AVS Forum banner

2981 - 3000 of 4791 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts

I just connected PC to my LC-80UQ10E with HDMI, maximal resolution is 1920x1080 (maybe problem of my graphic card to not support 2160p). But when I move mouse, input lag is terrible (maybe 200 or 300ms)! I dont understand where is problem, using TV as temporary monitor is very big issue due to this "lag"... Anyone having similar experience or am I doing anything wrong? TV settings as "Game" or "PC" does not affect this. Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,475 Posts
FYI from Scott Wilkinson, clearing up the previous statement that the UQ down coverts 4K to 1080P:


I regret to say that I did not fact check it for myself, but rather reported what Tom Norton told me. I just heard from Sharp that this is NOT true; the UQ17 accepts UHD and displays it with somewhat less resolution than true UHD but more than 1080p. I'm sure this will have been corrected in Tom's full review when it appears. I have corrected the OP. If you would, please post comments wherever else you reposted this and make sure everyone knows the correct story. Thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,339 Posts
Thanks for posting that info. Good to know I wasn't crazy when I compared a clip off youtube in 4k and 1080 and saw a slight difference.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,482 Posts
After living with this set for a couple of weeks now I am getting happier with it. Strangely, I also found that it requires time used to "break in" though logically I'm having a tough time with this and thinking maybe it has more to do with the inner electronics and decoding algorithms (if there are such things) than the panel. Can someone educate me on this?


No videophile. Most of my viewing is in a brightly lit room watching cable, like most people so the movie settings don't work well for that. Watching and enjoying soap opera affect of standard mode, dare I say. Sitting a bit close, around 8 feet from 60". Still, mixed bag from source with some channels doing a very good job and some sucking. Overall, happy so far. Don't believe in the theory of "future proofing". Only way to future proof is to buy new tv's because the forecast changes so much.


Tried 3d with the amazon samsung glasses mentioned in this thread. Seemed ok but haven't watched any real content just 2d to 3d conversion to try it out. Glasses worked fine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,865 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukke  /t/1510153/2014-sharp-aquos-line-up/2970#post_24777897


I just connected PC to my LC-80UQ10E with HDMI, maximal resolution is 1920x1080 (maybe problem of my graphic card to not support 2160p). But when I move mouse, input lag is terrible (maybe 200 or 300ms)! I dont understand where is problem, using TV as temporary monitor is very big issue due to this "lag"... Anyone having similar experience or am I doing anything wrong? TV settings as "Game" or "PC" does not affect this. Thanks.
When you say game mode doesn't affect this are you saying there is no input lag when using game mode?


I solely use this set connected to my HTPC. I have no other equipment. No input lag on game mode. Much input lag on every other mode. It doesn't bother me to switch to game mode to game and use the HTPC as productivity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts
f
Quote:
Originally Posted by jyqureshi  /t/1510153/2014-sharp-aquos-line-up/2940#post_24775067


I'm getting my 80UQ17U tomorrow from Sharp.

NVC logistics showed up right on time at 9:10, they had given me a 9a-12p window...kudos to them.


I asked the guys to bring the TV in the garage and open it up.

I connected a Bluray player and fired up AVCHD disc.


Checked for bad pixels by running 100% full slides of white, red, green, blue, and yellow...no problems.


Fired up the 10% gray full slides, from 0% to 20% patterns, I saw three vertical bands, each at least 2 inches thick, each in left, middle, and right of the screen.


Told the guys to take it back, tipped them for being patient.


So that's that.

Kudos to Sharp customer service for trying to help, but it ends there. They still can't get their manufacturing right, the CMS is still broken, color temps are out of whack.


Sigh.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts

Well, now that I have stopped salivating over the 80" UQ....I am thinking of the 70" UQ or even the 70" SQ.  My reason is that since True 4k is at least a few years away, whatever I get now to replace my 8 year old 70" Sony will kind of be an 'interim' TV, because so much will Change in the next few years.  4k content will actually exist, the sets themselves will improve (daily!?) and I will have enjoyed a Much Better TV than I have now.

And IF I can justify the expense Then, I could upgrade to a Bigger/Better one!?  It is so hard to know when to make the move to 'new' tech, as quickly as it all changes!

But, it won't hurt so much spending $3000 now rather than $5000, since Both will be Obsolete in a few years anyway!

I think I'm giving myself too much more to ponder, Pinky!   I just know that after spending over $4500 for my Sony 8 years ago, it Hurts me to see it end up in the landfill!

 

Whatever I do....I First need to actually Find these things in a store and See them!

