AVS Forum banner
1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
173 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I usually only buy high-end electronics (my main tv is a Pro-150FD), but this tv is for my office that I use for gaming and watching tv by myself. I started off wanting a Samsung LED with active 3D, but the 55" is above my budget. I found the Panasonic plasmas have the best PQ right now, but I want a very thin profile and plasma will run too hot for my office. The Vizio seems to fit all of my requirements: thin, 55", 3D, under a grand. Also, I'm stuck with purchasing at Best Buy because I have $400 in gift cards there. Any recommendations for or against the Vizio?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,413 Posts
There is a definite love/hate relationship with Vizios. If you've got time, I'd look thru all of the Vizio-related threads and just read reports and stories from current owners and then make up your own mind based on what you discover. Personally, I'd but from Panasonic, LG, Sony, Samsung, Sharp, etc before I'd purchase a Vizio, but that's just me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
903 Posts
Has anyone had any experience with this set?


I have an M3D550KDE which has a very good picture BUT the fast motion blurr is unacceptable. I also see a lip sync issue which is ok when you change to a channel but as time goes on it gets worse, then if you switch channels & then come back to the original it's OK for a while so it's not something I can adjust using the Lip Sync fuction in the menus.


Anywhose, That M series is priced higher than the E551D even though the E has local dimming , better contrast ratio and otherwise similar specs to the M3D550. Is this E series from the same mold as the E701I-A3 (which I also have and which doesn't have any noticable motion blurr)? Best Buy is offering this for 799. I don't like their 15 day return policy, but they're the only one in town with the set in stock.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
903 Posts
Well, I bought it. Definitely better as far as blur. This doesn't have the Vizio qwerty remote that my other Vizio's do. Another thing I notice is that when I change channels (I have comcast with a non DVR HD box) it changes to the new channel in about 2 seconds, the M3D550KDE took about 5 or 6 seconds to change. I suspect it has a slower processor than the E series which would explain some of the blur. It's panel claimed 6ms and 120hz refresh, this E series is 6.5 ms & 120 hz and it has much better fast response than the M. I will run it through everything I can this holiday weekend since I only have 15 days to return it. So far I'm pleased
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
What about uniformity? Any flashlighting or clouding? I was looking to buy one of these a couple weeks ago, but since nobodyhad them in stock, I bought a Samsung F6400...still curious about the Vizio...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
903 Posts
No flashlighting or clouding. No uniformity issues noted either. My only complaint so far is the cheap remote, no qwerty keyboard and tou have to go into the TV menu to access the 3D functions where the M3D550 had a dedicated button for 3D.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
Congratulations!


You can buy another Vizio remote; other TVs in that series come with the Qwerty keyboard, and from what I've read, they'll work fine with that TV. They might even have the 3D button. That's a minor issue compared to what could be wrong with any edge-lit LED.



How about the viewing angle?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
903 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by ewright27  /t/1470357/about-to-buy-a-vizo-e551d-a0#post_23346487


Congratulations!


You can buy another Vizio remote; other TVs in that series come with the Qwerty keyboard, and from what I've read, they'll work fine with that TV. They might even have the 3D button. That's a minor issue compared to what could be wrong with any edge-lit LED.



How about the viewing angle?

What could go wrong, or I should ask what could be expected, from what consumer reports says, these are pretty reliable. Viewing angle is ok, after you et off center by a few feet it slightly washes but is decent at a pretty wide angle, no worst than most.


Siamesenick,


Can't tell you, I don't play games, no time. As far as fast motion, NHL Hockey seems pretty good.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
Sorry, I just meant that edge-lit LEDs from all manufacturers have had horrible backlight, flashlighting and clouding issues for the past couple of years, with generally weak viewing angles as well. So I was saying if your only complaint with your new Vizio is the remote (which you can easily fix for a few bucks), you should be thrilled!



I bought a 55" Vizio M3D550SL last year and exchanged it three times before I finally gave up and got a 50" Samsung. The Samsung had similar issues, but to a much less degree, and the auto dimming hid the worst of them. This year I was looking at the 55" Vizio you bought and/or the new M-series Vizios, but my old TV died a couple weeks ago so I got tiredof waiting for them to come out and bought a 55" Samsung. Since it has no flashlighting or clouding, I'm not going to take any chances...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
903 Posts
Is your Samsung 3D?


I have 2 other Vizios, e series 70" and a M420SL both are great. I know some don't like Vizio but so far I'm impressed. Before the M3D550KDE I had a 47" LG which wuldn't have sound half the times I turned it on & a 47 LG 3D which had a washed looking picture no matter what I did. I wated to try more wth it but I was busy & I bought it at BJ's club which only has a 30 day return policy so I just returned it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
903 Posts
Does anyone here have this TV? I bought it to replace the M3D550KDE I had. No doubt much better fast motion performance and great picture but I noticed the 3D has a more jagged edge picture, the M series 3D was better, does anyone else see this? I have less than 2 weeks to return this if it's bad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
903 Posts
I am going to return this to Best Buy this weekend, the 3D is definitely bad
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by indept  /t/1470357/about-to-buy-a-vizo-e551d-a0#post_23349040


Is your Samsung 3D?


