StickyMicky

LMFAO

SlimJ_2005

Robin,

A quick search on google reveals all

http://www.hdtvsolutions.com/sed_tvs.htm

J4CKO

iTrader: (1)

I am really pleased with our 26 inch Samsung, the picture is great and it doesnt require 3 feet of tube sticking out behind.

i8gtmf

Iv'e got a Panasonic Viera TH-37PX60-B-CAB can't fault in on any source compared to our old 32"crt, the Panasonic is far better.
Have to say though you really would struggle to put our old crt on the wall to

pslewis

Thats the TV I went to buy ................. and, to be brutally honest, its pants!!

I know you have paid good money so need to sing its praises - but, honestly, it showed the horses legs as a messy blur (that cannot be considered acceptable - surely?)

Pete

LongTimeLurker

are you sure it wasn't the source feed? I've seen plenty of plasmas / lcds and not seen what you describe from them. Could even be one dodgy cable connected to a multiplexer.

Bartop

I got a Sony Bravia KDL-40 v2000 a couple of months back and they were doing a bundle with Sky HD.

I had a Toshiba 36" top of the range CRT before and honestly the Sony is at least on a par for normal Sky (via HDMI) and leagues ahead with an HD source or upscaled DVD. As the saying goes, crap in, crap out

If you're passing by Farnborough Pete come in and have a look

alistair

I've got a couple of Pioneers (42 & 50) and a Sony 32" CRT.

The model numbers are 436XDE, 506XDE & KV32FX20U.

Of the lot, I prefer the picture on the 42" Pioneer - I have it fed from a (non-HD) SKY+ box via RGB SCART, but I guess it's personal preference....

If your room layout means having the TV in the corner of a room, then stick with the CRT - much better value for money, but if you want a TV in the middle of the wall, then it really needs to be a plasma and as has been said, there's a big difference between cheap & decent ones. The Panasonic & newer Sony's are OK, but IMHO there's still nothing to touch the Pioneers for quality.

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

SED: see the link already posted.

I've also read, from independant magazines, NOT adverts, that it will have better colour saturation, faster reaction times, (so no "smearing" of moving objects), and higher definaition.

Only time will tell.

Meanwhile, I'm with Pete. I have yet to see an LCD AT ALL that would make me want it in exchange for my Toshiba flatscreen 32" CRT, and the only plasma one I saw was over £4000! My Tosh was £800.........and the plasma certainly wasn't TWICE as good, let alone FIVE TIMES.

Nope, my money stays in my pocket until I've seen SED........

Alcazar

ru'

Slightly off-stopic, but isn't it weird that most shops selling TVs can't seem to get a decent feed signal together?

Most shops display absolute rubbish, and yet people still come in and buy them!

Ru' (sticking to CRT for domestic and PC use for now, but partly 'cos finances don't allow anything else right now)

Leslie

I had a Sony Trinitron. 29 inch, and its picture quality was particularly good. I have to say however that my present Sony plasma has a better quality picture regardless of the fact that the picture size is so much bigger. And that is on standard transmission. It is true as Matt360 says that the satellite picture is not as good as the terrestrial signal due to the reduced bandwidth.

We do have a strong tv signal from the local masts and that will be a significant factor.

The picture quality you see in TV dealers os usually poor because there are so many tv's on at once and there will be a certain amount of rf interference between them. Often the aerial system is not as good as it might be as well. I have always found that the picture quality of a tv set is better at home than when you see it in the shop.

Les

i8gtmf

Yes your right Pete, i wouldn't accept it either
All i can say is that if mine did that, considering it is a week old i'd be sending it back to where it came from.
I will say i did fit a new digital ariel before the set arrived but i do have sky+ and we very rarely watch anologue tv, considering this set has built in digital i don't think have had the tv in anologue mode for more than 5 minutes since it arrived.

Chip

Pete,
Remember though Comets, Currys etc are running all those TVs off just one or two feeds. That's why the picture may seem crap.

I run SKY via HDMI into my Panny Viera and the pic is superb.

Chip

j4ckos mate

the have some smashin ones at makro,
though i do think the big ones are a bit naff


i bought a cheap 15" one last week 100 plus vat, swisstech

together with a very small freeview box its been fine

pslewis

My first port of call is a big warehouse selling everything from Toys to Trampolines, Sugar Bowls to Sofas ................. it's about 100 yards away from my front door - hence the TV Signal is the same as I get at home.

They have a very good Audio/Visual set-up and make sure they have the best feeds ....... thats where I noticed that the horses legs were a disappointing motion blur - indeed, any movement left a vague fuzzy outline!

Maybe I have been spoilt? Maybe I have the best up until now in the CRT field?

This morning I watched the bedroom TV - a Panasonic Widescreen, about 3 years old - watching UK History through Freeview - Coral Reef documentary, this picture was simply stunning (far, far superior to any large screen LCD or Plasma screen I have seen showing normal TV)

I am simply amazed that anyone would accept such mediocre picture quality just because it's a 'big screen'!!

The public are being conned!!

Pete

Chip

Pete,
I wouldn't have thought a man of your means would be living on an industrial estate

Chip

GC8

I have the KDL-W 40" which is similar to Bartop's but with an integrated amplifier. If youre passing Greenhill in Sheffield Pete; and you stop by, I will set the dogs on you!

