Official 2012 Sharp LC-XXLE640U/XXC6400U - Page 31

Originally Posted by Z-Mad 

Did you try these? For me I'm getting good pop and picture on my set with these. Of course results will vary from set to set, but if you want, you can give these a shot... Good luck.

Again, these may vary from set to set...

AV MODE: STANDARD / GAME
OPC: Off
Backlight: +2
Contrast: +32
Brightness: 0
Color: +4
Tint: 0
Sharpness: +1

--Advanced sub-menu

C.M.S. -Hue
R: -12
Y: -2
G: -6
C: -13
B: -12
M: +10

C.M.S. -Saturation
R: -20
Y: -6
G: -22
C: 0
B: -6
M: -10

C.M.S. -Value
R: -8
Y: -3
G: +5
C: 0
B: +10
M: -2

Color Temp: Low
R Gain (LO): 0
G Gain (LO): +3
B Gain (LO): -7
R Gain (HI): -10
G Gain (HI): 0
B Gain (HI): -6

Originally Posted by Toaster805 

I bought an LC-70LE600U from Best Buy at the start of Feb and have observed the same problem today.

On my TV, the image is either (a) right-shifted by 4 columns (resulting in 4 black columns on the left side) or (b) not shifted, but then the right 4 columns of the screen are just duplicates of the 5th-to-last column. Either way, you can only view 1916 columns of your 1920x1080 image.

Have tried hooking up multiple PCs and DVRs and the problem is present in all cases when running dot-by-dot mode.

My brother also bought one of these at the same time as me and has the same issue. Sharp tech support does not seem to be aware of this issue.

Originally Posted by Oldgregg99 

Z-mad are these your latest settings? What is your Gamma, film, 120, active contrast, DNR, and other settings in advanced set to? I notice these are slightly different than your previous I'm using. Also, how come you use temp at low?

I'm using your settings for game, silverfox settings for standard, and cnet for movie.

Originally Posted by Z-Mad 

Hey oldgregg99, those are the latest settings I am currently testing and checking if there is room to improve (So far I corrected CMS hue for red to -10, and red gain (HI) to -8, as I'm still testing the settings with more and more content). I ended up with these settings because I was checking out the standard mode, since several people apparently used my game settings in standard mode too, so I was interested. Not that the old settings aren't good, but by starting in the standard mode it took me a slightly different route as I was matching up color tones, and I think these settings are looking good with even more pop. They actually end up looking a lot like CNET's picture, only without the green tint and with more pop. Film, active contrast and all that is turned off, just 120Hz is set to high. I still don't like the motion enhancement, but can use it when necessary depending on content, otherwise i still use game mode most of the time. I use low temp, because it is the most accurate for skin tones and in general. If you want, try them out and let me know the results on your set, as feedback is always helpful in noticing what I might have missed

Originally Posted by NAMiller 

I have the 600U and another difference between the two is the 600U doesn't have the advanced picture controls the 640 has. For a lot of people (especially people who browse this forum) that is a big deal. If I had to do it over I might have gotten the 640 but I really wanted to stay under $1000 with tax and with this TV I did that. It is WAY better than the 5 year old 47 inch TV it replaced that cost $600 more. For the price and the screen size I'm pretty happy so far. I wouldn't consider myself super picky (why does my wife laugh when I say that?) so I was able to get the picture where I wanted it. The thing that bothered me the most at first was how it didn't handle film content correctly which is mentioned in the CNET review and I almost took it back for that reason. But thanks to a post on this thread I made some adjustments with my blu ray player and now it looks fine. The 640U with it's advanced picture controls is probably the better choice. You could also wait for the new models as well. If you get a 600U just be aware that it is a basic TV with basic picture controls. Definitely do not pay over $899 for it. If you can get it for less, even better!

Originally Posted by Oldgregg99 

Z-mad are these your latest settings? What is your Gamma, film, 120, active contrast, DNR, and other settings in advanced set to? I notice these are slightly different than your previous I'm using. Also, how come you use temp at low?

I'm using your settings for game, silverfox settings for standard, and cnet for movie.

Originally Posted by Brownv 

Silverfox settings?

Originally Posted by frogpond1 

Ok sooo I'm reading through the posts and I see some people have issues with the 600u compared to to the 640u but I thought they were the same just that the 600 didn't have wifi, smart tv, etc. Kinda worries me considering we're looking at the 600 for cost savings.

