[umr]

I saw a KF-42WE160 this evening at Tweeter. They did not have it hooked up to a DVD player and the set was receiving a poor quality HD feed along with the other sets on that side of the room. The lighting was fairly low, but not dark.


Picture Quality:


Without test images this is a hard call, but it did not look very different than a GWII to me. The screen looked brighter than the 50" for blacks and whites. The PQ looked very similar to a 50" GWII being projected on a smaller screen. The colors looked the same as an untweaked GWII. The picture in this store was not remarkable probably due to the poor feed. It was hard to judge the screen quality with the room lighting, but I think it had less reflections than a GWII.


Cabinetry:


It looks like they shrunk the 50" GWII and put a cheaper front on it. The cabinet looks like a GWII from the back.


Remote Control:


The remote was finicky and cheap compared to the GWII. It did not want to work unless you pointed it at some magic spot. I am not sure why this was the case, but it drove me nuts.


User Menu:


Adjustments looked about the same as the GWII. I was not able to look at the adjustments for 480i. It did not have the gray scale adjustments found on the new XBR sets.


General Impressions:


I don't think I will get this set for my bedroom. I would have to add a color correction filter to it to get the low level blacks in line. It looked like you would have to remove the whole screen to do it. It also does not look as nice as the GWII to justify the price. I think I will be going with a Panasonic plasma or CRT instead. Someone else may like it, but I think I'll pass.


My wife was with me and was surprise how poor it looked compared to ours in both PQ and cabinetry. I don't think she realized how poor the feed was.

 

[the juggernaut]

From your post, I concluded the following.


1) The new Grand Wega's use a glossy screen cover (protector), though not as reflective as the GW2's.


2) The blacks ares still unacceptacle.


Are these two statements accurate?

 

[umr]

Quote:

Originally posted by the juggernaut From your post, I concluded the following. 1) The new Grand Wega's use a glossy screen cover (protector), though not as reflective as the GW2's. 2) The blacks ares still unacceptacle. Are these two statements accurate?

I don't remember if it was glossy or not. I did not look at that feature very much. I spent my time judging the black levels and tweakability.


I would not accept the black level on the set I saw. I am sure some will accept it. There are not many options in the 42" HD RPTV screen size. You could fix it with a filter, but it looks much more difficult to do than a GWII. The salesman was hovering over me so I was not able to try and remove any of the front cover.

 

[Feddie]

How would you rate the GWIII to the Hitachi and Panny LCD's? Any chance you will see another one soon that will have a normal HD feed or DVD player?

 

[DLiquid]

Quote:

Originally posted by the juggernaut 1) The new Grand Wega's use a glossy screen cover (protector), though not as reflective as the GW2's.

That is incorrect. The GWIIIs (non-XBR) have the same type of anti-reflective screen as most of the other tabletop RPTVs (Samsung DLP, Panasonic LCD, Hitachi LCD). The new screen is nothing like the GWII screen. That is either good or bad depending on which screen you like better.


I was able to demo the 42" GWIII today at CC. I really liked it. The main thing I didn't like about the GWII was the styling. IMO, the GWIII has a much nicer case than the GWII, the Panasonic LCD, and the Hitachi LCD. Not quite as nice as the Samsung DLPs, but pretty nice considering the side speakers. Of course, this is totally subjective. I didn't think it looked any cheaper than the above mentioned sets. The silver is not all shiny like in the online pics, it is more of a matte gray finish. This was a nice surprise, because I didn't really like the chromed-out look in the pics. The front is pretty clean looking, since the channel and volume buttons are on the side.


I thought the PQ was great! This was the CC demo loop (DVD upconverted to 1080i), but I liked what I saw. The TV was bright, crisp, and the colors were vibrant. Contrast seemed better than the GWIIs, but it was hard to compare it to the GWII across the room. Black levels were very hard to judge in the bright show room with only the demo loop. I want to find someplace better where I can evaluate blacks.


The screen door effect was very minimal on this set. That is probably mostly due to the smaller 42" screen, since I've been checking out a lot of 50" TVs over the past year. But it did seem to me like the pixel structure was less visible even at close distances.


