32" Lcd - What To Buy?

[ashman]

I am currently in the market to replace my old 68cm Panasonic TV. I am restricted in size by the dimensions of a cabinet my wife bought (grrrr!), so I can only get a 32" LCD.

I am after some non-salesman advice from owners on what would be the best option. I will only be running an SD PVR (Topfield) and Foxtel IQ, but would like it to be HD compatible if i ever upgrade my LG LST-5403 HD PVR (in my actual home theatre room). Budget is probably $2000-$3000.

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers

Ash

[taksan]

Panasonic 32LX600a........................

bout $1600

[eddieaus]

I'd say wait for Panasonic 32LX70D. this model has been released in Europe and Asia, should arrive in Australia very soon. It's got 100Hz panel and 2 HDMI ports, and it supports 1080P signal. hopefully the RRP will be under $1800.

Edited April 3, 2007 by eddieaus

[dixitr]

Pana 32lxd600a or hitachi 960hd whatever (??) - they both contain identical lcd panels made in the same factory.

I recently bought Pana because could not get supply of hitachi & was asked to wait. The TV is great, with built in HD tuner. IMHO, Pana has better sound that Hitachi, but Hitachi has powered swivel base, and 2 component inputs.

True, it is not full 1080i/p HD - but you have to ask yourself how much of 1080i/p contnet is going to be available in next 3-4 years.

if you are planning to buy a bluray or HD-DVD, then as suggested above, better wait for a full 1080p display - but trust me, you will pay through your nose for the privilage.

[Wolf1503559591]

I lived with a SD 42in Plasma and my Topeis fror the last 3 years but now hooked everything up to a HD display and I can assure you that the SD coming from the boxes is definitely much better. I try not lying into my own pocket and am very critical about my observations but when I switch between HD and SD, the difference is obvious, but much less than that on the SD Plasma. Therefore I believe that pixels matter and the more there are the better. Every camera is aiming for a large pixel count because of better resolutions.

If a SD pixel is interpolated into 2 or 3 HD pixels than surely all those rugged edges, so noticeable in SD are ironed out.

My 2 pennies.

[allanjohn]

I'm in the same boat - our CRT died and we were limited by the size of the cavity. We went for the Shuab Lorenz 32" - a real beauty, built in HD tuner, 5 year warranty and under 2K! It's our second SL and we're very happy.

[Guest Benoo]

I have recently bought the sony V series it has also just dropped in price this week.

[PanaSung]

I am currently in the market to replace my old 68cm Panasonic TV. I am restricted in size by the dimensions of a cabinet my wife bought (grrrr!), so I can only get a 32" LCD.

I am after some non-salesman advice from owners on what would be the best option. I will only be running an SD PVR (Topfield) and Foxtel IQ, but would like it to be HD compatible if i ever upgrade my LG LST-5403 HD PVR (in my actual home theatre room). Budget is probably $2000-$3000.

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers

Ash

I don't know how small your room/unit is, but I find it almost unbelievable that people restrict their TV size by cabinet space....me, I'd just get a table and buy a 42-50in HD Panasonic Plasma for 2-3k.

I don't consider a 32inch LCD as viable for all but the smallest loungerooms.

You also have the option of 56in DLP with in built tuner for a ridiculous $1999{will reqiure bulbs every few yrs, but easy entry price}......it has the best PQ I've ever seen{but I haven't seen Lcos}.

[PanaSung]

http://www.binglee.com.au/Product.aspx?id=1745

Description

81cm Integrated high definition LCD TV. 1366x768 pixel resolution . 8000:1 dyn amic contrast ratio,New Styling with Blue LED power on, 178 degree viewing angle, 3 x HDMI inputs, Gaming mode, Teletext, 3 year warranty.

=========================

If you end up going for 32....you should try and audition the new Samsung models.....they should look noticeably darker than 06 models{any 06 model}.

[Wolf1503559591]

http://www.binglee.com.au/Product.aspx?id=1745

Description

81cm Integrated high definition LCD TV. 1366x768 pixel resolution . 8000:1 dyn amic contrast ratio,New Styling with Blue LED power on, 178 degree viewing angle, 3 x HDMI inputs, Gaming mode, Teletext, 3 year warranty.

There we go again, ..............it is not HD at that resolution. I wish people would realize that and stop falling for such a cheap sales pitch. It is no doubt a very good screen, but not HD.

There we go again, ..............it is not HD at that resolution. I wish people would realize that and stop falling for such a cheap sales pitch. It is no doubt a very good screen, but not HD.

The same goes for the contrast, 8000:1 is unrealistic. Not even a Plasma screen can reach that. LCDs never shut down completely and therefore backlight will seep through.