Originally Posted by leroy lee 

I would just spend the extra $300. It is worth it in the end. This is a big investment, I wouldn't skimp out. I had the 600u, I swapped it forvtge 640u and I was glad I did. The notion blur on my Xbox was pretty BAD and on movies. I was amazed at how many more options the 640u had. 600u is pretty barebone all the way down to the cheap hotel remote

Originally Posted by Oldgregg99 

Silverfox1 settings, page 20, post #596. I use his settings for standard and z-mads new settings for game.

Here are Silverfox1 settings:

"AV Mode: Standard

Backlight : +8
Brightness: -9
Contrast: +34
Color: +1
Tint: 0
Sharpness: +4

Color Temp: High
Motion Enhancement: OFF
Active Contrast: OFF
Film Mode: Advanced Mode +2 [ The wife likes a little SOE ]
Digital Noise Reduction: Off
Monochrome: Off
OPC: OFF"

Originally Posted by Z-Mad 

I mentioned this a few times as well and couldn't agree more. I went through the same thing of having picked up a 600U first. It was so stripped down that it really didn't make sense. The cheap remote with the simplest menu that only allows the most basic settings of brightness contrast and a tint slider was a joke. I felt like I was operating a 20 years old set. It went back the next day and I got the 640U instead. A world of difference! The picture quality obtainable with 640U is so much better, it's like night and day. The difference between the 2 models is far bigger than just the lack of wifi and smart features. Picture quality is a huge difference, and I'd say that counts the most.

My personal opinion is that spending a grand on a large screen TV to get subpar picture quality is a grand thrown away. Spending just a couple of hundred more is more than worth it for the performance and picture quality you get for it. After all, how long do you plan on using the TV? Unless you change your TV every year, the value of spending the extra couple of hundred is a no-brainer if you think about the next few years you'd probably be using it.

To me this is the bottom line:
$1,000 for 600U: money thrown away
$1,300 for 640U: real value and bang for your buck
(I am guessing what the latest prices are, but I think I'm somewhat in the range)

Anyway, hope this is also helpful to some who are trying to make the decision

Originally Posted by frogpond1 

Really torn on this decision. I can get the 600 for 849 but I can also get the 60" panasonic p60u54 for 749.

Originally Posted by NAMiller 

I'm assuming the Panasonic is a plasma so you'll have decide if a plasma is right for you. If you just watch movies and regular TV and your room isn't too bright, the Panasonic might be a good choice. As I and others have mentioned the 600 is a bare bones TV. You will probably get more bang for your buck with Panasonic. $849 isn't a bad price for the 600 and you could always bring it home and try it out to see if it fits your needs. Don't stress over it too much. Buying a TV today isn't like it used to be when people bought them as a 10+ year or longer investment. All the TVs being discussed on this forum today will be worthless in 5 years or less and considered "outdated" junk. The fact that you can buy any 60" HDTV for $800-900 with amazing picture quality compared to the old tube TVs is really cool. I paid that much for a 32 inch JVC in 1998 which my wife and I thought was HUGE. Whichever you get I'm sure you'll enjoy the screen size. I know I am!

Originally Posted by Z-Mad 

To me this is the bottom line:
$1,000 for 600U: money thrown away
$1,300 for 640U: real value and bang for your buck
(I am guessing what the latest prices are, but I think I'm somewhat in the range)

Originally Posted by Z-Mad 

I agree with you in general about the speed of new developments in today's technology, but I'd only add the following to consider:

The best TV ever made remains the Pioneer Kuro that hasn't been manufactured any more since 2008. So as fast as the manufacturers are coming out with new models every year, not every new model automatically means better picture and quality. There are even examples of TV's where the new models performed worse than their predecessors.

On the other hand, with an entry price point model you are probably right, but in that case why get a 600U that is already obsolete with a subpar PQ and features that resemble a 20 year old set before you even bring it home, let alone 5 years from now...

Just food for thought

Originally Posted by ItsJohnB 

I'm starting to see 640U numbers around $1K, and was wondering if anyone has a feel for the reliability of the vendors. Buy Squad and Fassie are < $1K and East Coast TVs and All Time TVs are just over that. I've seen reviews but was wondering if anyone here had any experience with any of these companies.