I did notice a bunch of bad pixels, about 8, just from examining the screen closely for a few minutes. They're so tiny on this TV that I really couldn't see them from more than about 4' away.


If you've been reading the specs online, the TV actually has three S-Video inputs on the back, not two as the specs suggest.


On the feed I saw, I didn't think the PQ was significantly better than the Panasonic and the Hitachi, but it was right there with them. I'm not skilled enough to be able to walk around to different TVs and compare. I really need them right next to each other, and at this CC not one of these competing TVs is next to another, strange.


Overall, I was pretty impressed. I need to check out the GWIII with a better feed, maybe tomorrow at Good Guys. But as of today, the KF-42WE610 and KF-50WE610 moved into the top spot on my list. Of course, I seem to change that dang list all the time, but I'm happy I liked the TV. It's the final TV in the four TVs I've been waiting for since February (Panasonic LCD, Hitachi LCD, Philips LCOS, GWIII).

 

[htwaits]

Quote:

Originally posted by DLiquid I'm not skilled enough to be able to walk around to different TVs and compare. I really need them right next to each other, and at this CC not one of these competing TVs is next to another, strange.

Was that the Mt. View store?


Once they get them I think you could get Will in the Santa Clara Magnolia Hi-Fi to set up a combination of Philips, Sony, and Panasonic in one spot.


He said he was planning to put the Philips in the center with the Samsungs on one side and the Panasonics and Sonys on the other. It shouldn't take much of a nudge to get a side by side.


Their RPTV room has the best lighting that I've been able to find in a chain store.

 

[DLiquid]

Yep, Mountain View CC. EPA Good Guys should have it set up by now, too.


I've actually never been to the Santa Clara Magnolia Hi-Fi. Let me know if they get that set up. That would be the almost perfect (missing Hitachi LCD) test setup for me.

 

[htwaits]

Quote:

Originally posted by DLiquid I've actually never been to the Santa Clara Magnolia Hi-Fi. Let me know if they get that set up. That would be the almost perfect (missing Hitachi LCD) test setup for me.

I would like to see the HLN567, Philips LCoS, Sony GWIII, and Panasonic DLP in that order. I'll see what I can do.


If you can find Roger in the Mt. View CC he will turn off the worst over head light above the Hitachi. The last time I was in there I couldn't get the remote to make user menu changes and they still hadn't gotten the black blotches fixed.

 

[umr]

Quote:

Originally posted by Feddie How would you rate the GWIII to the Hitachi and Panny LCD's? Any chance you will see another one soon that will have a normal HD feed or DVD player?

Hitachi and Panasonic do not make a set in this size so there is no comparison with the 42" GWIII that I saw.


I do not like the colors on the the Panasonic or the Hitachi compared to either the GWII or GWIII. I perfer a tweaked GWII to either the Panasonic or the Hitachi based on the sets I have seen.


I don't know if I'll see a GWIII with a different feed soon or not. The way the remote worked on the GWIII in the store really turned me off to further investigation. I don't want to have to get out of bed to mess with the TV.


The size of the GWIII is also marginal for me (too big). I am not willing to put up with what I saw when it does not fit my room very well on top of it.


I guess if I found out you could easily slip a filter in and the remote was only problematic because of some interaction with a plasma nearby I could change my mind.

 

[Ineedanewtv]

Thanks for the review DLiquid!

 

[the juggernaut]

Quote:

That is incorrect. The GWIIIs (non-XBR) have the same type of anti-reflective screen as most of the other tabletop RPTVs (Samsung DLP, Panasonic LCD, Hitachi LCD). The new screen is nothing like the GWII screen. That is either good or bad depending on which screen you like better.

That would be good news for me, but it conflicts with everything I'd heard prior to your post. Can't wait to check it out for myself.

 

[DLiquid]

Quote:

Originally posted by the juggernaut That would be good news for me, but it conflicts with everything I'd heard prior to your post.

I know, I know, it conflicts with everything I've heard too. But trust me, the GWIII screen is very antireflective (like Panasonic LCD, Hitachi LCD, Samsung DLP). The GWII looks like a mirror in comparison.

