AVS Forum banner
1 - 20 of 28 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
836 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Prior to Black Friday, you could visit any Black Friday resource on the net and they would assure you that Walmart was going to have the LG 42LD450 on sale. This struck me as too much of a good coincidence to pass up so I undertook to buy one for a family member.


Folks may remember me somewhat recently making a detailed search for an acceptable gaming/PC/movie TV and settling upon the LG 42LD450 as a sort of Hobson's Choice; there literally wasn't any other TV which met the criteria I'd assumed would be easily met. (Apart from the 32LD450 and probably the 47LD450.)


It was disappointing, then, to discover that Walmart's Black Friday LG TV was in fact a new model. I had immediate misgivings, because the fact was that every LG TV I tested except the 450 had failed my 4:4:4 color test, just as had most other TVs on the market. Anyway, the 450 and 400 are very nearly the same TV. Here are some notable similarities and differences:



1. Input lag is the same, at about one frame (quite excellent).

2. The 400 is Energy Star compliant, while the 450 is not.

3. The 400 takes about three times as long to switch to a new input upon hitting "Enter" (about 4.5 seconds vs. about 1.5 seconds).

4. The 400 lacks the "expert" picture modes, including the 10-point IRE customization.

5. The 400 fails the 4:4:4 color test.


And there you have it. Get your 450 while the getting's good because my guess is the 400 is meant to replace it as LG's entry-level 1080p TV, and if that is the case, then I personally am quite disappointed, though perhaps happier than ever that I got my TV when I did.


A couple of less unhappy notes. First, it seems at this point that the likelihood of ending up with a non-S-IPS panel has been reduced to an effective zero. Second, even though the 400 fails 4:4:4 color, the visual manifestation of this failure is really rather subtle, and perhaps only truly meaningful in certain situations during PC use. (That said, the effect is the same as it was on the 42LD520 I initially purchased, and it was enough to cause me to return it for the 450.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
56 Posts
My cousin endured the Walmart early Friday morning crazed event and was successful. We did a little channel surfing on the set and I thought for the money, it was a pretty good bargain. So good, I left his house and made haste to the local Walmart hoping it was still available and bent on getting one for the master bedroom. It wasn't,... all gone. At the time I wasn't paying much attention to the model#, just the brand and price. Disappointed, but still bent on getting a new TV, I started looking online for a similar deal. Just so happened to stumble on what I thought was the exact same TV on Amazon's site, for the same price,. I quickly threw it into my Amazon cart and did a little more searching around. Just wanted to make sure that for a couple bucks more, I wasn't missing a similar opportunity on maybe a slightly better set. Nothing,... everything else that looked to be as good a TV as the Walmart door buster was at least 100 bucks more, most more than that. Anyway, I went back to my Amazon cart and completed the order. Within minutes, I received my order confirmation email, then an hour or two later, received an email saying that the order had shipped and basically there was nothing I or Amazon's customer service department could do the stop it from reaching my door. I tried forwarding a copy of this email to my cousin to rib and tease him about how I got the same deal, on the same TV, for less money from the comfort of my home while he had to deal with rabid human beings posing as shoppers. As I was hitting the send button, I noticed something. What I had purchased from Amazon was not the same as his TV and what was in the Walmart Black Friday flyer. I checked the flyer,... LD400; I called my cousin,... LD400. Check my receipt one last time, and what's on it's way here is the 450. More amo to rib and tease I'm thinking.


Anyway, your post is a bit confusing. Are you saying the 400 is being replaced by the 450, or is the 450 being replaced by the 400? I only come here when I'm in the market, so during down periods, I don't keep up with this stuff much. Which one of us should taking our sets back,... he or I (well mine hasn't arrived yet, due to be here Tuesday the 30th)?


Oh,... one other question. How much of a difference does 60Hz vs 120Hz make on these sets? It the LG 42LD520 was the set that had 120HZ on it's sticker. Is the difference noticable? I thought refresh rates were important with the old interlace sets, not so much with progressive scan sets.


Thanks?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
836 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericpd
Anyway, your post is a bit confusing. Are you saying the 400 is being replaced by the 450, or is the 450 being replaced by the 400?[...]Which one of us should taking our sets back,... he or I (well mine hasn't arrived yet, due to be here Tuesday the 30th)?
My speculation (not fact) is that the 400, being a year newer and nearly the same thing, may be intended to replace the 450. Whoever has the 450 needs to hold onto it, because it is the superior, with the exception noted above.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericpd
Oh,... one other question. How much of a difference does 60Hz vs 120Hz make on these sets? It the LG 42LD520 (which was at Sams for $599) was the set that had 120HZ on it's sticker. Is the difference noticable?
This ventures off-topic and is answered elsewhere, but I'll offer my thoughts. The 120Hz feature can be nifty, as long as one accepts what is being achieved. There are many people who derisively refer to it as the "soap opera" effect. This phenomenon must stem from the fact that soap operas are traditionally videotaped (at an effective 60Hz), which makes them play more smoothly than film - precisely the effect you get from 120Hz frame interpolation.