[markallwood]

There we go again, ..............it is not HD at that resolution. I wish people would realize that and stop falling for such a cheap sales pitch. It is no doubt a very good screen, but not HD.

Just out of interest, what is your view based on here ?

kind regards,

Mark

edit: the reason I ask, is that HDTV is defined as 720p or 1080i. Just curious why you maintain that the standards are wrong...!

Edited April 3, 2007 by markallwood

[Wolf1503559591]

Just out of interest, what is your view based on here ?

kind regards,

Mark

edit: the reason I ask, is that HDTV is defined as 720p or 1080i. Just curious why you maintain that the standards are wrong...!

HD =1920x1080, mediocre HD is less. The simple fact is that camcorders can produce 1920x1080 therefore why talking about HD that has less than 2Gig in screen resolution.

It has nothing to do with the video format bat only with the pixel number of the screen in the same way as a digital camera resolution is based on the pixel count.

[markallwood]

I understand where you're coming from now... what I believe that you are saying, is this:

"in my opinion, anything below 1080 should not be called HD"

Maintaining that "HD = 1080" is like saying that regulation AFL pitches are 185m long....its simply untrue.

Anyway, I'm playing the devil's advocate here... I do share your opinion that resolutions below 1080 shouldn't be classed as HD... but they are HD for now, so deal with it !

[eddieaus]

HD=720P/1080i

Full HD=1080P

[nis200979]

HD =1920x1080, mediocre HD is less. The simple fact is that camcorders can produce 1920x1080 therefore why talking about HD that has less than 2Gig in screen resolution.

It has nothing to do with the video format bat only with the pixel number of the screen in the same way as a digital camera resolution is based on the pixel count.

HD is DEFINED as being 576p or higher. So 576p, 720p, 1080i and 1080p currently.

Although I don't agree that 576p should be HD, all other formats including 1280x720p (or 1366x768p) are clearly HD.

Why not leave your ignorant opinions at home and check out the difference between mediocre HD on say a Pioneer PDP427 (1024x768) and compare to your acceptable Sharp LC42PD5 or Sony KDL40X2000 resolutions. If you are truly indepenent you'll agree that all three give a very sharp image.

If you look at PQ the same as I do you'll think the 1024x768 Pioneer gives a far better PQ than the Sony and Sharp Full HD plamas.

Even if you believe the Full HD LCDs look better, if you where truly indpenent and educated, you'd agree the picture is still very good and is defined as HD.

Newbies, some on this forum are uneducated and ignorant bigots who type rubbish. When shopping for a tv, ask questions but let your eyes judge for yourself.

[nis200979]

I don't know how small your room/unit is, but I find it almost unbelievable that people restrict their TV size by cabinet space....me, I'd just get a table and buy a 42-50in HD Panasonic Plasma for 2-3k.

I don't consider a 32inch LCD as viable for all but the smallest loungerooms.

You also have the option of 56in DLP with in built tuner for a ridiculous $1999{will reqiure bulbs every few yrs, but easy entry price}......it has the best PQ I've ever seen{but I haven't seen Lcos}.

Your posts get more amazing all the time Panasung.

The guy asks whats the best 32" LCD and you recomend a 56" DLP.

Who cares what you'd buy, 32" and smaller LCDs are a massive part of the tv market, and for you to say get rid off all your funiture, buy a new stand and get a big, ugly RP that lasts 6000-8000hrs is stupid, even for you.

[madmax]

stupid, even for you.

Now that's saying something......

[PanaSung]

Your posts get more amazing all the time Panasung.

The guy asks whats the best 32" LCD and you recomend a 56" DLP.

Who cares what you'd buy, 32" and smaller LCDs are a massive part of the tv market, and for you to say get rid off all your funiture, buy a new stand and get a big, ugly RP that lasts 6000-8000hrs is stupid, even for you.

As if I'd allow shitty furniture to control and dictate my entertainment equipement.

32in LCD for the loungroom will quickly be recognized as the "stupid" part....I'll give him 6-8months before he ditches it.

As for 56in DLP......it has the best PQ i've seen{not seen all screen types}....has a low entry price, thus partially negating the cost of bulbs, and is massive{but only 220mm thick}.....I wouldn't hesitate to buy the DLP if I had much use for it.....but most of my media time is spent on my PC, and I have 100's of gigs worth of small video files{mainly music video's....I own a music message board}.

Btw, there's nothing ugly about the DLP's PQ.

[PanaSung]

There we go again, ..............it is not HD at that resolution. I wish people would realize that and stop falling for such a cheap sales pitch. It is no doubt a very good screen, but not HD.

The same goes for the contrast, 8000:1 is unrealistic. Not even a Plasma screen can reach that. LCDs never shut down completely and therefore backlight will seep through.

979 has already made an ass of you WRT to your "it's not HD" comment.....but then you also need educating WRT to contrast ratio's.