Supply seems to be drying up. Best Buy and B&H used to have this for $1199, but don't seem to have them anymore.

Someone already mentioned seeing the 600U for $849.

I'm hoping to see a review for the 650U soon. CNET reviewed the 640U in March 2012, so it would be nice to see them review the 650U in March 2013. If a 640U at $1300 is real value and bang for your buck, the 650U might be more value and bang for less buck! I'll want to see a review or two and see it in a store before passing judgement.

Does anyone have any thoughts on extended warranties? Normally, I consider them to be a sucker bet. But with what I have been reading about Sharp's precarious financial situation, it might be prudent for this one time.

-John

Originally Posted by ItsJohnB 

I'm starting to see 640U numbers around $1K, and was wondering if anyone has a feel for the reliability of the vendors. Buy Squad and Fassie are < $1K and East Coast TVs and All Time TVs are just over that. I've seen reviews but was wondering if anyone here had any experience with any of these companies.

Supply seems to be drying up. Best Buy and B&H used to have this for $1199, but don't seem to have them anymore.

Someone already mentioned seeing the 600U for $849.

I'm hoping to see a review for the 650U soon. CNET reviewed the 640U in March 2012, so it would be nice to see them review the 650U in March 2013. If a 640U at $1300 is real value and bang for your buck, the 650U might be more value and bang for less buck! I'll want to see a review or two and see it in a store before passing judgement.

Does anyone have any thoughts on extended warranties? Normally, I consider them to be a sucker bet. But with what I have been reading about Sharp's precarious financial situation, it might be prudent for this one time.

-John

Originally Posted by ItsJohnB 

I'm starting to see 640U numbers around $1K, and was wondering if anyone has a feel for the reliability of the vendors. Buy Squad and Fassie are < $1K and East Coast TVs and All Time TVs are just over that. I've seen reviews but was wondering if anyone here had any experience with any of these companies.



JohnB ; I paid $1049.00 at HH Gregg( brick and mortar) about a month ago for the 640U. They discounted it without me even asking. I would check with them.

Originally Posted by evening flyer 


I think you bring up an important point: "brick and mortar". I know many people buy their TV from online retailers and may be happy with it, but personally I'd never go for something as big as a 60" TV from an online store. Apart from adding additional shipping step with potential for shipping damage, the convenience factor is a huge difference IMO. For example, I got the 600U first, thought it was crap, so I simply packed it up, drove to the Best Buy down the street where I bought it, and they exchanged it for me right there and then. I was home with a 640U in half an hour setting it up. Imagine that scenario with an online retailer: call them, explain, get a return authorization, ship (often at your own expense), wait for replacement, etc. Even if I paid 50 bucks more than the cheapest online price, just what I saved in shipping, insurance, etc, was already way more than that... Not that everyone will need to return or replace their TV's, but then again many do for one reason or another.
And if you don't have an HH Gregg around but a Best Buy, you can still go to BB with a print out of the advertised price from other retailers and they'll match it (they won't match every online retailer, but they did Dell.com in my case for example).
Anyway, can't beat brick and mortar and the convenience and service that comes along with it, especially on something as big as a 60" TV...
Just my 2 cents worth...

Originally Posted by Z-Mad 

Hey oldgregg99, those are the latest settings I am currently testing and checking if there is room to improve (So far I corrected CMS hue for red to -10, and red gain (HI) to -8, as I'm still testing the settings with more and more content). I ended up with these settings because I was checking out the standard mode, since several people apparently used my game settings in standard mode too.

Z-Mad; Thanks for these latest settings. I used your corrected setting above along with the settings you posted on post 901. The picture looks just perfect with these settings. I had been using your settings from posts 874,882, and 899 and was quite happy with them. I was just about to give feed back to you on your previous settings, when I saw these on post 901. The few questions that I had went away with these latest settings. It seemed that flesh tones were just a little too rosy and the yellow colors seemed just a tad off. For instance, when a yellow cab would be in a scene the color looked a little too orange. Thanks for all your expertise, I could have never got the picture to look this good without all your help.

