spot on. I was floored.

Every review I've read about the Elite TVs says that their full array, local dimming technology brings blacks to the plasma level. Maybe Sharp's upcoming 950s will be as good at a much lower price, but you are right that these, especially for everyday TV viewing, are only marginal improvements.

At our present seating distance of 12 feet, in order to see much improvement in a 4k, 48fps, display, we'd either have to reduce our seating distance pretty dramatically or get a display much larger than 65".
Herve is offline  
post #17 of 17 Old 12-10-2012, 06:46 PM
Member
 
rexian96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 143
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by johncourt View Post

Refresh rate on lcd panels has little to no effect on our perception of motion blur.
Well, there are many people a lot happier while watching Football on latest true 240Hz LCDs over older 60Hz ones. There is a reason why purists still prefer plasmas for sports or action.

Quote:
Originally Posted by johncourt View Post

Clouding and flashlighting are inherent problems with lcd/led technology that have not gone away, much less decreased significantly, in recent years.
How much has PQ improved in high quality lcd/led panels since the inception of 1080p? I would say not at all, or only very slightly.
That's your opinion, doesn't have to be right. All those people who spend $1.5k+ on 50" 2D TVs are not fools and no, they are not just buying for smart remote or apps. You ignored my comments on the black level, color accuracy, ability to calibrate etc in latest generation TVs as if those are gimmicks. If you think there is no significant PQ difference between a calibrated 60" Sharp Elite and a calibrated 1080p 60" Dynex that you can get for probably $500, you have to try for yourself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by johncourt View Post

There is greater consistency in the manufacturing of lcd, ie fewer dead pixels, but overall there is not any more information to be squeezed out of tv's.
4K and 48 fps films will improve the picture noticeably. Otherwise, we're mainly paying more money for thinness, light weight and marginally effective "smart" tv functions.
I agree with consistency of LCD technology these days (except that I had to replace my LG twice) and also believe 48 fps is better (more frames never a bad thing though some will complain about SOE). However, 4k is no good for most people (until we get Avatar style wall-sized displays) - if you are someone with 20/20 vision at a viewing distance of 10 ft or more, you'll not "see" any improvements unless your TV is larger than 77". http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.html

We need to stop the megapixel myth. LG's passive 3D will definitely gain from 4k resolution though.
rexian96 is offline  
Reply LCD Flat Panel Displays

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off