or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › Aquos vs. Bravia
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Aquos vs. Bravia  

post #1 of 210
Thread Starter 
Hi Gang, Just joined this forum as part of my research - planning to buy the 45" Sharp LCD. However, I was at Fry's yesterday and watching the 45" Sharp next to the new 40" Sony Bravia. Both were displaying an HD football game. The Sony looked MUCH BETTER! Specifically, the Sony was much sharper with fast paced motion. My buddy who has just ordered the 40" Sony believes it to be due to the 8ms vs. 12 ms display spec for the Sony vs. Sharp. The Sony supposedly has an 8th generation LCD panel - not sure about Sharp.

This is making me think I should wait for the 46" Sony - Any comments/Advice???
post #2 of 210
BRAVIA 40" use SAMSUNG's 7th generation panel,it's 8ms.
post #3 of 210
The Sony kills it.
post #4 of 210
PQ is one thing, but speed of channel changing will affect you just as much. The Sony XBR changes channels at hyper speed. Don't laugh, it is an issue with these new fangled sets. I honestly can't find a flaw in this 32" Sony that I am typing on right now. It is worth every $ripoff dollar I spent. If your wife is hesitant, then plug in your digital camera to the USB port, and play a slide show with the built in piano music. The new sharps are 12 ms gtg and last years are 16. I'm not even in a hurry to upgrade to digital cable, never mind HD, this set does SD so good. Oh yeah, the sound is great too.
post #5 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by pizpot
... I honestly can't find a flaw in this 32" Sony that I am typing on right now. It is worth every $ripoff dollar I spent. If your wife is hesitant, then plug in your digital camera to the USB port, and play a slide show with the built in piano music ...
I like my new V32XBR1 also, but note that not all cameras will operate on the USB port, and in fact Sony specifically states that only Sony cameras are supported.
post #6 of 210
Extensive side by side comparisions in various stores - SONY! I bought one last Tuesday, awaiting delivery.
post #7 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoda1
The Sony kills it.
Not when you can get two 37 inch Aquos's for the price of one Bravia.
post #8 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldcband
Not when you can get two 37 inch Aquos's for the price of one Bravia.
If you're looking to save money, and the actual picture quality doesn't matter, I guess you're right.
post #9 of 210
I use to be obsessed with the aquos line until I actually saw the new sony bravia 40 inch LCD. Don't get me wrong you can't go wrong with the sharp sets. They have a nice picture. But the sony bravia lcd sets look incredible.

From my experience in viewing these sets in the stores it seems to me that the sharp in some scenes shows some slight bluriness and isn't as ....well...sharp as the sony. But that's just my opinion.
post #10 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by stacy11
If you're looking to save money, and the actual picture quality doesn't matter, I guess you're right.

And not if you care about good black-levels or quality DVD playback. Besides, there are quite a few places where one could find the Bravia well below MSRP. Oh and the complete lack of videogame ghosting is a major plus as well.
post #11 of 210
Hi guys

tough decision , With Sony basically you don't need to worry about it breaking down. I have 2 Sony CRT television at home , both pass 10 years.

With Sharp I don't know but did read from this forum there a few people did have problems with it.

Then again with Sharp I can get a Xbox360 and a PS3 when it does come out and throw in a few games. :rolleyes: and maybe some monster cables.

Hard decision, mostly I will use to play games and watch Sports.

Anyone else with there thoughts? :confused:
post #12 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayhui339
...With Sony basically you don't need to worry about it breaking down. I have 2 Sony CRT television at home , both pass 10 years.

With Sharp I don't know but did read from this forum there a few people did have problems with it.
This doesn't really mean anything as every good name brand can (and does) have defective products from time to time. My 1990 era 27" Sony Trinitron TV broke down twice in in the first 3 years of it's life requiring it be taken to the shop for a week each time. I have had eight other Sony A/V and telephone products all fail out of warranty in the past 15 years. Others have had no problems with their Sony products whatsoever and even with my terrible luck i don't automatically assume a Sony item will go bad. I expect everything to work perfectly but realistically sometimes stuff is defective.

My Sharp VCR has been working flawlessly for about 8 years, Sharp Microwave Oven also flawlessly for about 15 years, two Sharp 27" TVs at my shop on continuously during business hours with no problems, and two 2003 era Sharp LCDs that have been problem-free. Yet others report problems with their Sharp components so obviously my stuff works as specified.