 

[umr]

Quote:

Originally posted by DLiquid I know, I know, it conflicts with everything I've heard too. But trust me, the GWIII screen is very antireflective (like Panasonic LCD, Hitachi LCD, Samsung DLP). The GWII looks like a mirror in comparison.

Actually it is very consistent with the change in weight. The GWII uses glass which is very heavy. They had to switch to plastic to get the weight reduction.


The actual performance of the GWII screen is strange. If you look at the reflections they can be rather bright if you focus on the TV image though they fade dramatically. This must be due to the difference in distance from the lenticular screen and the protective/filter screen. Your eye tends to focus on one or the other, but not both.

 

[umr]

Quote:

Originally posted by DLiquid ... The TV was bright, crisp, and the colors were vibrant. ...

The 42" is VERY bright. I believe that is the problem with the black levels. I thought the whites and blacks were too bright in a relatively dark room. They should have reduced the light level to place the TV in a better range. The set is too bright in low light level situations. It will be great in high average light level rooms.

 

[DLiquid]

There are things I like about the GWII screen. It doesn't seem to get that sparkly effect with bright backgrounds that the anti-reflective screens get. But overall, I like the newer screen better, since it works better for my viewing environment.

 

[faceoff]

Quote:

Originally posted by umr The salesman was hovering over me so I was not able to try and remove any of the front cover.

The salesman obviously didn't know who you were . . . or maybe he did!


THANKS for the review and follow-up. Still looking forward to one of these babies (size issue) next week.


David

 

[Tweakophyte]

Guys-


Thanks for the quick impressions. Does anyone know if the d/a/d over-conversion is still an issue? I am interested in a 50" and the Panny and GWs are on the list. The Panny seems to win based on connectivity so far. Of course I am going to need to compare the PQ, too. UMR, are you saying there is no way to tweak the grey-scale in the standard interface or did you check the service menu?


Has anyone been able to tweak a Panny via the service menu? (I mean actually tweak a 50LC13, not link to another Panny's menu.)


I am worried about DLP technology, whirring, headaches, etc since I can tell if a computer monitor's refresh is below 75Hz. That rules out the Sammy.


Any sccop on the new XBRs or will we need to wait another month or so?


Keep up the good feedback!

 

[umr]

Quote:

Originally posted by Tweakophyte ... Does anyone know if the d/a/d over-conversion is still an issue? ... UMR, are you saying there is no way to tweak the grey-scale in the standard interface or did you check the service menu? Has anyone been able to tweak a Panny via the service menu? (I mean actually tweak a 50LC13, not link to another Panny's menu.) ...

Sony has said the new sets are not converting DVI to analog. I never saw any great problems from the old signal path. This seems to be a religion for some though.


I am sure you can tweak the gray scale in the service menu, but I did not see it. I would also like to be able to add a color correction filter and possibly a neutral density filter to the light path as well. This is easy to do on the GWII with Kodak polyester filters. I did not see a way to easily access the light path on this set. I also hated the way the remote worked. The size and remote functionality alone would keep me from buying this TV.


I have not read reports of anyone succesfully tweaking a Panny LCD in the service menu.

 

[bberns22]

I got to see the GWIII 50" today at Tweeter and I was moderately impressed. Compared to the GWII (15 ft away) the picture did seem brighter. It appears that the GWIII's are shipping with more accurate color temp than the GWII's. The blue cast at low IRE was greatly reduced compared to the GWII but it was still somewhat detectable. I believe that the more accurate color temp was why the set looked brighter than the II. There is a bit of red push but they can easily be tamed.


The overall black level is still higher than other RPTV's and I could not tell how much better the set is but this one appeared to be slightly better than the II accross the room. Again the better color temp might be why.


I saw OTA HD that looked really good and some guy had a Tom Hanks DVD that looked ok but also seemed a bit red. I will go back tomorrow and take a better look at the various menu options. One thing I did notice is that the "Mild" setting is no longer an option. I liked the cabinet but that is puely a matter of taste. I would agree with UMR forget about a filter I could detect no way to only remove the lower portion of the set.

 

[umr]

Quote:

Originally posted by bberns22 ....One thing I did notice is that the "Mild" setting is no longer an option...

Actually Mild is an option now and not a mode. You can turn it on if you want to make the picture fuzzy.