Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Washington DC metro area
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Well I bought a 32" LCD specifically to replace my 27" bedroom CRT and feel the picture size is comparable between the two sets. Granted, I watch mostly 16x9 HD programming on the LCD though. However, if you do the math, a 4:3 image on a 32" 16x9 LCD is the equivalent of a 4:3 image on a 26.1" 4:3 CRT. The 32" LCD produces a 4:3 image of 328.13 sq inches while the 32" CRT produces a 4:3 image of 349.92 sq inches. So you get a decrease of roughly 6.2% of the 4:3 image size when going from the 27" tube to the 32" LCD - not that much IMO. By contrast, when viewing 16x9 programming, you get a minimum of a 40% increase in viewing area by going from the 27" CRT to the 32" LCD. So I guess when you look at the numbers, at least IMO, the 32" LCD gets you in the same ballpark for 4:3 viewing as the 27" CRT and greatly surpasses the 27" CRT for 16x9 programming in terms of viewing area. My educated guess would be that's good enough for most people (but obviously not all) and thus why tv manufacturers probably don't see a need to produce something between 33" -36".