I have 2 other Vizios, e series 70" and a M420SL both are great. I know some don't like Vizio but so far I'm impressed. Before the M3D550KDE I had a 47" LG which wuldn't have sound half the times I turned it on & a 47 LG 3D which had a washed looking picture no matter what I did. I wated to try more wth it but I was busy & I bought it at BJ's club which only has a 30 day return policy so I just returned it.

Yes, my Samsung has 3D, but its active rather than the passive on the Vizio. My experiences over the past year, with 3 Vizios and 2 Samsungs, have been:


- Vizio's passive 3D definitely has less depth. It looks as if the 3D image extends from the screen's surface backwards (or into/behind the TV), if that makes sense. On the Samsungs, the image appears to extend from the screen's surface forward (from the TV toward me).


- Vizio's passive 3D halves the resolution, which is why edges seem jagged to you. Its not 1080p.


- Vizio doesn't have 2D to 3D conversion. I really don't care about this. But when using the conversion, the Samsung 3D looks just like the Vizio's; less depth and extending backwards into the TV rather than outward toward me as when using actual 3D source content.


- Vizio's glasses are much better. They're like a normal pair of sunglasses. They fit well over my normal glasses, I can't see the frames when looking forward, and they block more light from the sides. You quickly forget you're wearing them, even over prescription glasses. Easy to use and comfortable, but sturdy and can be folded up like normal glasses when not in use.


- Samsung's glasses suck. They're light, but they're awkward, flimsy, fragile and too narrow. They don't block peripheral light at all, and the frames are right in your forward field of vision. If you have to wear them over prescription glasses, they very much obstruct your field of view. Once assembled, they can't be folded and will quickly and easily be destroyed if left on your end-table or within reach of your kids. Also, they require a battery, which means when they die, I'll never use them again. I shouldn't have to keep paying to use a feature on a $1400+ TV...and even if I didn't care about that, I'm too lazy to be bothered replacing batteries for a poorly-implemented gimmick I won't use much anyway.


- Samsung's definitely has more depth, and is full 1080p (so no jagged edges), but because the glasses are complete crap and don't block any light, you'll see flickering and maybe even get a headache. You can't use them for long, and immersion is absolutely impossible. Yes you don't have to press a special button on the remote to turn it on as with Vizio, but you have to turn on and sync the glasses, etc. So don't believe the hype that they're easier to use. They suck.


The end result is: Samsung's 3D is better as far as resolution, depth and objects "coming at you". But its such a hassle and visually annoying that I'll rarely use it. The Vizio on the other hand isn't as deep or sharp, but since its virtually transparent to the user and flicker/headache/hassle-free, I'd use it A LOT more. Put the glasses on, push one button, and forget you're wearing them...vs. Samsung, which is turn on the glasses, try as hard as you can to ignore the frames right in front of your eyeballs, turn off all the lights in your house or deal with flicker and headaches, etc. I very much prefer Vizio's 3D to Samsung's.


And one more thing: the Samsung 3D demo at Best Buy looks amazing. But look carefully at the glasses; they aren't the ones that come with your TV.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by indept  /t/1470357/about-to-buy-a-vizo-e551d-a0#post_23370454


I am going to return this to Best Buy this weekend, the 3D is definitely bad

See my previous post. Active and passive both have pros and cons. Just like the IPS vs. *VA panel issue, you have to pick whats more important to you personally, and go with that. The truth is, both implementations of 3D don't live up to the hype. I prefer Vizio's to Samsung's for the reasons I listed above, but if you don't wear prescription glasses, and resolution and depth are more important to you, then you'll like Samsung's version better.


To be honest, I was underwhelmed by Vizio's 3D until I took the Vizio back and got a Samsung. My first impressions with the Samsung was that it was sharper and "deeper", but the crappy glasses quickly made up for that, and I decided that even though it was "better", I'd never use it. At least on the Vizio I would've used it...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
Actually, I would say if you got a Vizio with no flashlighting, clouding, or other backlight issues, just learn to love it. If you buy another brand hoping to get minimally better 3D, you're taking a chance and will probably end up finding something even worse about whatever else you buy. Modern edge-lit LEDs are a complete crap-shoot no matter how much more you're willing to spend. At this point, I don't even care about 3D any more; I'm just satisfied with a uniform screen I didn't have to take out a mortgage to buy.



