yusmart 32in

[NokkonWud]

I suspect the only good reviews of cheap screens are from people who don't realise how much better the more expensive screens are. I'm guessing this screen isn't good for football because of the fast moving nature of the game and the screen doesn't respond quick enough.

Exactly. If you got a real technophobe to review the latest Pioneer screen (or any of the past 3 generations) against something like this you'd see a real difference in quality.

 

[McManicMan]

so a 8ms screen refresh isn't fast enough

certainly faster than my 12ms PC TFT and had no issue's with blurr on that.

I think this is abit like ElRazur and his PS3 fanboy thread, just because someone says's Pioneer or Sony or whoever are better due to brand names yet costs twice as much doesn't mean its always better. Most the specs on these larger HDTV's for response and contrast ratios' esp with Samsung are actually missleading (again abit like the PS3) and although correct info but made to sound better than it actually is and i think its actually something thats being looked into by FTS.

 

[NokkonWud]

It's all a difference in quality, the refresh rate doesn't mean everything.

I have played on screens of incredible quality that are 25ms (I believe the Apple monitors are this) and screens of 8ms or lower and it's looked much better on the 25ms screen.