David Lock

I have a Thomson 14" TV and it's jolly good. But I don't look at horses' legs

LG John

Sounds a lot like a Cosco to me and I recently looked at all of their LCD/Plasma's on display ranging from cheap to expensive and not one had even close to an acceptable picture quality. They were all a total joke but that's because they were all getting a crap source, split between them all, weren't correctly set up or calibrated and were using el-cheapo cabling. I'd be willing to bet the picture quality in a good AV shop with solid sources, good quality cabling and a correctly set up screen would be night and day different

I'm sorry but I don't see a walk around Cosco/Macro's display area as a fair assessment of the merits of plasma/lcd technology

kbsub

"I'm sorry but I don't see a walk around Cosco/Macro's display area as a fair assessment of the merits of plasma/lcd technology"


Quite right too


As far as Im concerned anyone slagging off LCD/Plasma either can't afford one or haven't seen one properly set up

Scooby-Doo

Have to say I have both CRT and LCD at home and currently the CRT is superior on Sky and analogue pictures. Wack in an HD DVD and its a different story. Until HD DVD is decided and widely available and HD Sky is the standard rather than an expensive toy I will stick to the CRT as the main tv.

PSL - Why were you looking away from Sony ? Thought you would purchase nothing else.

pslewis

Right, you lot, just been down to the SONY Shop .................

Walked in, fantastic pictures on all the screens ..... HD feeds of course!

Walked up to a £3499 TV - looked very nice - if I need to spend £3500 then I will ..................... "Can I help you, Sir?" came the usual opening from the Manager.

"Yes, I would like to see this TV with a normal Digital Feed from your aerial please"

"Certainly Sir" he switched it .................. the difference was SHOCKING and just what I have seen EVERYWHERE - the 'normal' TV picture is crap!!

It was showing the motorbike racing ...... each bike had a kind of 'haze' of pixels around them - the TV simply could not produce a sharp outline of a moving image!!

"Thats terrible" I said ... He responded, "What are you comparing it to, Sir?"

"My 29" CRT SONY Trinitron" I relied

"You won't beat that for pure Picture Quality yet Sir - not from an aerial - the way forward is the feed from the internet through your broadband connection ...... but, right now, NOTHING will match your TRINITRON - sorry!"

At that moment a couple looking to buy walked in to the shop and walked behind us ........ "Thats a terrible TV that one" They said looking at my object of desire over my shoulder. The manager wandered off to the till.

"Let me switch this to the HD feed" I said - I swapped it .... they were shocked.

"WOW, what a picture"!! the couple said ....

When I explained that every screen in the shop will look crap when using the normal TV signal they were amazed at how poor it was too - and walked out.

I have come to the educated, unbiased opinion that NO LARGE LCD OR PLASMA can live up to a £50 Quality CRT ....................... thats a fact as plain as the nose on your face!!

Don't get me wrong - I am REALLY PISSED OFF - I wanted, and was willing and able, to buy a large screen TV this weekend ............ I really wanted one - whats currently on offer is total, utter, crap

Pete

LG John

But surely any semi-decent sky or cable package will provide an acceptable feed? Or any DVD player for that matter for your home movies?

pslewis

Oh, yes, another explaination was tendered .... which actually makes some sense.

That the lower pixel count TVs from a few months ago are better at the normal TV pictures .... but will fall down badly from HD feeds.

This actually makes complete sense - the higher the pixel count the more obvious the imperfections are.

You lot who are happy with your TV pictures clearly are happy because your TVs have low (by todays standards) pixel counts ...... but, sadly, your TVs will not deliver cracking HD performance.

It becomes clear now ..........

Pete

GC8

The broadcast pixel count remains constant Pete; so when its spread over a large LCD television, even an excellent one, the picture looks poor. Rather obviously though, this isnt a reflection on the television itself. The picture will look 'better' on an inferior smaller CRT in this circumstance.....

pslewis

Broadcast aren't broadcast in a certain number of pixel counts - or are they?

Analogue is the number of lines ..... is the digital image sent in a limited number of pixels so that the TV has to calculate/guess what other pixels might be?

Pete

kbsub

Its also worth pointing out that TVs viewed in a shop are usually viewed too close i.e. stood right in front of them ! The correct viewing distance is approximately 3x the screen size away. even my superior 32" LCD looks ropey when stood right in front of it when fed with Sky + feed , put a in DVD in however and it looks ace wherever I'm stood

Before we got Sky+ it looked even better from a normal Digital feed with a correctly aligned ariel.

Varboy

if they are so crap Pete, don't buy one.

It would probably be too big in your nursing home room anyway

Chip

Right Pete you've made your point now will you just shut up about it.

Chip

pslewis

I realise this ..... so, I stood a good 3metres away from them - sorry, still crap!

When I was walking out the shop, about 10metres away they looked almost acceptable ... but thats a BIG room and the text cannot be read.

Nah, there isn't a flat panel at the moment that can live with what I expect and am used to ...... I guess if I lowered my expectations and standards then some of the panels you lot rave about would satisfy me - but I'm a hard man to please! (especially when its my money I'm talking about!)

Pete