 

Bruce Wayne

^^X^^
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts

don't matter what they come out with until it get transmitted in 4k we will only see some  movies in 4k...... not live TV   is that a correct statement?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
781 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by graceace  /t/1510153/2014-sharp-aquos-line-up/2910#post_24772801


** Viewing Angle **


I currently have a 50" LG Plasma (LG 50PC1DRA). I am planning to upgrade to something in the 75-85" range and I've been reading a lot about the LC-80UQ17U. I started reading this thread about a week ago and I've finally caught up...


For owners of the 80UQ (or any tv in the UQ line):


1) At what angle from the center or from the edge do you start to notice a significant drop in viewing quality?


2) What angle can you sit at and still get a good experience? In other words, what is the maximum angle from the center of the screen or from the edge of the screen that you would want to have seating?


3) Is you answer different depending on the content (sports, movies, etc..)


4) is your answer different based on lighting / time of day?


Thanks,


GraceAce

1. I haven't really noticed a bad viewing angle, our couch is around from 0^ to 20^ (or less). Our love seat may be close to 40^.

2. See answer above.

3. No.

4, No.
 
  • Like
Reactions: graceace

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by jyqureshi  /t/1510153/2014-sharp-aquos-line-up/2970#post_24779864


NVC logistics showed up right on time at 9:10, they had given me a 9a-12p window...kudos to them.


I asked the guys to bring the TV in the garage and open it up.

I connected a Bluray player and fired up AVCHD disc.


Checked for bad pixels by running 100% full slides of white, red, green, blue, and yellow...no problems.


Fired up the 10% gray full slides, from 0% to 20% patterns, I saw three vertical bands, each at least 2 inches thick, each in left, middle, and right of the screen.


Told the guys to take it back, tipped them for being patient.


So that's that.

Kudos to Sharp customer service for trying to help, but it ends there. They still can't get their manufacturing right, the CMS is still broken, color temps are out of whack.


Sigh.
In my above post, I had this line which I removed in fear of offending people here:

"650U is a much better TV, and at a lot better price, and WITHOUT the yellow sub-pixel."


650U always looked better to me every time I went to Best Buy...
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd  /t/1510153/2014-sharp-aquos-line-up/2970#post_24779962


Wow - CNET just posted this review of the 60" UQ: http://www.cnet.com/products/sharp-lc-60uq17u/ (pretty scathing)
Dodged the bullet today ... phew.


Anyway guys, I will not be pursuing any of Sharp TVs for my Sharp Elite's replacement.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batman4oz  /t/1510153/2014-sharp-aquos-line-up/2970#post_24779996


Well, now that I have stopped salivating over the 80" UQ....I am thinking of the 70" UQ or even the 70" SQ.  My reason is that since True 4k is at least a few years away, whatever I get now to replace my 8 year old 70" Sony will kind of be an 'interim' TV, because so much will Change in the next few years.  4k content will actually exist, the sets themselves will improve (daily!?) and I will have enjoyed a Much Better TV than I have now.

And IF I can justify the expense Then, I could upgrade to a Bigger/Better one!?  It is so hard to know when to make the move to 'new' tech, as quickly as it all changes!

But, it won't hurt so much spending $3000 now rather than $5000, since Both will be Obsolete in a few years anyway!

I think I'm giving myself too much more to ponder, Pinky!   I just know that after spending over $4500 for my Sony 8 years ago, it Hurts me to see it end up in the landfill!


Whatever I do....I First need to actually Find these things in a store and See them!


Bruce Wayne

^^X^^

Get a 70LE650U if you can, Cnet gave it 7 in performance, has a lot better black levels and best of all, a lot cheaper !
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by graceace  /t/1510153/2014-sharp-aquos-line-up/2910#post_24772801


** Viewing Angle **


I currently have a 50" LG Plasma (LG 50PC1DRA). I am planning to upgrade to something in the 75-85" range and I've been reading a lot about the LC-80UQ17U. I started reading this thread about a week ago and I've finally caught up...


For owners of the 80UQ (or any tv in the UQ line):


1) At what angle from the center or from the edge do you start to notice a significant drop in viewing quality?


2) What angle can you sit at and still get a good experience? In other words, what is the maximum angle from the center of the screen or from the edge of the screen that you would want to have seating?


3) Is you answer different depending on the content (sports, movies, etc..)


4) is your answer different based on lighting / time of day?


