I use a Lumagen Radiance vp. The consensus of owners on the Lumagen forum is that a reasonably good 480i DVD will look like average cable 720P or thereabouts. It provides a big improvement on a 65" screen.
post #1051 of 1421
8/19/11 at 2:02pm
The people who believe you will need a really big screen to benefit from 4k x 2k are correct, of course. We went through debate 5+ years ago, too. Heck, I'm still not sure most people need 1080p on a 50" -- depending on viewing distance of course.
The reality is that if you make a really big LCD or plasma with giant pixels, it's going to suck. This is pretty easy to see if you ever get a chance to be near the Panasonic 103" plasma or one of the few Sharp 100+" LCDs that ever got made. Whether there's a market for 85" or 92" TVs is another matter, but if someone decides to produce them, they are very very likely to make them with 4k x 2k resolution even though there won't be any source material for them. It's also pretty likely that 4k x 2k will creep down and become a selling feature in the 70+" class over the next couple of years.
And it will look better than the comparable 2k x 1k displays when displays 2k x 1k sources. People who don't get this need to go do their own research. I'm really not going to spend the time running a lesson here. But if you have 4 pixels instead of 1, you can create intermediate shades to smooth out lines, color gradients, etc. And even doing algorithmically, you can make the source look better than it is. If you don't believe this, upscale a DVD. It's proof of the very same concept.
Hey Guys, I am a little hesitant to post this since I don't have too much information, but thought you might like to know it anyway. The place I work at recently set up two new Sharp SKUs. One is the LC70LE632U and the other is LC80LE632U. MSRP for the 80" is currently set at $5500. I assume these will be similar to the LC60LE632U, and be non-Quattron models.
Steve, I know you sell TVs for a living so I don't wish to state this in a way that implies you are not fully grasping this: Everyone but Sharp satisfies the mid-range of the market very nicely at this point.
Samsung has such an assortment of product I doubt anyone here could come close to correct identifying all the product lines and their differences. They hit about 11 price points and have feature differentiation (and some performance differentiation). The flaw with Samsung is none of their TVs are great, picture-quality wise.
Panasonic has a three-tiered product line for quite some time now. It does the trick quite well. And, in fact, Panasonic makes a lot of extra margin selling GT models to people that aren't even videophiles. Is the ST still the bread and butter? Yes (especially because there are also warehouse club variants of it). But there's a tiered line.
Sony is like Samsung, there's a chicken for every pot. Again, like Samsung, overlapping chickens. NX720 vs. HX729? Please Sony, that stuff makes no sense at all.
Sharp is weird. At 60" there is really cheap (sub $1500 63x series), pretty cheap (around $2000 edge-lit 83x series) and Elite ($5500). The 83x series is not an enthusiast product. It's basic a "this is not a bargain basement product". Samsung sells a 60" product at $3500 MSRP or so. Sony does one over $3000. Sharp basically has nothing over $2500.
At 70" it's worse. There is essentially $3k, $3500 (same thing with 3-D), $8000. I know we've done this conversation before, but the notion that they wouldn't make money with a model in between flies in the face of everything everyone else does in consumer electronics. And quite frankly, Sharp's track record puts them in no position to claim they know what they are talking about.
I can understand why they didn't go after Samsung and Sony with a 60" in the middle; quite frankly they don't currently have the brand to compete there. (Maybe that will change again over time). At 70", they have 5 freaking inches that no one else has (arguably 10" since Sony still isn't shipping 65s and Samsung's commitment to that size really seems very very tepid and LG, well, Lost and Gone is hard to find in many retailers outside of the bargain aisle). There is just no reason not to be putting the pedal down.
They have the panels. They can clearly do a de-featured version of the Elite. In fact, you could do a pretty quick sensitivity analysis to show that even if they cannibalized 90% of Elite sales -- which they wouldn't -- they'd make more money under every realistic scenario with a $5000 variant of the 70". If one wanted an example of what I'd do, features wise, here goes:
1) Don't use the Elite front filter system on the "935". Make that Elite unique
2) Use the local dimming system
3) Don't use the Aquomotion at 720 (which I think is what they're doing, someone can remind me), but perhaps pick it up from the 240 and go to 480.
4) Don't claim any other improvements to the 735
MSRP, 734: $3000, 735: $3500, 935: $5000. Incremental manufacturing cost would be on the order of $100, worst cast it's $200 (and it isn't $200, but I'm going to let people have fun with their own margin numbers).