Regardless, i give Sharp and Sony about a 15% chance of going bad in the first year . . .
post #13 of 210
I am in the same boat in deciding between the Sony and Sharp. I would really like the 45"s of the Sharp but the Sony seems to have a better picture from what I have seen.

When is Sony coming out with the 46" set mentioned above? I might just wait if it's not too far out.
post #14 of 210
My Pentax digi camera works fine with the Sony. I suspect any camera that functions as a removable camera will be fine. If you need special software then it won't I would think.

About the $$ question... $2500 is a lot of dough to me. So is $3500. They both hurt. But $2500 and a flaw hurts more than $3500 IMHO. I had a $1500 32" LCD first and well, I thought it over and spent $2000 more because PQ and peace of mind are worth it--to me. Even just waiting 1 sec per channel change was enough to grate on my nerves. I like to surf.
post #15 of 210
Is the Sony THAT much better? Are your comparisons based on calibrated in-home settings? It seems like every thread is sabotaged by someone coming in and offering a blanket statement: The sony is the best, the sony kills everything else...

Offer your opinion and some facts to back it up please.

I've seen several LCDS and done my review of the sony/sharp/panny/philips... in another thread. They all have strengths and weaknesses, yes even the sony. If you feel good about your purchase I'm happy for you as I am happy for my purchase too.

Personally Sony "may" subjectively be the best... but I would be happy to have any of these LCD sets b/c the margin/difference is NOT that great. Even with online prices i feel $500-$600 more (price + shipping) than all the other TVs is not justified. For a 32" I can get a 37" it's all about what you value.

I realize people want to be happy about their purchases and want the best. But we know the "best TV" is not going to be the same for everyone.
post #16 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesxtreme
It never fails to surprise me how "loyal" people are to one brand.

Is the Sony THAT much better?
It has nothing, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with loyalty. I have a Hitachi Plasma, and the Sony LCD that I just bought the other day is the ONLY Sony product in the house. You buy what looks BEST to you. Everytime I went to look for LCD's the SONY looked the best TO MY EYES, so I bought it.

From an objective point-of-view: Best blacks of ANY of the LCD's I saw, FAR better then the Sharp's. No ghosting. The BEST SD of any of the LCD's. Best looking colors, and an almost 3D image on HD. I tried to make myself like the Hitachi Director series, the JVC, the Panasonic AND the Sharp. But the Sony XBR kept looking the best to my eyes, so I spent the extra $$$$ and bought the set.
post #17 of 210
Personally, I would love to compare the XBR and Sharp side by side in my home... I have some pictures here of the Sharp vs. the philips. You should be able to see the black levels here (which should be judged by how low the backlight goes down)

In my personal experience, the sharp has very similar black levels to the XBR (based on being at the store)

i'm not disputing that you think sony is the best.. i'm just offering more information on the subject that i've studied for awhile. i could be wrong too.

As for ghosting... that is very subjective. 16ms for the sharp is black to black. The sony has better response time 8ms (black to black?).

In this thread JediPunisher lists the Sony as about 12ms Black to black.
I used the same test for the sharp and it came out to 15ms black to black.

My point earlier was that some can tell and some can't... I play Video games on my PC so it should be apparent. i just may not be that sensitive to it. Again, in real life practical application these are Milliseconds we're talking about.

I also suggest looking at the panasonic/while it does not have the features it has great black levels ( the adjustments for backlight are really great).

I've also spent so much time at the store and u know, the feeds really suck. connections are not always the same for every tv... it's not a controlled environment so i try not to base too much off of that.

IN any case, i'm glad you like your TV... that's whats most imporant anyways, while i don't agree about the black levels/ghosting, i know the sony is a great tv. it's not to take anything away from it. I'm just saying the sharp is not worlds apart like everyone makes it out to be.
post #18 of 210
i had the chance today to fiddle with the Sony XBR for a while which was side by side with the Sharp. i would have to say that the Sony a little bit sharper than the Sharp on component HD material. one thing i also thought was the default settings for the Sony (at the store) were much more natural than the Sharp (which is oversaturated out of the box). after i fixed the sharp and tweaked the Sony a little, i got a comparable picture.

i can't comment on on ghosting which neither seemed to exhibit, but for games i'm sure that a few ms could mean the world. i tried to get an idea of black level on certain scenes but being that the store was brightly lit, i couldn't decipher any difference.

