-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Worst movie or series plot hole?
- Status
Wasp_21
Expert Member
All depends on if you can get 3 contracts. Guys are tight on more than 2. And then, cut/damage the sim cards, so they don't get used.
PostmanPot
Honorary Master
If you're happy paying it off over 24 months, then it really all depends on what you want to use the TV for?
LE5300 reeks of entry-levelness, meaning it's going to lack at SD TV/sport capability. Also, you have not mentioned what size the TV is. Also, it is an LED edge-lit LCD, 95% the same as LCD and about the identical picture quality when playing HD stuff. A higher end LCD with, say, 100Hz, would be far better at TV/sport. Even better would be a plasma, if TV/sport is a priority.
For gaming/HD stuff/PC it will be fine. I'd stick to Samsung though.
Wasp_21
Expert Member
it's a 42"
PostmanPot
Honorary Master
K well there was a 42" LG LCD/LED mentioned yesterday for R7,500. So R2,499 (total R9,999) for the Blu-ray player sounds steep. How much value is this "free" Blu-ray player going to be in any case? Personally my money would be far better spent on a HD media player.
Wasp_21
Expert Member
Yeah. Blu Ray costing comes out expensive. It's LED & Blu ray marketing ploys. Have seen the PHilips blu ray on specials for R999. So total for the set should be sub R9k.
Bought my PS3 like that. Got the voucher, sold the phone, paid for most of the PS3.
The questions is whether they somehow limit the number of vouchers you can use in tandem. Would really suck to go buy three contracts only to find i can purchase three different things with the vouchers, but cannot combine them to buy one large thing.
For those who asked, the screen is a 42inch and to be honest i am not completely sold on it (blu-ray player means nothing to me). I can always take a look around and see what screen i like before taking the dive so if anyone has any other recommendations then please feel free, bare in mind that it would need to be offered by game though. Any screen 12k and below would be hundreds, but no more. I am not "short" of funds, i am just reluctant to fork out 10k + in one go. Screen will be utilised for both gaming and divx series, sport and dstv is not really a consideration as I am neither interested nor have either.
If you're happy paying it off over 24 months, then it really all depends on what you want to use the TV for?
LE5300 reeks of entry-levelness, meaning it's going to lack at SD TV/sport capability. Also, you have not mentioned what size the TV is. Also, it is an LED edge-lit LCD, 95% the same as LCD and about the identical picture quality when playing HD stuff. A higher end LCD with, say, 100Hz, would be far better at TV/sport. Even better would be a plasma, if TV/sport is a priority.
For gaming/HD stuff/PC it will be fine. I'd stick to Samsung though.
Sorry postman... I missed this post. The LED i mentioned is 100hz per the lg website and that's why it seems like a good deal to me. What screen would you recommend?
Rt PP would recommend the samsung plasma as per his post you quoted. Even though you don't watch tv or sport.
I meant more specifically a model and from what i read in the post he nowhere mentions a Samsung plasma, although he does say "I'd stick to Samsung though." The reason I don't want to get a plasma is primarily image retention and power consumption, LED even an edge lit LED provides higher contrast and deeper blacks in the price range I am looking at and this screen is 100Hz so motion blur would be reduced when compared to a 50hz tv. As much as the plasmas have got reduced image retention compared to older models I am quite certain they would not stand up to hours on end with static images and I don't want to have to stop gaming to ensure i don't damage the screen. I guess I will just have to go in store and take a look at what is on offer and judge image quality for myself. I do agree that the samsung screens I have seen recently have looked awesome though. I will take a good hard look tomorrow.
If I take the plunge and get one I will let you all know.
nakedpeanut
Expert Member
I popped into game 2day, just to view some of the models, and I must say the current plasmas do look very good! For the life of me I could not figure out why they had all the HD content playing on the screens 32" and less while they had SD content playing on the large (>=40") LCD and plasmas...
PostmanPot
Honorary Master
Rt PP would recommend the samsung plasma as per his post you quoted. Even though you don't watch tv or sport
Absolute twaddle. Shows how much you know. Thank you for this post though, it shows your true colours i.e. complete stupidity and ignorance (as pointed out by the OP).
PostmanPot
Honorary Master
A LCD/LED-LCD would definitely suit your needs. The LG LED is looking like a good deal as it suits your purposes and would be slimmer and require less power. Since you don't need SD/sport, you do not need plasma. Although you do display misconceptions about plasma, that is not important, since plasma does not suit your needs.
Look at the Samsung LA40C430 or LA46C430.
PostmanPot
Honorary Master
Dolby
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2005
- Messages
- 39,197
- Reaction score
- 6,168
Rt - you may hear claims of a hoax when it comes to IR and no one has ever actually seen it - but I'd also be weary of static images for hours. You could run Magic Pixel Shifter Plus II every night before bed and once every second morning if you're worried?
Anyhow - more seriously - LCD, LED and plasma get a lot closer in terms of IQ as budget increases. LCD and LED always have brighter whites - fact. Its been tested that the 'B' and 'C' series LCD already have deeper blacks that many plasma and actually on par with most. Since contrast is deepest black and whitest white ... LCDs will often have a greater contrast ratio than plasma when comparing more expensive units.
