50" or bigger TV?

Peerzy

Peerzy

Peerzy

Soldato
Joined
9 Nov 2008
Posts
7,148
Morning all,

Following on from my previous thread I've now moved into my new house and feel a TV smaller than 50" would be too small (we are currently using a 32" which is laughable).

My previous budget and spec was £500 for a 46" TV, no requirements for any Smart or 3D features as they just won't be used so I was after the best sound and picture along with a nice design that could be wall mounted and 3 HDMI ports for my Sky, PS3 and HTPC. I had set my sights on a Samsung F5000 46" but have now realised I need to go bigger.

Can anyone recommend a 50" TV or slightly bigger (I'm guessing 55" but they look like a big jump in price?)? Budget has not been set yet but as I want to avoid expensive features like Smart and 3D I'm hoping for it to be as cheap as possible.

Also will a £10 Amazon TV wall mount do the job or will I need something better?
 
SDK^ said:
You can get a 50" Samsung F5000 but it costs £230 to go from 46" to 50" (£730)
http://www.currys.co.uk/gbuk/tv-dvd...samsung-ue50f5000-50-led-tv-21328914-pdt.html

Once you get to TV's over 46" Smart and 3D features don't cost that much more.
e.g. The Samsung 50" F6400 with 3D and Smart is £749 and you are getting a better TV, with Dual Core processor, etc : http://www.currys.co.uk/gbuk/tv-dvd...e50f6400-smart-3d-50-led-tv-21339115-pdt.html
Click to expand...

Thanks, I won't use 3D and no need for Smart as I'll use my PC for that sort of stuff. Looks like it's just included at this size though.

My brief research has taught me that the extra 4" from 46" to 50" costs a fair bit (roughly 50% again) and a 55" is another big jump (to around £1000) if I'm not mistaken?

What about this TV?
 
Last edited:
Samsung Plasma > all at this price range and size tbh (Panasonic are now all EOL and hard to find).

Forget LCD and get a Plasma so long as you can control lighting within the room.
 
Completely agree with the above but Samsung can't match the price point of the LG and it also looks better then the lower model Samsung sets (in my opinion).
 
Lighting isn't an issue as it's a living room so curtains can be drown and lights are on dimmers anyway.

Forgive the obvious question but why Plasma over LCD? My knowledge of Plasma is that it's heavier and (I think) an older, less reliable technology?

60" would be too big I think, ideally 55".
 
Peerzy said:
Lighting isn't an issue as it's a living room so curtains can be drown and lights are on dimmers anyway.

Forgive the obvious question but why Plasma over LCD? My knowledge of Plasma is that it's heavier and (I think) an older, less reliable technology?

60" would be too big I think, ideally 55".
Click to expand...

You have been duped by the LED brigade.

Its slightly thicker, slightly heavier than LCD.

But its far better at everything for 1/3rd of the price usually.

Black levels are much much better than LCD.

Plasma panels handle motion much better also.

A reference level 50" plasma costs roughly £800. A reference level 50" LCD costs £1500+.

£1 for £1 plasma is 2-3 times better if your after picture quality.

If you want a slightly slimmer, slightly lighter TV with a vastly inferior picture quality buy an LCD.

For example my 50" GT50 is so light I installed it myself and I can lift it with one arm if need be. Old plasmas of 5 years ago are big heavy thick panels.

Plasma beats LCD in every department apart from screen reflection due to lighting. That is the only situation I would buy LCD.
 
Last edited:
Psycho Sonny said:
You have been duped by the LED brigade.
Click to expand...

I think you've been duped by the plasma brigade ;)

There's much true in what you say, and some not so true. LEDs have improved considerably in areas that they have traditionally suffered (black levels/motion/input lag), although you're right that you have to pay a little more. Plasmas have gotten better too, but not in the areas that bug me the most. Here they're as bad as they were multiple generations back. Phosphor lag, dithering and the handling of 30fps content (I play a lot of console games) are enough for me to skip the tech. Having said that, I'm going to end up agreeing and suggesting a Sammy plasma as they're great value for money if you want 50"+ and decent quality without having to sell a kidney.

If 46" is big enough and the budget will stretch, though - Sony KDL-46W905A. Especially if you plan on playing a good deal of games, Peerzy. I trialled the current crop of plasmas before settling on the bigger brother of the Sony and haven't regretted the choice.
 
SDK^ said:
Plasma are (slightly) cheaper but not 1/3 of the price , as your example also shows.
Click to expand...

When talking about reference quality sets they are, the bigger you go the bigger the gap is in price.

But if you want to compare a reference plasma to a non reference LCD then there isn't as much a difference.

You have to compare like for like.
 
The difference between a top model 65" Samsung Plasma and LCD is £200 - £2600 vs £2800.
A 65" Panasonic Plasma is £3000 - £200 more than the top Samsung LCD.

Where is the big saving from buying Plasma ???!!!!
 
Psycho Sonny said:
60" LG plasma for £799

Show me a 60" LCD with the same or better picture quality for a similar price then
Click to expand...

Psycho Sonny said:
You have to compare like for like.
Click to expand...
Comparing like for like? Or is that just image quality you what to compare because it suits? You've just picked out the cheapest 60" Plasma you could find. It's not even a 'reference' set.

How many people have recommended that LG set to - none that I've seen.
You usually suggest a Samsung 8500 or Pansonic which are not 1/3 of the price of the equivilent LCD.

Just to be clear, I know Plasma has better image quality (in controlled conditions).
 
Thanks for the information guys - very helpful.

47" is going to be too small so it's need to ideally 55". I'm interested in this LG 60" for £800 though, or is that a rubbish TV (can't find the deal at the moment)?

Guess it's the LG 60PN650T - is the TV any good? Only having 2 HDMI will be annoying as ideally I want 3 but I guess that's a small price to pay for a massive TV for the money.

Hmmmm how bad is the whole not being able to watch with direct sunlight?

The TV will be near a window but I don't ever think the sun will be directly on it, obviously with the curtains drawn back there will be natural light - will this make the TV unwatchable as I don't want to have to close the curtains to watch TV in the daytime!
 
Last edited:
SDK^ said:
Comparing like for like? Or is that just image quality you what to compare because it suits? You've just picked out the cheapest 60" Plasma you could find. It's not even a 'reference' set.

How many people have recommended that LG set to - none that I've seen.
You usually suggest a Samsung 8500 or Pansonic which are not 1/3 of the price of the equivilent LCD.

Just to be clear, I know Plasma has better image quality (in controlled conditions).
Click to expand...

Okay so there is no like for like LCD anywhere near the price of the LG, okay here is another set which is even better PQ than the LG for only slightly more:

Samsung PS60F5500 is £930

That is a better quality 60 inch Plasma than the LG

how much is the equivalent PQ 60" LCD of that tv then?

http://www.avforums.com/review/samsung-ps60f5500-plasma-tv-review.9595

even AVforums say it beats the pants off LCD's at 4-5 times it's price range

"That is an excellent result and surpasses the performance of all the 4K LED TVs we’ve tested recently, for some perspective. For further perspective, those TVs will cost you between 4 or 5 times the entry price of the F5500"

When buying plasma you usually go for bang for buck, the ZT65B is not a bang for buck tv, it's overpriced compared to a VT65B but there are no LCD's anywhere near the level of those tv's in terms of PQ.

You cannot get a TV which even compares to those models in LCD, they don't exist.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom