Originally Posted by TomF
I've been looking at the WD-65833 to replace my six-year old WS-65907 Diamond Series that's been having occasional convergence and alignment issues.
Consumer Reports has been doing reports on HDTVs with frequent regularity but the last test they did of RPTVs was in June 2007. In that review, the Mitsubishi WD-65831 (last year's 65" Diamond I think) placed fourth out of four against the Sony KDS-R60XBR2, the JVC HD-61FN97, and the Sony KDS-60A2000. The Sony XBR was a clear winner at 80 points, and while the others were 11 points down, there was only a one point difference between them at 69, 68, and 67 points respectively.
Their last HDTV test was in their November issue, but they didn't test RPTVs, only LCD and Plasma. They indicated that they would be reviewing RPTVs in their December issue. It just came today and while it had more reviews and ratings of LDC and Plasma sets, they only had short summaries of three RPTVs, the Mitsubishi DLP WD-65734, the Panasonic LCD-based PT-56LCZ70, and the Sony LCOS KDS-60A3000 again. They didn't rate them and had these comments about the Mitusibishi:HIGHSFine Picture quality.
This 1080p TV produced fine HD picture quality. Images had very good clarity, and gray scale was excellent.Impressive viewing angle.
Wider than typical on such sets.Fine-tuning controls.
It has more fine-tuning adjustments than usual.Slim cabinet.
Trim style saves space.LOWSDoesn't maximize detail.
Overall HD detail was satisfying, though the finest details were somewhat lackingSubtle distortion.
Geometric glitch could make the top edge of a leter-boxed movie appear a bit bowed.Rainbow effect.
As with other DLP sets, viewers might see a potentially annoying flash of color at times.BOTTOM LINE
This TV did very well, much better than previously tested Mitsubishi sets. Minor quibbles aside, its generally fine picture quality is likely to please mos users. It's very svelte for a 65-inch TV.
About the Panasonic they said "displayed the finest details, with bright, crisp images" but with "less-than-ideal contrast".
About the Sony they said "appealing HD pictures with good black levels" but "finest details lacking" and "red fringing on the edges of objects, more than we've seen on other projection TVs".
I thought that these objective comments might help those of you who are looking for input.
Consumer Reports seems to like plasma more than LCDs and a lot more than RPTVs and having just got a 42" Panasonic plasma for the bedroom, I can see why. My local BB just got the 65833 and 73833 in the other day and I spent some time today looking at both of them. But they also had a 65" Panasonic plasma and that picture blows both of them away. Only problem is that it's $8,000!
Tom, you have to view Consumer Reports articles in context.
Their reviewer is not a video aficionado -- the reviews are for
the masses, not for videophiles. The reviewer often knows
about the subject less than most peoeple here. I wonder
whether he owns equipment such as the set under review.
As a result, CR's 'point system' is oversimplified to the point
of uselessness. The same is true of CR's camera and high
end audio reviews.
When CR includes data, one can evaluate it on it's merit,
but blindly accepting their conclusions is pure folly. For
example, they think a Mitusu 'Low' is that it doesn't maximize
detail. Where detail enhancing circuits exists, most videophiles
disable them (due to introduction of unnatural artifacts), yet
the CR review wording leads one to believe that detail
enhancing somehow improves PQ. Siimilarly, CR thinks that
geometric aberations are a 'Low' of the Mitsu model, while in
reality, it's a problem of a specific review sample. And, what
is 'subtle distortion', anyway? And since when has high price
become a 'problem'?
Bottom line: CR reviews of high-end high-tech equipment
should be taken with a sack of salt. Read them, by all means,
but then read owners' comments, then view sets on your short
list at dealers show room -- more than one, if you can.