[shamster]

Hi, I am new to this forum. Lots of good info here, to the point of being overwhelming. Anyhow, aside from just looking at specs, can anyone give me honest assessments comparing the Sony KDL-46V2500 and the Samsung LN-S4695D? I am looking to purchase one of these soon. Just from looking at both in stores, they seem to be pretty close in overall picture quality, and both are priced similarly. Thus, I'm wondering if anyone can give me more insight into which would be the better purchase.


Also, what is the difference between the Samsung LN-S4695D and LN-S4696D? Not sure if the $1-200 difference between these two is worth it.


Thanks in advance!

 

[shamster]

Any help please? I've tried searching here to compare the two models directly, but cannot find anything.

 

[sss_tacoma]



Quote:
Originally Posted by shamster /forum/post/0


Any help please? I've tried searching here to compare the two models directly, but cannot find anything.

I'm by no means an expert, but figured I'd chime in since no one else has yet. I purchased the KDL-46V2500 the weekend after Thanksgiving and have really enjoyed it to this point. It's my first HDTV, and like you, I tried to research it as best I can. Honestly, I think you can beat yourself up over it if you aren't careful!! I was looking at the Sony, Samsung, and Sharp models, and even though I've read issues about all of them, I honesltly thought they all had great pictures!! I believe the Sony is using a Samsung panel anyway. At the time I purchased, I got a better deal on the Sony, but now kind of wished I'd waited for the Samsung -- I've now seen it priced the same as what I paid. My reason isn't even for picture quality -- I like the shiny black cabinet on the Samsung better than the flat black of the Sony. Also, I put mine into a stand that just fits the 46" -- it's so tight that I can't fit my hand over the top of the Sony to operate the buttons. The Samsung buttons are on the side, and I could have used them. Also, the power button on the Samsung is right on the front -- would be kind of handy when you're running out the door and can't find the remote! (at least my kids aren't fingerprinting the buttons all up since we can't used them - maybe it is a benefit!!)


You know, I think whatever you get you'll be happy with, but if you're like me you'll always second guess yourself!! I watched football this morning on a friend's new 50" Samsung Plasma and started wondering if I should have went with plasma instead of LCD!!


You mentioned the other Samsung - 4696. I think the only difference on that is that the 4696 accepts cable cards while the 4695 or the Sony do not. If you plan on using a cable box, then it would be a waste of money. The cabinet may be a little different also - glass bezel on the bottome and a round stand instead of square.


Scott

 

[ph00ny]

I was in a same boat as you. Initially i wanted to get the XBR2 or XBR3 and ended up getting the LN4696D over both.


My decision was based on comparison of the demo units found at bestbuy and circuit city as well as the huge price gap that exists between two units.


1. Color reproduction seemed better on the XBR3 when viewed next to 4696 but the closeup pic revealed that color repro is overly bright and un-natural on XBR3 (high def football game was being brodcasted).


2. With the price gap, i was able to buy an extended warranty and still had enough money left.


3. Samsung had few extra feature that came in handy especially the usb/firewire ports. Also 1080p support through component was a big plus

 

[ncted]

I went through this same process at the end of 2006. I ended up with the Samsung LN-S4696D over the Sony & Sharp models for a couple of reasons. The Sharp was a better deal, but the banding problem was horrible on the in-store displays, so that removed it from the running.


I liked the packaging of the XBR3, but I could not justify the extra cost, so I considered the XBR2 and the V2500. The other thing that drove me to pick the Sammy over the Sony was how SD looked on the set. With the DNIe and DNR turned off, the Sammy produced a decent SD picture while I never could get the Sony to do so. Finally, based on anecdotal evidence here and and on other forum sites, the Sammy had less cloudy backlight problems than the Sony.


I have had my Samsung for almost a week now, and I am very happy with it.


Ted

 

[ph00ny]



Quote:
Originally Posted by ncted /forum/post/0


I went through this same process at the end of 2006. I ended up with the Samsung LN-S4696D over the Sony & Sharp models for a couple of reasons. The Sharp was a better deal, but the banding problem was horrible on the in-store displays, so that removed it from the running.


I liked the packaging of the XBR3, but I could not justify the extra cost, so I considered the XBR2 and the V2500. The other thing that drove me to pick the Sammy over the Sony was how SD looked on the set. With the DNIe and DNR turned off, the Sammy produced a decent SD picture while I never could get the Sony to do so. Finally, based on anecdotal evidence here and and on other forum sites, the Sammy had less cloudy backlight problems than the Sony.


I have had my Samsung for almost a week now, and I am very happy with it.


Ted

You and me both

 

[miniz]

Are you looking for a cloudy set or a cloudy set?

 

[shamster]

Thanks for the replies everyone. At this point, I'm sorta leaning towards the Samsung.

Quote:
Originally Posted by miniz /forum/post/0


Are you looking for a cloudy set or a cloudy set?

Can you explain this please?

