Wait till after christmas for a 40" LCD?

Yeah definately wait. I'm hoping to pick up a 40" X2000, or a 46" W2000 depending on how much room I have :p
 
Getting Sharp 37DX1 around January/Febuary :D

We've tested it in a dark room where it was set-up side by side with a Pio 427 and the Sony 46W. It's official for me, The Sharp is the best allround performer. I had the chance to play around with all the settings, but the Sharp is a clear winner! - Better Blacks - Better Colours - Better Repsonse time (than Sony) - HD Looked absolutely stunning! - SD feed was the best of all - Viewing Angle is excellent
Click to expand...
 
Clerkin said:
im tempted for a new one. had mine over a year now, paid 400 quid for a 17" widescreen.

think what id get for 400 now :eek:
Click to expand...

a 20" ?

most of the decent HD ready 26" are more than 400.
 
MrLOL said:
a 20" ?

most of the decent HD ready 26" are more than 400.
Click to expand...


You can pick up 32" lcd's for £400 and possibly even cheaper now. I paid £500 for one a few months ago. I'm going to wait a few months and if the 42" lcd's come down in price I'm going to buy one and just use my 32" for my pc instead of tv and pc as I do now which can be a bugger when someone wants to watch tv and I want to use my computer. :D
 
notice in my post i mentioned quality

the AVforums are full of posts about cheap 32" LCDs that appear to be bargain of the century and sleeper brands etc..

they've nearly all turned into sob storys.

Its an old saying but a true one, you get what you pay for.
 
MrLOL said:
notice in my post i mentioned quality

the AVforums are full of posts about cheap 32" LCDs that appear to be bargain of the century and sleeper brands etc..

they've nearly all turned into sob storys.

Its an old saying but a true one, you get what you pay for.
Click to expand...


My mate has a top of the range ******* one and has had nothing but problems with it whereas I haven't had one problem. Your best off reading reviews of the product your buying from customers who have purchased it and going from there. No sob story here. I just used my head instead of my wallet. :D
 
the AVforums posts i was talking about were indead user observations of their own products.

the same people that raved about how amazing they were, and what a sleeper brand they were etc.. then posted months later about their problems

im not saying every cheap monitor will break and be vastly inferior to the better priced stuff. Heck i own a cheap 20" WS LCD thats not given me any problems, but im not under any illusion that its quality is in any way as good as the proper LCDs. But being the bedroom, the main concern was space. It had to be wallmounted to fit in our bedroom and it had to be slim, a 20" TV CRT would just have been too big. so it fits its purpose

i dont pretend its anything its not though.
 
the AVforums posts i was talking about were indead user observations of their own products.

the same people that raved about how amazing they were, and what a sleeper brand they were etc.. then posted months later about their problems

im not saying every cheap monitor will break and be vastly inferior to the better priced stuff. Heck i own a cheap 20" WS LCD thats not given me any problems, but im not under any illusion that its quality is in any way as good as the proper LCDs. But being the bedroom, the main concern was space. It had to be wallmounted to fit in our bedroom and it had to be slim, a 20" TV CRT would just have been too big. so it fits its purpose

i dont pretend its anything its not though. The gadget show agreed when they reviewed 20" widescreens. They too found the cheap ones to be lacking in quality compared with the Toshiba.
 
MrLOL said:
the AVforums posts i was talking about were indead user observations of their own products.

the same people that raved about how amazing they were, and what a sleeper brand they were etc.. then posted months later about their problems

im not saying every cheap monitor will break and be vastly inferior to the better priced stuff. Heck i own a cheap 20" WS LCD thats not given me any problems, but im not under any illusion that its quality is in any way as good as the proper LCDs. But being the bedroom, the main concern was space. It had to be wallmounted to fit in our bedroom and it had to be slim, a 20" TV CRT would just have been too big. so it fits its purpose

i dont pretend its anything its not though. The gadget show agreed when they reviewed 20" widescreens. They too found the cheap ones to be lacking in quality compared with the Toshiba.
Click to expand...

I have to agree here.
I'm sure a £400 32" LCD will be ok, and great for a lot of people. But the people that think that somehow they're getting something that can come close to the better Sony / Tosh / Sammy models are kidding themselves. Do people think that Sony are building £400 LCDS, then adding £1000 to the price for the hell of it?

The more you pay, the better quality components you get. That doesn't mean that all expensive LCDs are great, but in order to make a £400 LCD, corners have to be cut somewhere..

I always say buy the best model you can afford. If you can only afford £400, then i'm sure you'll be happy. But if you can stretch to £1000+ then you can enjoy the benefits of a decent branded TV.
 
I see where Your comming from, there are only about 4 TFT panel makers makers worldwide. when Panel Yields are good and demand low the cheap manufacturers will get better graded panels, I would think it obvious the best panels go to the big players first.

Sony Use samsung panels, I think they do take advantage of their name but also have a massive advertising expenditure. currently they do have about the best LCD's out there (allbeit some quality problems on the W series) but wheather they are worth getting on for 2 times the cost of an ATEC for the same size personally I would say not, the technology is moving to fast to drop £3000 on a 46" x series and be replacing it in 12 to 18 months
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom