[EricAtUNC]

Hi all. I've searched and read many posts on here, and I still can't decide. We're moving next week, and our living room is 24x15.10. We'll be sitting about 12'-14' (tv will be on one side of the 15.10 and couch on the other).


I'm looking to get either the Pioneer 5020 or 6020.


Not only and I worried if the 50" will be too small and regret not getting the 60", I'm worried about the extra 1k for the 60".


The nice thing about the new house is that it has a specific area for the TV, which is concaved and set back, and this area is to the right of the fire place.


Any advice? Opinions?


Thanks,

Eric

 

[fstopp]

I would go with the 60". At that distance you will probably find that a 50 would look small after a while.

 

[17seconds]

50" seems perfect at 10ft.


58" would be good at 14ft.


60" at 12ft might be a bit much.

 

[AlexInvision]

I would go with the 60". I t will make the 1080P stand out more and it is usually the size people buy for that distance.

 

[gm1]

I sit between 10-12 feet away and I have a 50". I like the size but if I was sitting 12-14

feet away I would probably prefer a 60".

 

[Novex]

I have a 50" at 12 feet and it is fine...If price is really an issue, grab the 50"...if not, go for the 60"!

 

[tvrbob86]

Definitely 60".

 

[optivity]

If possible go with a 60" display & don't look back.


The screen of my 50" TH-50PX50U looks rather teeny tiny compared to my PRO-150FD.

 

[funkyman010]

I sit 8ft from 60"

Big at first

Grew used to it

Now I'm hoping Pioneer releases 70"

 

[bigdavy]

I also vote for the 60" at that distance. In my house, the 50" felt small at 11 feet.


I do understand the money concern. If you are looking for a more immersive home-theater experience, larger is better at that distance. Most of us lived with much smaller CRT sets in our living rooms for many years, so even a small HDTV set will get the basic job done. It really depends on what kind of impact you want, vs. how much you can afford (or want to spend).

 

[batpig]

As always, get the biggest you can afford. As someone who watches a 50" at 7-8 feet, I would definitely want a 60" if I was at 12-14. I couldn't afford it, however....


If the money is really a big deal, the 50" will be fine and will definitely impress people... but it WILL start to feel small after a few months.


Do you need a 6020? Why not a 6010 on closeout, which would give the size at the price you want...

 

[Lookilook]

 http://myhometheater.homestead.com/v...alculator.html

 

[17seconds]

It's not only the amount of impact and cost, but do you want to see all the little details on a huge screen? Much more likely you'll see PQ inconsistencies when you go with max screen size. You sacrifice PQ when you go huge. Not to mention standard def (especially cable) may look terrible.


Personally I don't want to have the biggest possible set I can handle. It should have impact, but not diminish PQ. That's why I wouldn't go over 50" at 10 ft.

 

[CHG]

I would go with the 60" if you can swing it. These sets seem to shrink after you have them. I went from a 50" to a 60" and think it was the right choice for me. You are more likely to watch the 50" and wonder if you shoud have bought the 60", than buying the 60" and wondering if you should have gone smaller.

 

[EricAtUNC]



Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig /forum/post/14253358


As always, get the biggest you can afford. As someone who watches a 50" at 7-8 feet, I would definitely want a 60" if I was at 12-14. I couldn't afford it, however....


If the money is really a big deal, the 50" will be fine and will definitely impress people... but it WILL start to feel small after a few months.


Do you need a 6020? Why not a 6010 on closeout, which would give the size at the price you want...

I can't find the 6010 on closeout anywhere where it's cheaper than I can get the 6020. I would definitely be up for a discounted 6010, but the 6020's are around 4k now, so it would have to be less than that. I'm selling my current tv for $500 (Sony LCD Rear projection), so that helps especially since I'm going to get a blu-ray player to accommodate this TV purchase.

 

[dhodory]

My experience is that over time my 'once huge' 50" Panny feels small from 10'. I find myself looking for a 60" Pio these days and wondering (I wonder if they'll come out with a 70"?).


Seriously, you'll be surprised how quickly you attenuate to the size thing. At that point, best to have the largest TV you can reasonably afford.

 

[batpig]



Quote:
Originally Posted by 17seconds /forum/post/14253377


It's not only the amount of impact and cost, but do you want to see all the little details on a huge screen? Much more likely you'll see PQ inconsistencies when you go with max screen size. You sacrifice PQ when you go huge. Not to mention standard def (especially cable) may look terrible.

I agree with you when it comes to watching normal TV -- I jumped from a 42" to a 50", and my friend has a 42" at a similar distance, and for normal TV viewing (especially SD) the 42" looks like it has a better picture because the flaws aren't as magnified.


Frankly,I don't need to see Jon Stewart or the Sportscenter anchors blown up larger than life.


However, when you are talking about watching movies, or HD sports, there is no question that bigger is always better. In terms of giving you that cinematic home theater impact, there's no comparison. When I would watch a letterboxed 2.35:1 movie on the old 42", it would annoy me with how small the picture was. The extra real estate really adds to the impact of movies.


I think it boils down to how many movies you watch. If 90% of the time you're just going to be hanging out watching regular TV with family and friends, the 50" will be fine. But for HD football on Sunday, or if you watch lots of movies, bigger IS better.

 

[Cleveland Plasma]

For that distance at least the PDP-6020FD, might want to look into the Panasonic TH-65PZ750U to

 

[EricAtUNC]



Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig /forum/post/14253454


I agree with you when it comes to watching normal TV -- I jumped from a 42" to a 50", and my friend has a 42" at a similar distance, and for normal TV viewing (especially SD) the 42" looks like it has a better picture because the flaws aren't as magnified.


Frankly,I don't need to see Jon Stewart or the Sportscenter anchors blown up larger than life.


However, when you are talking about watching movies, or HD sports, there is no question that bigger is always better. In terms of giving you that cinematic home theater impact, there's no comparison. When I would watch a letterboxed 2.35:1 movie on the old 42", it would annoy me with how small the picture was. The extra real estate really adds to the impact of movies.


I think it boils down to how many movies you watch. If 90% of the time you're just going to be hanging out watching regular TV with family and friends, the 50" will be fine. But for HD football on Sunday, or if you watch lots of movies, bigger IS better.

We are big movie and sports watchers. (NFL Sunday Ticket here!). Most of the regular programs we watch are already in HD. Some aren't, but I think that might be OK.


Even though I really wanted to place my TV order before we moved, I might wait until we get in there and put the couch and tv stand and check it out.

 

[batpig]

If you are really going to be watching a lot of movies and sports, there is no question you need to go bigger than 50" at 12-14 feet.


If money is truly a concern, there are several alternatives. One positive is that 1080p is largely irrelevant at that distance. For example, the Panasonic 58" industrial model 58PH10UK is available from forum sponsors for barely over $2000. That's an outstanding value proposition and puts an extra thousand or two back in your pocket. You won't have Kuro black levels, but in most other respects this TV will be 99% as good.