 

[rconn2]

If the Samsung has overscan fixed to show 1-1 pixels, then it's comparable to the Sony's though the Sony's have the better WCG-CCFL backlighting and color reproduction. I've read that this is to be fixed by fw upgrade or new fw on new sets, but I'd want it confirmed. My recommendation is the V2500 which is the only one to have pixel perfect 1080p hdmi and suitable as a monitor or in a htpc setup. The Xbox 360's 1080p VGA also works well with the V2500. And, I much prefer the black matte understated style w/ menu buttons on the top of the V2500 -- but this is just personal taste.


Cloudiness is an issue for all these sets. Many owners experience no problem under normal viewing; other's more acute problems.

 

[rishid]

Another thing to note is the Sony V2500 has a QAM tuner while the 95 series Samsung does not. But the more featured, 96 series Samsung does have a QAM tuner. If you do not want to get a cable box, a QAM tuner is always useful.

 

[DantheMan17]

Bought the Samsung 4695D and set it up this past Friday. The picture is incredible. I hooked it up to a PS3 and to Verizon FIOS HD. I was torn between the Sony XBR2 and went with the Samsung after reading numerous reviews and then doing a side-by-side comparison at Best Buy and Sears. The Samsung is brighter and seems to have much less pixilation. Sports, movies, music... they all look great on the Samsung. I just can't see paying the additional $500-1000 for the Sony.

 

[miniz]



Quote:
Originally Posted by shamster /forum/post/0


Thanks for the replies everyone. At this point, I'm sorta leaning towards the Samsung.




Can you explain this please?

Click on the link in my signature. There are over 115 pages of documentation and even a poll to feast your eyes on. Better get reading, there is a lot there!

 

[shamster]

Thanks for the further info. I'll have to read it bit by bit.


One more question...I won't be getting HD programming till later this year. If one can only view SD channels, do you think it's still worthwhile to get these TVs?

 

[laurie_lu]



Quote:
Originally Posted by shamster /forum/post/0


Thanks for the further info. I'll have to read it bit by bit.


One more question...I won't be getting HD programming till later this year. If one can only view SD channels, do you think it's still worthwhile to get these TVs?

This was a huge issue for me as well. My 15 yr old 35inch JVC picture tube TV finally bit the dust and I needed a new TV. Now I own the Samsung LN-S4695D. My satellite box is 6 yrs old and the best I can do is hook it up to S-Video. I was pleasantly suprised by the picture quality of standard definition. I was expecting alot worse and thought I'd need to immediately upgrade to a high def service, dish, & box. But I am content with what I have until more high def channels are available from my satellite company. Of course the closer you sit to it, the worse it looks. My livingroom is quite long. I sit probably 15 or more feet from the TV and it looks quite good.


My 3 yr old DVD player produces amazingly clear scenes as well when connected via component cables. I don't regret moving up to a high def LCD TV. Times are changing and I feel I have "future proofed" my TV viewing.

 

[miniz]



Quote:
Originally Posted by shamster /forum/post/0


Thanks for the further info. I'll have to read it bit by bit.


One more question...I won't be getting HD programming till later this year. If one can only view SD channels, do you think it's still worthwhile to get these TVs?

I would wait. If you can't feed your HDTV an HD signal then there is no point in having one. That is like buying a car then saying, oh I can't afford any gas.

 

[scote3232]



Quote:
Originally Posted by ncted /forum/post/0


I went through this same process at the end of 2006. I ended up with the Samsung LN-S4696D over the Sony & Sharp models for a couple of reasons. The Sharp was a better deal, but the banding problem was horrible on the in-store displays, so that removed it from the running.


I liked the packaging of the XBR3, but I could not justify the extra cost, so I considered the XBR2 and the V2500. The other thing that drove me to pick the Sammy over the Sony was how SD looked on the set. With the DNIe and DNR turned off, the Sammy produced a decent SD picture while I never could get the Sony to do so. Finally, based on anecdotal evidence here and and on other forum sites, the Sammy had less cloudy backlight problems than the Sony.


I have had my Samsung for almost a week now, and I am very happy with it.


Ted

What is the main difference between the 4696D and the 4695D? I'm looking at the latter now, but I'm confused now.


Thanks

 

[Reaver2218]



Quote:
Originally Posted by scote3232 /forum/post/0


What is the main difference between the 4696D and the 4695D? I'm looking at the latter now, but I'm confused now.


Thanks

the 96 series has more features plus a QAM tuner while the 95 series lacks the features and the QAM tuner of the 96 series.


the 96 series has the QAM tuner plus Firewire and USB ports.

 

[scote3232]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaver2218 /forum/post/0


the 96 series has more features plus a QAM tuner while the 95 series lacks the features and the QAM tuner of the 96 series.


the 96 series has the QAM tuner plus Firewire and USB ports.

Ugh...it never ends. I get my mind set on one TV, then I find there is a better version.


One of these days I'm just going to have to bite the bullet and buy one.

 

[laurie_lu]

There will always be a better version. I bought mine when I did because it was on a really good sale I couldn't pass up.