bottom line, i think the Sony had a better picture, but not worth the several hundred more that i paid for my Aquos. BUT, if and when we look to replace our "main set" which is currently a Sony XBR, i was telling my wife, i hope that the prices will drop enough on whatever technology we choose such that i would be willing to consider buying the "best" regardless of price. in this case, i think i would prefer the Sony, but for my needs, i couldn't justify the price difference.
(but could justify the $500 price difference between the Sharp and the cheaper offerings of Proview, Maxent, etc.). even these sets, IMHO< can look decent enough if one spends the time to adjust the color/brightness/contrast.

anyway, just some perspective from a happy Sharp owner who is also willing to acknowledge that the Sony is better.
post #19 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesxtreme
Personally, I would love to compare the XBR and Sharp side by side in my home... I have some pictures here of the Sharp vs. the philips. You should be able to see the black levels here (which should be judged by how low the backlight goes down)

In my personal experience, the sharp has very similar black levels to the XBR (based on being at the store)

i'm not disputing that you think sony is the best.. i'm just offering more information on the subject that i've studied for awhile. i could be wrong too.

As for ghosting... that is very subjective. 16ms for the sharp is black to black. The sony has better response time 8ms (black to black?).

In this thread JediPunisher lists the Sony as about 12ms Black to black.
I used the same test for the sharp and it came out to 15ms black to black.

My point earlier was that some can tell and some can't... I play Video games on my PC so it should be apparent. i just may not be that sensitive to it. Again, in real life practical application these are Milliseconds we're talking about.

I also suggest looking at the panasonic/while it does not have the features it has great black levels ( the adjustments for backlight are really great).

I've also spent so much time at the store and u know, the feeds really suck. connections are not always the same for every tv... it's not a controlled environment so i try not to base too much off of that.

IN any case, i'm glad you like your TV... that's whats most imporant anyways, while i don't agree about the black levels/ghosting, i know the sony is a great tv. it's not to take anything away from it. I'm just saying the sharp is not worlds apart like everyone makes it out to be.

I don't even own the Sony and if anyone sounds loyal or defensive, it's you. I've done some DVD-viewing tests on the 40" Sony Bravia and the Sharp 37D4U and I came away feeling that the Sony just totally blew it away with DVD playback. Much less video noise, much more accurate colors, better blacks, better contrast. The Sharp exhibited a lot of color bleeding/smearing and mosquito noise. The new Bravia almost has a direct-view CRT look to it. It's great. But I still think I prefer plasma in the 40-42" size range.
post #20 of 210
Sigh... well i wasn't trying to single out anyone ok? :(

I've already went through 3-4 TVs trying to find the best tv and even considered getting another.

Basically if the Sony were available at the same price even i would get it. my point was simply everyone has a different value on LCD's and to say hands down one is better than the other as a definitive answer is not always as easy as ppl make it out to be.

And FYI, i never rejected any opinion except to ask others to share their experience in why the Sony was so much better. Like i said before, i wasn't taking anything away from the PQ of the Sony. Which precisely i wanted to see if anyone had a detailed review comparing the two.

The more information, the better informed all of us are as is the purpose of this forum. If explaining myself is defensive so be it.
post #21 of 210
I'd have to go along with bluesxtreme on the Sharp/Bravia similarities.

The setup I saw tonight - Sony 32 and 40 Bravia - colors were oversaturated (could be just a setting though, did not have time to tweek). Sharp still had the best colors of any LCD.

Black levels - the Sony mimicked the Samsung - it is the same panel after all. It goes black on blank signal, great anti-reflection coating. But, just like the Samsung, it was crushing blacks a bit more than the Sharp, giving the appearance of more contrast upon a first glance but a very careful look revealed some shadow detail was being lost. When you crush at low levels, it can appear more contrasty with a bright scene.

I could not detect any difference with the Bravia's wide spectrum CCFL, Sharp and Sony both did well with reds.

Overall, its a good pic, the gap has narrowed between Sharp and others, but in my opinion the Sharp has not been surpassed yet. The Sony, like the Samsung, goes really black with null signal but it crushes blacks just a bit.

A friends thoughts - after seeing all the LCD's and Panasonic Plasma - she felt the Plasma BLEW AWAY all the LCD's. I would have to agree, the Plasma still is light years ahead of any LCD on the market and probably anyone ever to come down the road. Its not just about contrast, its also the sheen (or lack of it with LCD) due to the glass and the emissive display properties that put Plasma in a different league (and I own LCD, not Plasma).
post #22 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark_1080p





Overall, its a good pic, the gap has narrowed between Sharp and others, but in my opinion the Sharp has not been surpassed yet. The Sony, like the Samsung, goes really black with null signal but it crushes blacks just a bit.

