LCD 37 to 40" HDTV

[Digger]

The couch is about 10 to 12 feet away so a 37" would be more than enough. I was thinking 40" because the room itself feels larger since it has a high ceiling (about 11'). Then again it might look awkward filling up the entire wall.

I might go with a 37" if they have one in the series (leaving about 3" wall space on either side of the tv). I have to research this more later.

 

[Rupp]

Digger,
Don't follow the hype. I did and it took me over 4 years to pull the trigger. I now have 3 flat panel TV's. A 42" EDTV Panasonic plasma, a 42" HDTV Panasonic plasma and a 32" Panasonic LCD. From more than roughly 8 feet you would have a hard time telling the difference between the 42" HDTV and 42" EDTV while the cost was significant between the 2 at the time. I've had several people look at my EDTV which has the high def tuner in it that that was one of the best high def pictures they have ever seen and then I preceded to tell them that that's not even a hi def unit. A high definition picture is great no matter what resolution it's being broadcast on and the guys on the AVS forums will tell you that the difference is only around 15% between a EDTV (853 x 480) and an HDTV (1024 x 768). The big difference I see is between the LCD and Plasmas when viewing fast action video like sporting events and especially things like NASCAR races. Another thing that worries me is that dead pixel syndrome that plagues LCD's. My (same) neighbor has a 32" LCD that has a dead pixel and it is very distracting on certain backgrounds and looks like a black spec. Other than that I like them all. Buy what you can afford because in a year or two these flat panels will continue to decline in pricing and be as cheap as the old tube models.

 

[Guy Lavoie]

I have made the HDTV plunge just two weeks ago. I wanted a nice large screen and after looking at a lot of options, I went for a Sony Bravia 46" LCD set. This is a 768 x 1366 resolution (not the 1080 line XBR set that costs quite a bit more). I find that the difference between plasma and LCD pictures is much less important then is used to. LCD has improved a lot in contrast and color accuracy. They also won't be affected by the burn-in problem which is still alive and well, and that you'll notice when switching from 4:3 to 16:9 modes. There are ways to minimize burn-in, but you cannot totally eliminate it...especially with a wife that never turns the TV off. I also find that the black space between pixels is much more noticable on plasmas then on LCDs, giving an annoying screen door effect if you're a bit close to it.

I liked the Sony for its multitude of inputs and discrete codes for power and input, an important automation advantage. It seems that Samsung and Sony both produce their LCD screens in the same factory, so picture quality should be similar for both brands. It also appears that Samsung has discrete codes, although I haven't verified this myself.

Anyway I'm happy with my new TV and the 768 line resolution doesn't both me at all, since I mostly use it to watch regular DVDs which are 480 line resolution. In fact I would think that the less amount of upscaling needed to go to 768 lines might be an advantage here in terms of image quality. To me, the 1080p thing sounds more like bragging rights then anything concrete. I saw an article a while back saying that it is only on screens 60" and up that it becomes noticable at all.