With all that having been said, I have yet to see a single TV which has enough processing power dedicated to the effect to ensure that the 120Hz is maintained no matter how busy things get. Not Sony, not Samsung, and not LG. When it happens, the frame dropouts are, frankly, more distracting than standard film judder.


I need also to point out that any LG model besides 450 - and this also means any model which has a 120Hz feature, of course - fails the 4:4:4 color test.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericpd
I thought refresh rates were important with the old interlace sets, not so much with progressive scan sets.
This conceptualization seems wrong on a few levels. Interlaced TVs are locked at 60i, no more, no less. Perhaps what you refer to is the need for one's TV to be able to display a multiple of 24Hz in order to show movies without judder. You may be pleased to know that the 450 (and 400), while limited to 60Hz, recognizes 24Hz and can display such material at 48Hz, which looks just fine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
421 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colmino
First, it seems at this point that the likelihood of ending up with a non-S-IPS panel has been reduced to an effective zero.
You know what the real kicker is? In addition to the 'W' and 'D' product codes for identifying panel type (S-IPS and TN/xVA, respectively), there's also an 'I' product code now. Based on photo evidence from a member in the official LD450 thread, the 'I' code designates an IPS Alpha panel. I guess if LG has to use a panel lottery, at least they're getting rid of the crummy one and replacing it with a better one
. Although personally, I think S-IPS is superior to IPS Alpha, but that's completely subjective.

Quote:
My speculation (not fact) is that the 400, being a year newer and nearly the same thing, may be intended to replace the 450. Whoever has the 450 needs to hold onto it, because it is the superior, with the exception noted above.
Nah, I don't think the LD400 is replacing the LD450. I think LG decided to create a super economy version of the LD line for thrifty retailers like Walmart. I haven't seen the LD400 sold anywhere else.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
56 Posts
Ahh,... I get it. So I should be happy as a just fed puppy,... getting the 450 for the same price as the super economy 400. That sorta explains why the Amazon price jumped over 100 bucks within a span of about 18 hours. Just looked and it's now a $599,... which seems to be just about the average, stores on the streets and online.


Thanks for your patience in answering kindergarten questions fellas. Much appreciated!


Eric
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Just got one of these from a "Black Friday" Sale at Walmart. Great picture. However the speakers on this TV are the worst I have ever encountered! No matter how I change the different audio settings it still sounds like the speakers are resonating from a tin bucket. I bought this TV for my wife and she is NOT Happy. It will be boxed up and go back to Walmart. I wish now I had paid greater attention to the sound quality but that was too hard to do in the display area.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericpd /forum/post/19551775


Was yours a 400 or 450?

LD400; for the price of $380, I am extremely satisfied. With all this new 3d technology coming out, I am expecting to buy a new tv in two or three years anyways so for now, its perfect.


Can't say nothing about the sound or picture as I have a headset and only use it for the PS3.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
I'm thinking about getting the 400...it's on sale at BB for $350 shipped. Needed a cheap 32'' display for PC gaming. How crucial is not being 4:4:4? I'm just looking for a bigger (using a 24'' monitor) display with low input lag.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
Hey guys,


This is some sweet info, I love that you all get into this stuff so deep. That being said, I pulled the trigger on a LD400 BF deal at Wal-Mart. Something else I noticed on this model is there is no label on the box about 24p real cinema like there is on the LD450 box. This may be yet another difference to add other than the 5 above.


Questions:

I intend to use this on a PC(as a monitor) via the old d-sub(pc) input,


1)will the 4:4:4 test deficiency still be noticed, and


2)when you all do the 4:4:4 test, is it done using the PC input or the HDMI?


3) does it matter which input I use...what do you think would give the best PC result?


Thanks so much I dont want to have to take this back, but I will depending on all this info in here I am reviewing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,772 Posts
Most sets do 4:4:4 over VGA inputs. Its the HDMI input that it is scarce on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
Great, thanks, so using PC(vga) input - I will not have to worry about the 444 issue?


This seems to be the only thing that lags this TV behind the 450, and it does use considerably LESS power than the 450

115W vs 180W avg

This probably explains the slowness in menus and less sound.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
421 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by ellipsen /forum/post/19585525


Great, thanks, so using PC(vga) input - I will not have to worry about the 444 issue?


This seems to be the only thing that lags this TV behind the 450, and it does use considerably LESS power than the 450

115W vs 180W avg

This probably explains the slowness in menus and less sound.

Unless someone actually tests the VGA input for 4:4:4 capability, its really up in the air. But like EscapeVelocity says, **usually** 4:4:4 is supported over the VGA port.