A friends thoughts - after seeing all the LCD's and Panasonic Plasma - she felt the Plasma BLEW AWAY all the LCD's. I would have to agree, the Plasma still is light years ahead of any LCD on the market and probably anyone ever to come down the road. Its not just about contrast, its also the sheen (or lack of it with LCD) due to the glass and the emissive display properties that put Plasma in a different league (and I own LCD, not Plasma).
Very well written review! And I stated before that when I can have two Sharp 37 inch tv's (close too) at current prices for the price of the 40" bravia now thats a deal breaker. Of course these are my humble opinions.
post #23 of 210
Hi

lets not change the topic here LCD vs Plasma, is Sony vs Sharp LCD.

thanks. :D
post #24 of 210
Isn't the Sharp in question here 1080 by 1920? That's got to be an advantage with some sources and viewing distances...
post #25 of 210
Saw the Bravia 40" today at a Best Buy next to a Samsung 40" - the Samsung was brighter, sharper (both using the same component video feed). Color was turned up on the Samsung, giving it a "punchier" picture. It would appear that the Samsung looked better on the shelf. However, visiting the Sony Style store on the previous evening, the picture and color controls were turned all the way up on an HDMI 480p feed and there was significant noise in from the source making its way to the Bravia, which was also set in the wrong aspect ratio. I've never been satisfied with all of the Aquos's I've seen at any of the stores out there, but at CES and Cedia, the new Aquos 45" and 60" looked much better than any of the Aquos's I've seen displayed at any store.
Bottom line - you can't make a judgement what you see on store shelves and definitely can't trust what you see from store to store if you plan to have it hold water on the AVS forum.
I've read testimonials from those who have different LCD panels for gaming and I can safely say that gaming has been a positive experience.
I am looking for a good 45" LCD and look forward to comparing a larger Sony Bravia with the rest that are out there. I personally don't care for the Bravia's look and I have yet to see it look heads and shoulders better than the LG LCD or Samsung. However, this thread is definitely causing me to look into it a bit further.
(I own several sony products..)
Elbert
post #26 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmatt
Hi Gang, Just joined this forum as part of my research - planning to buy the 45" Sharp LCD. However, I was at Fry's yesterday and watching the 45" Sharp next to the new 40" Sony Bravia. Both were displaying an HD football game. The Sony looked MUCH BETTER! Specifically, the Sony was much sharper with fast paced motion. My buddy who has just ordered the 40" Sony believes it to be due to the 8ms vs. 12 ms display spec for the Sony vs. Sharp. The Sony supposedly has an 8th generation LCD panel - not sure about Sharp.

This is making me think I should wait for the 46" Sony - Any comments/Advice???
Wait! My wife and I were up in Binghamton this weekend visiting my son. We had time to kill and so where else to go but a local CC? I spent some 'quality time' with the Sony and some other panels. The Sharp 45" was about 4 panels away and all had the same feed. To say the Sony blew away the Sharp is not an understatement in my eyes. The details, response time, color, you name it, the Sony beat it. The 45" Sharp, as I've seen on virtually every single occasion regardless of store or location, was soft by comparison. On the other hand I've seen the Sharp 37" LCD and have always been impressed with that panel. I just don't know what happens in going from that 37" to the 45"...other than panel resolution. All I can say is that every single time I've seen that pair, I've seen the same huge disparities. The 37" displays a very nice picture and the 45" just looks like something's wrong.

I would without a doubt wait for the larger versions of the Sony. I was very impressed with the 40" Bravia and have been every time I've seen it. My only question revolves around true black levels....very hard to tell with the ambient store lighting.
post #27 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross
To say the Sony blew away the Sharp is about as radical an understatement in video as I can make.
My experience tells me this is as radical an overstatement as I have ever heard.

The Sony looks as good as the Samsung, that's pretty good, but ...
post #28 of 210
And Mark, that's what makes horse racing! I've surely got no axe to grind, merely reporting what I see. ;)
post #29 of 210
How do both fair with the gaming lag mentioned for other sets? Is it "really" a problem for the kids playing PS2's and Gamecubes??
post #30 of 210
I am considering the Aquos, but only due to the AVC unit which will facilitate hanging the panel on my wall. Do any of the Bravias have a similar feature?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
This thread is locked  
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › Aquos vs. Bravia