Despite the anti-LCD and sometimes anti-Plasma nonsense, each panel makes significant improvements in CR when the panel is updated, IOW, manufactures don't just bump up the CR without having the tech to back it, IOW, the increasing CR's are a result of improvements in the tech, not just marketing hype.

The new Sharps claim very high CR's, and the improvement in PQ is as plain as day....in fact some people are happy with a stone-age 800:1 native CR, yet the new models are anywhere from 1200-2500:1 native.

And who gives a damn whether any light seeps thru....all that needs to be considered is PQ and black levels.

[ashman]

I don't know how small your room/unit is, but I find it almost unbelievable that people restrict their TV size by cabinet space....me, I'd just get a table and buy a 42-50in HD Panasonic Plasma for 2-3k.

I don't consider a 32inch LCD as viable for all but the smallest loungerooms.

You also have the option of 56in DLP with in built tuner for a ridiculous $1999{will reqiure bulbs every few yrs, but easy entry price}......it has the best PQ I've ever seen{but I haven't seen Lcos}.

Panasung

As mentioned in my original post, this is for a non-home theatre room (more of a family room where we tend to "live"). I already have a full home theatre (see pics in the link below my signature). Just after some advice from people on what's the best 32" LCD to buy.

Thanks for your input though!

Ash

[PanaSung]

Panasung

As mentioned in my original post, this is for a non-home theatre room (more of a family room where we tend to "live"). I already have a full home theatre (see pics in the link below my signature). Just after some advice from people on what's the best 32" LCD to buy.

Thanks for your input though!

Ash

Okay, see if you can check out the new Sharps/Nec's.....I've seen the Sharp{nice looking unit with probably the best 32in PQ at the moment}.....well within your budget.

But never take my word for it.....do a net search and see if the panel has any faults.

Good luck.

[nis200979]

The two best 32" LCDs IMO are the Sony KDL32V2000 RRP $2699 and the Panasonic TX32LCD600 RRP $1999. Panasonic has 2xHDMI, front inputs and SD card reader. The PQ is similiar between the two, slightly better sound on Panasonic.

However, wall mounting the Pana sucks, very thick and has a bum at the bottom. The Sony is a flat design with side AV inputs, 1xHDMI that really suits wall mounting. It looks timeless too.

After that, the Philips 32PF9631D is pretty good, includes USB in, 2xHDMI, ambilght, and a wall bracket in the box. Sharp LC32PD5 RRP $2199 is on par with the Philips except 1xHDMI. Very compact unit with a pretty good style.

Samsung LA32R71 has a very average sound but is compact and flat for wall mounting, and a 3yr warranty standard. It is showing it's age and Sony/Panasonic are now a long way ahead in PQ. (No front or side inputs isn't acceptable IMO for wall mounting)

[PanaSung]

The two best 32" LCDs IMO are the Sony KDL32V2000 RRP $2699 and the Panasonic TX32LCD600 RRP $1999. Panasonic has 2xHDMI, front inputs and SD card reader. The PQ is similiar between the two, slightly better sound on Panasonic.

However, wall mounting the Pana sucks, very thick and has a bum at the bottom. The Sony is a flat design with side AV inputs, 1xHDMI that really suits wall mounting. It looks timeless too.

After that, the Philips 32PF9631D is pretty good, includes USB in, 2xHDMI, ambilght, and a wall bracket in the box. Sharp LC32PD5 RRP $2199 is on par with the Philips except 1xHDMI. Very compact unit with a pretty good style.

Samsung LA32R71 has a very average sound but is compact and flat for wall mounting, and a 3yr warranty standard. It is showing it's age and Sony/Panasonic are now a long way ahead in PQ. (No front or side inputs isn't acceptable IMO for wall mounting)

One look at the new SHARPS and you'll take it all back.

Granted were only arguing opinions here, but the new Sharp 32 and 42 have the best LCD PQ I've ever seen without question.....the 32 was nestled amongst all the other 32's and clearly had better black levels.

All the Sony LCD I saw had very good PQ, but they all came second to the Sharp's.

[Wolf1503559591]

It looks to me, and that is with all respect, there are a number of wankers around here who have no capacity to argue but plenty to masturbate their tonsils in calling everyone stupid and ignorant who has a different opinion that does not fit into their little pigeon hole. Having a discussion under those circumstances can not be called mature and should be left to those who have no respect for others.

[PanaSung]

It looks to me, and that is with all respect, there are a number of wankers around here who have no capacity to argue but plenty to masturbate their tonsils in calling everyone stupid and ignorant who has a different opinion that does not fit into their little pigeon hole. Having a discussion under those circumstances can not be called mature and should be left to those who have no respect for others.

Your opinion has been written off as largely ridiculous