Originally Posted by evening flyer 

Z-Mad; Thanks for these latest settings. I used your corrected setting above along with the settings you posted on post 901. The picture looks just perfect with these settings. I had been using your settings from posts 874,882, and 899 and was quite happy with them. I was just about to give feed back to you on your previous settings, when I saw these on post 901. The few questions that I had went away with these latest settings. It seemed that flesh tones were just a little too rosy and the yellow colors seemed just a tad off. For instance, when a yellow cab would be in a scene the color looked a little too orange. Thanks for all your expertise, I could have never got the picture to look this good without all your help.

Originally Posted by NAMiller 

I suppose you could call the 600U picture quality subpar but in the price range that it was I would argue it's comparable to other brands in the same price range. It also depends too on what you compare it to. Of all the TVs I watch in a week which includes my 5 year old 47" LCD, my 8 year old 27 inch tube in the bedroom, my smartphone, my 12 year old portable DVD player (which cost $500 in 2001) , the crappy hotel TVs I watch the 2-3 days a week I'm on the road, and the Mitsubishi RPTV I watch in our employee lounge, the Sharp has by far the best picture, so there you go. All a matter of perspective I guess. Do I wish I had the 640U with the extra stuff? Maybe, but I ended up using the $200-300 towards a new dishwasher for the wife which made her happy. I kept the 600U because I got the picture where I wanted it, it has a very uniform screen and no pixels defects (yet). As a side note for those interested, I just saw the 650U/6500U at Costco today for $1149. With Costco's two year warranty and 90 day return policy that could be a great deal. Ok enough forum browsing, wife and kids are gone so I think I'll watch some TV.

Originally Posted by pywackett 

I was all set to get the 60 inch 640u model but the last one sold at sears ( i am limited to buying a tv at Sears) last week. I was in yesterday and they had the new 650u model. I have always been a Samsung gun and was considering the 6100 model but the Sharps really popped when viewing them in store. Should I be hesitant in buying a new model such as the 650u? I have looked all over the internet for reviews but have found none. Not sure how long it takes for reviews to come out on new products but I may just pull the trigger anyways this weekend.

Originally Posted by Z-Mad 

As I was mentioning above, I wouldn't expect much difference between 640 and 650 model. The features could possibly see some updates, like maybe added apps (which would be no big deal), or what I would hope for the most, better motion processing. This is what often happens: the manufacturers are practically forced to declare a new model each year, so they give most of the models just a "face-lift", but in reality it's often more or less the same TV. Kind of like with the cars: every year there is a "new" model, but in reality they just change the headlights slightly for a fresher look, but you are really getting the same engine and performance as the predecessor model. However, every few years, they might indeed come up with a true novelty, like a new panel with new depth of blacks, or higher contrast, redone interface and programming, etc. But this doesn't seem to be the case with the 650U...

Based on the specs on Sharp's website, following seems to be the case:

- Slight "face-lift" in the bezel and the stand, but barely noticeable
- 650U is actually cheaper (MSRP)
- Full smart central features (apps displayed over the entire screen rather than along the strip at the bottom of the screen). Potentially access to a few more apps and a web browser (surely useless as on any TV), which I find to be no big deal...
- 640 has surround sound, 650 has "simulated surround sound", I don't think either one matters as you'll need a proper sound system to get a decent sound anyway
- actually the most important difference I noticed is in the specification of the panel!
640U shows "X-Gen LCD panel" (which is on every other model too, including the most expensive one - 847U)
650U shows only "LCD panel" (the only model without the X-Gen)
This could potentially explain the lower MSRP on the new 650U.
Sharp's definition of X-Gen: "Sharp's X-Gen LCD Panel is designed with advanced pixel control to minimize light leakage and a wider aperture to let more light through, providing the industry's highest contrast level."

Since 650U has the "normal" LCD and not X-Gen, the question is if this is something noticeable in terms of contrast (although they state the same 4mil:1 for both models), potentially differences in colors, brightness level and panel uniformity. From their definition above, it would seem these aspects would be affected, and potentially negatively, unless this "normal LCD panel" somehow turns out to be better than their X-Gen panels. I'd wait for a pro-review on CNET, as they will measure all these aspects with pro equipment and state clearly any differences from 640U. I hope this doesn't turn into one of those examples I kept mentioning, where the new model performs worse than the old one.

Originally Posted by leroy lee 

It also has a dual core processor but I think that is a marketing scheme because what's really the point? Lol.