In regards to image quality, is VGA terrible? No. But in my experience, HDMI produces a superior image compared to VGA, something that is definitely noticeable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
Thank u pooh....so HDMI is better than VGA as far as you seen....I do have 2 DVI inputs on the back of my video card and adapter to take DVI to HDMI, I can use that instead based on your info. I know HDMI and DVI are 1 to 1 so the cable/adapter shouldnt hurt.


A few more ?'s

1)Does the connection I use - the one above or the VGA(using a DVI to vga adapter) make a difference on input lag? I am playing SF4 and lag matters.


2)What connection would you recommend using for best pic and least lag with the options I have above?


3)Is there a significant tradeoff between the 2(lag VS PQ)?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
421 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by ellipsen /forum/post/19585732


Thank u pooh....so HDMI is better than VGA as far as you seen....I do have 2 DVI inputs on the back of my video card and adapter to take DVI to HDMI, I can use that instead based on your info. I know HDMI and DVI are 1 to 1 so the cable/adapter shouldnt hurt.


A few more ?'s

1)Does the connection I use - the one above or the VGA(using a DVI to vga adapter) make a difference on input lag? I am playing SF4 and lag matters.


2)What connection would you recommend using for best pic and least lag with the options I have above?


3)Is there a significant tradeoff between the 2(lag VS PQ)?

Generally speaking, to get the lowest lag possible you would use the VGA port, since most TV's automatically bypass post processing effects when receiving a VGA signal. Whether this is true for the LD400, I'm not sure. But the way I look at it, the LD400/LD450 already has a confirmed input lag of 16-32ms on the HDMI port, and that's REALLY fast, something that a huge majority of the population can not detect. So for an all around setting, use the DVI->HDMI connection.


But if the only thing you do is play SF4 and similar "twitch" games, go for the DVI-VGA connection. The fast motions of the game, not to mention your lack of attention to image detail, will obfuscate/"blur" the finer image quality you would get from DVI->HDMI.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
Awesome! So from what I understand, VGA has less lag, AND also might solve the 444 issue with the 400?


Whats a bit confusing is how you noticed PQ is better over HDMI even though it is less likely on most tv's to pass 444 test. I would think passing 444 results in better image quality, so VGA would then usually be the best PQ? I guess its all the processing that makes a diff.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
421 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by ellipsen /forum/post/19585966


Awesome! So from what I understand, VGA has less lag, AND also might solve the 444 issue with the 400?


Whats a bit confusing is how you noticed PQ is better over HDMI even though it is less likely on most tv's to pass 444 test. I would think passing 444 results in better image quality, so VGA would then usually be the best PQ? I guess its all the processing that makes a diff.

In terms of image quality, this is how I rank it...


HDMI (w/ 4:4:4) > HDMI (w/o 4:4:4) >= VGA.


Quite honestly though, I think you and I are over analyzing the situation
When you get your LD400, forget this techno mumbo jumbo, try out HDMI and then try out VGA and see which one you like best. Differences in input lag between the two connections will probably be so minute that you can't tell the difference.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
What IS 4:4:4, and why is it important?


At this point I'm just trying to eliminate any reasons NOT to get the 32LD400.


Will it look any worse than my 24'' 1080p LCD monitor? (Dell ST2410)


HDTVs have higher pixel pitch correct? What's the result, worse picture/more jaggies while gaming?


Will I need to use vsync or should games run like they do on my monitor?


(I'm going to be strictly using the HDTV for PC gaming at 3-4 feet away)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
421 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by TMallory /forum/post/19586081


What IS 4:4:4, and why is it important?


At this point I'm just trying to eliminate any reasons NOT to get the 32LD400.


Will it look any worse than my 24'' 1080p LCD monitor? (Dell ST2410)


HDTVs have higher pixel pitch correct? What's the result, worse picture/more jaggies while gaming?


Will I need to use vsync or should games run like they do on my monitor?


(I'm going to be strictly using the HDTV for PC gaming at 3-4 feet away)

For a technical definition of what 4:4:4 is, read the wikipedia article on it ( link ). For an actual illustrative example of what 4:4:4 vs. non-4:4:4 is, see this and this . The first picture shows effectively an undistorted perfect representation of the test pic. The second picture shows a distorted representation -- note how some of the vertical red lines are semi red. Now the question is, at 3-4ft sitting distance, can your eyeballs tell the difference (especially with gaming)? In my opinion (and my eyeballs), yes.


Will it look worse than your 24" 1080p LCD monitor? Definitely. As you said, already you're losing some clarity by increasing pixel pitch with the larger screen. So compounding the lack of 4:4:4 will definitely make picture quality worse.


VSync will be dependent on the TV. Some TVs (like the LD450) will experience frame tearing if you feed it a 60+ fps signal. But some TVs can handle it just fine.
 
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top