Read the threads here; people are paying thousands for top-of-the-line Samsungs and getting god-awful panels with a completely black screen actually changing colors every half-inch. Everybody from Samsung and Sony down to Vizio and even Insignia and Emerson should be downright f*cking ashamed of what they're peddling.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
246 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by ewright27  /t/1470357/about-to-buy-a-vizo-e551d-a0#post_23370714


Yes, my Samsung has 3D, but its active rather than the passive on the Vizio. My experiences over the past year, with 3 Vizios and 2 Samsungs, have been:


- Vizio's passive 3D definitely has less depth. It looks as if the 3D image extends from the screen's surface backwards (or into/behind the TV), if that makes sense. On the Samsungs, the image appears to extend from the screen's surface forward (from the TV toward me).


- Vizio's passive 3D halves the resolution, which is why edges seem jagged to you. Its not 1080p.


- Vizio doesn't have 2D to 3D conversion. I really don't care about this. But when using the conversion, the Samsung 3D looks just like the Vizio's; less depth and extending backwards into the TV rather than outward toward me as when using actual 3D source content.


- Vizio's glasses are much better. They're like a normal pair of sunglasses. They fit well over my normal glasses, I can't see the frames when looking forward, and they block more light from the sides. You quickly forget you're wearing them, even over prescription glasses. Easy to use and comfortable, but sturdy and can be folded up like normal glasses when not in use.


- Samsung's glasses suck. They're light, but they're awkward, flimsy, fragile and too narrow. They don't block peripheral light at all, and the frames are right in your forward field of vision. If you have to wear them over prescription glasses, they very much obstruct your field of view. Once assembled, they can't be folded and will quickly and easily be destroyed if left on your end-table or within reach of your kids. Also, they require a battery, which means when they die, I'll never use them again. I shouldn't have to keep paying to use a feature on a $1400+ TV...and even if I didn't care about that, I'm too lazy to be bothered replacing batteries for a poorly-implemented gimmick I won't use much anyway.


- Samsung's definitely has more depth, and is full 1080p (so no jagged edges), but because the glasses are complete crap and don't block any light, you'll see flickering and maybe even get a headache. You can't use them for long, and immersion is absolutely impossible. Yes you don't have to press a special button on the remote to turn it on as with Vizio, but you have to turn on and sync the glasses, etc. So don't believe the hype that they're easier to use. They suck.


The end result is: Samsung's 3D is better as far as resolution, depth and objects "coming at you". But its such a hassle and visually annoying that I'll rarely use it. The Vizio on the other hand isn't as deep or sharp, but since its virtually transparent to the user and flicker/headache/hassle-free, I'd use it A LOT more. Put the glasses on, push one button, and forget you're wearing them...vs. Samsung, which is turn on the glasses, try as hard as you can to ignore the frames right in front of your eyeballs, turn off all the lights in your house or deal with flicker and headaches, etc. I very much prefer Vizio's 3D to Samsung's.


And one more thing: the Samsung 3D demo at Best Buy looks amazing. But look carefully at the glasses; they aren't the ones that come with your TV.

A lot of information in this post is not correct. The active 3D manufactures have pushed this half resolution stuff, but it is simply not accurate in terms of how the human brain is actually interpreting the images. This is an excellent article from a very reputable site:

http://www.displaymate.com/3D_TV_ShootOut_1.htm


"Main Conclusions


Based on our extensive lab measurements and visual test comparisons between 3D TVs with FPR Passive Glasses versus 3D TVs with Active Shutter Glasses, we found that the Passive Glasses TVs delivered substantially and demonstrably better all around 3D imaging, 3D Contrast and sense of 3D depth, better 3D sharpness, better overall 3D picture quality, immersion and realism, and freedom from 3D ghosting, image Crosstalk, and flicker. This was true in all but a small number of situations, all of which we document in the sections mentioned above."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
"Not correct"? It wasn't based on any manufacturer's version of anything, just my personal experiences. I read everything I could about both, but more importantly, I tried both on 6 different TVs in my living room rather than at the store or in an online review.


Regardless, I hope I made it perfectly clear that I much prefer passive to active! Passive may have its problems (and sorry, but lower resolution and less depth are definitely among them...see what the previous poster said), but at least I'd use it. Active is, in my opinion, too much of a hassle and makes immersion impossible...and why even attempt to watch 3D if you can't get immersed in it? The in-store active demo is not accurate.


In case I wasn't clear; after using both, I very much prefer passive, even if lower-res and less depth, to flickering, headaches, crosstalk, etc. Passive is definitely better in my opinion. Maybe I worded it wrong (I've had a few IPAs
), but the point is that I agree with you...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
903 Posts
The issue I see, jagged edge, is not due to resolution. I just returned a Vizio M3D550KDE due to bad fast motion blur. The 3D on that had no jagged edges. I watched the same exact movie, Men in Black 3, with the same hdmi cable & same high def cable box and the M series looked great. If the new one has issues it will go back too. Maybe then I'll go the extra 400 and get the new M series 55".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
903 Posts
BB had the M series for 1049 so I returned this & bought that, will see how this is.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top