Thanks,


GraceAce

I went from Pioneer Kuro Elite to Sharp Elite, and I notice picture start to degrade at more than 15+ degrees angle.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
27,427 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by jyqureshi  /t/1510153/2014-sharp-aquos-line-up/2970#post_24780346


Get a 70LE650U if you can, Cnet gave it 7 in performance, has a lot better black levels and best of all, a lot cheaper !
To each his own, in the end the 650U is a great value, but the advanced units are better
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,865 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleveland Plasma  /t/1510153/2014-sharp-aquos-line-up/2970#post_24781272


To each his own, in the end the 650U is a great value, but the advanced units are better
Agreed! I personally couldn't justify the UQ but the SQ with the settings posted here make this set exceptional. The 60 inch was $1499 a few weeks ago when I bought it. Can't beat that price.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
118 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd  /t/1510153/2014-sharp-aquos-line-up/2970#post_24779962


Wow - CNET just posted this review of the 60" UQ: http://www.cnet.com/products/sharp-lc-60uq17u/ (pretty scathing)
I have watched the CNET situation for a long time, they seem to be agenda driven. The recent demise of plasma must have been devastating for them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Seawater

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by 356c  /t/1510153/2014-sharp-aquos-line-up/2970#post_24781297


I have watched the CNET situation for a long time, they seem to be agenda driven. The recent demise of plasma must have been devastating for them.

Not that anyone here is ever guilty of that......


Anyway, as a 60 uq15 owner I think their observations are actually pretty spot on. To the points.

1. Having an input that accepts 4k is a dubious at best advantage


2. The Pseudo 4k affect is aptly named, in that anybody that claims to see a real effect is likely deluding themselves. I put myself in that camp when I first got my set. It wasn't until i compared to both a real 4K set (LG) and even a low end 1080p set (Vizio) with a real 4k source that I realized that. What occurred was that the sharp was better than my previous Samsung and I attributed it to the Q+ tech. In reality it was more that my Samsung was a truly lousy set. But to the point in side by side comparison, the 4k LG was clearly the winner with the Sharp and the Vizio roughly tied (no clear winner). What I would have been happy with was LG at the top , the Sharp in 2nd place by a reasonable margin and the Vizio a distant 3rd.


3. So this leads to the bottom line in the CNET review, that in reality it's a good midrange 1080p set that is over priced and mis-marketed as something other than what it is.


I'm keeping my set because it's still a decent set in most respects, but this will be the last Sharp I buy because I feel misled
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,865 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by azcompguy  /t/1510153/2014-sharp-aquos-line-up/2970#post_24781512


Not that anyone here is ever guilty of that......


Anyway, as a 60 uq15 owner I think their observations are actually pretty spot on. To the points.

1. Having an input that accepts 4k is a dubious at best advantage


2. The Pseudo 4k affect is aptly named, in that anybody that claims to see a real effect is likely deluding themselves. I put myself in that camp when I first got my set. It wasn't until i compared to both a real 4K set (LG) and even a low end 1080p set (Vizio) with a real 4k source that I realized that. What occurred was that the sharp was better than my previous Samsung and I attributed it to the Q+ tech. In reality it was more that my Samsung was a truly lousy set. But to the point in side by side comparison, the 4k LG was clearly the winner with the Sharp and the Vizio roughly tied (no clear winner). What I would have been happy with was LG at the top , the Sharp in 2nd place by a reasonable margin and the Vizio a distant 3rd.


3. So this leads to the bottom line in the CNET review, that in reality it's a good midrange 1080p set that is over priced and mis-marketed as something other than what it is.


I'm keeping my set because it's still a decent set in most respects, but this will be the last Sharp I buy because I feel misled
I agree for the most part, however, I feel like $1499 was a reasonable price I paid considering I saw many purchasing in the ~$1800 range. For only $200 more than its not pseudo 4k little brother, I think the benefits are worth it.


I really wanted 4k this year, but at $3500 for the Samsung 8550, I couldn't justify spending more than twice as much. There are many con plants about Samsung's 4k lineup this year, that, coupled with the lack of content, led me to the SQ.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,339 Posts
I don't see much wrong with the cnet review. It isn't like the guy said "oh this tv is a piece of garbage. don't even think about buying it!"...he said the image quality is pretty good yet the semi-4k aspect of it doesn't make much of a difference which is true and at the MSRP you are paying a premium for that. I do disagree that turning resolution enhanced on makes detail worse as I haven't seen that issue and the image and detail is very defined.


Also keep in mind that most of these reviews when they talk about certain picture quality issues they do from an uncalibrated state. The reviewed.com complaints were with it out of the box yet you can calibrate that blue crap out of the image and mainly dial in the colours with the CMS. Likewise in this review he brought up the low gamma value which is out of the box as calibrating can get you to 2.2 or above.


I fully agree with commenting on out of the box picture quality (and Sharp dropped the ball big time in that area) in a review since that is how most will view yet one needs to keep in mind that you can calibrate away many issues in this or other sets.
 
2981 - 3000 of 4791 Posts
Top