AVS Forum banner

1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
82 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Greetings:


Which 32" 720p panel out there is the best for the following (all PC related). And PLEASE no "get a 1080p panel instead" or "get a PC monitor instead" The following are HIGH on my wish list?


* excel at shadow detail in static pictures

* excel at dealing with highlights in static pictures (dithering of overexposed areas)

* excel at dealing with avi/DivX/mpeg compression artifacts

* excel at scaling avi/DivX/mpeg to 2X and/or full screen


Currently I'm considering the:


KDL-32XBR4

KDL-32S3000

TC-32LX700


I bought the 32XBR6 and didn't like it at all. The shadow details was not that great and the full screen scaling was not that great (it is much better on my 26S3000), and it had this annoying habit of going blank every 5 min or so (for about 2-3 sec at a time).


I am curious whether 120Hz would help with the compression artifacts and scaling.


Finally, as to the highlights, some displays tend to lump the highlights together to where the highlights are just one brightness level, instead of gradually increasing/decreasing the gradient.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,822 Posts
Your post is kind of confusing, you say you want to use your monitor for pc usage yet don't want people telling you to get a 1080p tv?


For pc usage i actually recommend 1080p, otherwise if it's just for gaming or tv watching with the occasional blu-ray i would recommend a 720p set.


The best 720p set from what i've been reading currently out there is the Samsung LN__A450 series 4 LCD tv's. They have gotten favorable reviews from Cnet.com.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
82 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Thanks SurfingMatt27. That is correct I only want 720p (aka 1366 x 768). So how is the A450 with regard to shadow/highlights/scaling/artifacts? I saw that Viper had problems with the 32XBR4 with games where the detail in shadows and dark rooms was not so great. Maybe the 32S3000 doesn't experience this as my 26S3000 (?which is based on the same panel) actually is very good with details in shadows.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,822 Posts
Both have gotten favorable user reviews, from what i have been hearing you really can't go wrong with either tv. BTW i'm looking for a 32" or 37" LCD TV as well for gaming,movie watching and some tv watching.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
82 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
SurfMate, which two are you refering to? In addition, I've heard about their other reviews, but how do they do specifically with regard to shadow/highlights/scaling/artifacts as they don't address this specifically. Just like the 32XBR6 (which I had, tested for a couple of weeks, and eventually returned), highly rated but "sucks" at shadows and scaling. Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,822 Posts
i was refuring to the two you mentioned, Samsung 450 & Sony s3000. as for your other questions i'm not really sure how they perform in those areas you mentioned, all i've heard is they perform very well for 720p tvs.


maybe someone else can chime in and help that has more hands on experience.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
82 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Well my quest continues, I bought an LN32A450 at BB, and so far I'm impressed by the detail in the shadows, blacks and adjustments, although it can suffer from tearing if left in "Standard" mode, but can be fixed with "reduced blanking" on the video card & maybe "Game" mode (I didn't try it). I was going to pickup a KDL-32S3000 at Sears that I bought online, but you guessed it, I got a "we don't have it" once I got to the store. So now I have to wait until next week for the 32S3000 (32XBR4 if I can find it cheaper). Also, I'm still debating about the 32LX700, as all the posts that I've read have not addressed my PC related issues.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
82 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Well, after spending a week with the LN32A450 and several days with the 32XBR4, just got it two days ago (side by side on cloned feed), I definetly will say the LN32A450 is a tad sharper and crisp. The Sony: suffers from red/blue on dark grey syndrome; AVIs/MPEGs looked a wee bit softer (hardly noticeable); it did have a wee bit more clouding (i.e., blacks were more black on the LN32A450 at a given detail level); and finally, and most importantly, lack of adjustments (the LN32A450 has a bunch in "Movie" mode). I will say this, out of the box the Sony looks better, but after calibrating the Samsung, it is clearly better.


Well, gottta pack up the 32XBR4 and ship it back for a refund. My final two on my Odessy are the 32LX700 and the LN32A540 (which I suspect may be the same as the 450)....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,771 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by JB2007 /forum/post/14221982


and the LN32A540 (which I suspect may be the same as the 450)....

they may be the same on paper, but i did notice more ghosting on the 32" 450 than i did on the 32" 540 for games, which showed little to no ghosting...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
82 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
FIVE ONE SIX: on the 450 vs 540, besides the ghosting issue how do the two compare with regard to details in shadow/highlights, viewing angles and if possible, scaling/artifacts? Are the colors "deeper/richer" on the 540? In other words, does it appear they are the same panel just different processing? Would hate to buy it, just to find out they work the same (for my purposes). Thanks.


EDIT: I just some pictures of the 540 on eBay (item # 130235415703 ). The back is different, and the connections panel is on the right for the 540 and left for the 450. My 450 was made in June 2008 and the 540 on eBay, April 2008. BTW, both were made in Tijuana, Mex.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,771 Posts
honestly, the colors looked about the same for both games and for my PC. i didn't go through each with a fine tooth comb though, i just pretty much took them out of the box and messed about with them for a day or two, since i'm beyond backed up at work and at home too. so chances are that you would definitely pick up on things that i missed. and you're right about the back, i didn't even notice that myself until just now...


the really weird thing about the 540's is that the 32" is 720p, while the 46" is 1080p, which if found very strange...

Quote:
Originally Posted by JB2007 /forum/post/14221982


I will say this, out of the box the Sony looks better, but after calibrating the Samsung, it is clearly better.

i'm curious, what are you using for settings? i'm only asking because people rarely calibrate a 32" set, and some people try using the settings from people calibrating a 46" set, usually not knowing that those settings are going to look different on the smaller set than they do on the larger set...


sorry i couldn't be of more assistance...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
449 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by JB2007 /forum/post/14221982


Well, after spending a week with the LN32A450 and several days with the 32XBR4, just got it two days ago (side by side on cloned feed), I definetly will say the LN32A450 is a tad sharper and crisp. The Sony: suffers from red/blue on dark grey syndrome; AVIs/MPEGs looked a wee bit softer (hardly noticeable); it did have a wee bit more clouding (i.e., blacks were more black on the LN32A450 at a given detail level); and finally, and most importantly, lack of adjustments (the LN32A450 has a bunch in "Movie" mode). I will say this, out of the box the Sony looks better, but after calibrating the Samsung, it is clearly better.


Well, gottta pack up the 32XBR4 and ship it back for a refund. My final two on my Odessy are the 32LX700 and the LN32A540 (which I suspect may be the same as the 450)....



Wow, I bet you are a retailers worst nightmare...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
449 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by FIVE ONE SIX /forum/post/14232950


honestly, the colors looked about the same for both games and for my PC. i didn't go through each with a fine tooth comb though, i just pretty much took them out of the box and messed about with them for a day or two, since i'm beyond backed up at work and at home too. so chances are that you would definitely pick up on things that i missed. and you're right about the back, i didn't even notice that myself until just now...


the really weird thing about the 540's is that the 32" is 720p, while the 46" is 1080p, which if found very strange...



i'm curious, what are you using for settings? i'm only asking because people rarely calibrate a 32" set, and some people try using the settings from people calibrating a 46" set, usually not knowing that those settings are going to look different on the smaller set than they do on the larger set...

Rarely as in, everyone BUT the people on this forum...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,771 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by googleme7 /forum/post/14233010


Rarely as in, everyone BUT the people on this forum...

actually, i haven't seen a single calibration for the 32" 450 or 550 in any of the official Samsung calibration threads. most of the people there have the 46" 550, and even though those settings may look great on the 46", they won't work as well on a smaller panel like a 32" or 37"...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
449 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by FIVE ONE SIX /forum/post/14233732


actually, i haven't seen a single calibration for the 32" 450 or 550 in any of the official Samsung calibration threads. most of the people there have the 46" 550, and even though those settings may look great on the 46", they won't work as well on a smaller panel like a 32" or 37"...


Thats because it's pretty stupid to give out your settings anyway. I doubt that every single person who calibrates with an Avia disc gets on here and gives their settings and even if they did, those settings are for their room conditions, not yours.


Take for example the link that JB2007 just offered up. CNET claims the best settings they had for their dark room using HDMI and 1080i for the 32A450, used 0 backlight, movie mode which greys out the DNIE, and "just scan" for 1080i sources (yet in their review they claim the TV loses detail with 1080 downconvert and you should feed it 720p).


If you are going to turn off the DNIE, then you might as well save your money and buy the 32A330. I also have no idea why anyone would use "Just Scan," for HDMI, other than possibly a Blu-Ray disc. That setting is for PC input to eliminate overscan.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
39 Posts
Yes, it is 1080, but it still costs less than the 32xbr4, I think. I've owned the 32rv530u for about two months now and am very pleased with the overall PQ. Handles shadows reasonably well and has adjustable gamma. Color adjustments are also available. 1080i and 720p both look fine with minimal artifacts. Upscales 480i fairly well also. Based on certain specs I've seen, I think the panel is the same one used in the Sammy 32A550. My calibration settings for this set are in the calibration thread for the rv530 series.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
82 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
Well, I've had the TC-32LX700 now for a couple of days. I am very disappointed that it doesn't do PC DVI->HDMI input at either 1360x768 or 1366x768 (the native reolution) at 60Hz. This is the first LCD that refuses to accept either resolution. It will accept 1280x720 but it's not 1:1 and it looks bad. See

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...9#post14259579


Well, one more set remains on my quest the LN32A540. Or should I consider a Toshiba or Sharp?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
82 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
Got the LN32A540 from Costco.com yesterday after work. I've played around with it for a little while and set it up right next (actually one is right in front of me and the other is to my left) to the LN32A450 on a cloned feed. I went into the 540's options and set it to the exact ones as the 450. Inititial impressions, are that I believe these MAY be the same panel. However, I did notice that I had to bump up the brightness on the 540 to get it to display at the 450's shadow detail level. But overall, it's a close call. If I had to tip the scales AT THIS POINT, it would be in favor of the 450, as it appeared that it "bleeds/clouds" much less in the corners and it appears that it handles shadows better but ever so slightly. This may be due to the viewing angle or the settings on the monitors. I have to be fair and spend some more time on the 540 to get it just right. So at this point I would say that there isn't enough to say there is any meaningful subjective differnece in PQ (in other words, the pictures look the same).


I'll spend more time on the 540 this weekend to see what I find. Until next time.....
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top