As for LED and LCD, PP is unbelievably correct in mentioning the lighting and being similar to LCD. However there is a difference between the two - you just need to see if its worth it.
I bought in 2009 and the difference was definately not worth it - and I took my 46" LCD. My mom bought 3 weeks ago and chose a 47" LED. The difference in IQ is reasonably small - but difference is pricing was small too.
I've got Series 6 'B' LCD and love it compared to my previous plasma. TYR just bought a Series 7 'C' LCD and quite interesting to see the results when he compares it to his KURO.
My parents refused to look at plasma when I pointed out the burn in at the store ....
Anyhow - more seriously - LCD, LED and plasma get a lot closer in terms of IQ as budget increases. LCD and LED always have brighter whites - fact. Its been tested that the 'B' and 'C' series LCD already have deeper blacks that many plasma and actually on par with most. Since contrast is deepest black and whitest white ... LCDs will often have a greater contrast ratio than plasma when comparing more expensive units.
As for LED and LCD, PP is unbelievably correct in mentioning the lighting and being similar to LCD. However there is a difference between the two - you just need to see if its worth it.
I bought in 2009 and the difference was definately not worth it - and I took my 46" LCD. My mom bought 3 weeks ago and chose a 47" LED. The difference in IQ is reasonably small - but difference is pricing was small too.
I've got Series 6 'B' LCD and love it compared to my previous plasma. TYR just bought a Series 7 'C' LCD and quite interesting to see the results when he compares it to his KURO.
My parents refused to look at plasma when I pointed out the burn in at the store ....
Last edited:
PostmanPot
Honorary Master
rtzouves, do not take this seriously at all. You have stepped into the middle of a debate and even though he's trying to be funny, Dolby will say things like this to try and push his pro-LCD and anti-plasma bias regardless, based on his experience with a three/four year old, older technology plasma.
Take it with a grain of salt, please. No plasma owners have ever denied the possibility of getting image retention, which he says is the case, and I'm talking about owners of the newer plasmas too.
The point is that image retention is much less prevalent, and much less of a problem than older plasmas in that it is much less likely to lead to image burn-in (physical damage). Speaking of which, image burn-in has been drastically improved on, and the chances of getting it are next to nothing for people who use their plasmas for purposes where there aren't excessive high contrast, opaque images being displayed constantly.
The fact is, IR is something you shouldn't be too concerned about as it is part of a plasma's normal operation, and is fixed in no time after simply changing channels or running the screen sweeper. It is the price us plasma owners pay for better image quality at the same price point as LCDs.
To harp on, I ran all three SA vs India test matches on my plasma for 10 hours a day, spanning 15 days. There was a permanent, relatively high contrast, opaque green score/info bar along the bottom of the screen. I had not one bit of IR afterwards. Also, I've played movies with black bars at the top and bottom for over 6 hours, and I have not ever ever IR after that. All in all, I have never had IR after any application that I use my TV for. I don't game (static HUDs) or have it connected to a PC (static Start bar), but I have run the closest one can get to static images from DSTV/movies.
This all has very little relevance to you, but I am compelled to reply because if you are not careful, Dolby will try to keep you in the dark by confirming your misconceptions about plasma. Sure, we would have agreed on them a few years ago, but the fact is that plasmas really have been drastically improved on.
Plasmas lose out on no colour accuracy by having less bright "lighting" than LCDs/LEDs.
While on the subject, do you mind rather referring to LED TVs the way that they actually are? They are LED-LCD TVs, and more precisely, LED edge/backlit LCDs. The ones in reasonable budget are certainly not backlit entirely by LED. Please use the correct terminology so as to not perpetuate the LED myth that Samsung created.
I'm quite sure you mean the '6' and '7' Series (Samsung) LCDs. You are also incorrect by turning your direct comparison of two/a few LCDs/plasmas into a broad generalisation. Let's just say that the best plasma has deeper blacks than the best LCD - one of the reasons the best TV in the world is in fact a plasma.
Where did I mention lighting?
You do realise that the letters refer to production dates, right? I agree that a Series 7 LCD is awesome and competes well with higher end plasmas, but then so is the best TV in the world which is a plasma.
This is meaningless and it was already proven to you why it would have burn-in. It is a demo model from a shop which abused the TV.
Dolby
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2005
- Messages
- 39,197
- Reaction score
- 6,168
Why do you feel you need to jump in to every post and correct me?
Everything in that post - opening IR paragraph aside - is the truth and factual?
There's nothing wrong with anything said - but you feel the need to reply and say pretty much ... nothing of value?
Call it LED, LED-LCD, LED lit LCD, Light Emiting Diode Liquid Crystal Display or whatever you want - we all know what it is. There's no secret about what it is and we all are talking about the same at the end of the day.
Constrast is the difference between the deepestblacks and the brightestwhites - it's got nothing to do with colour. Liquid Crystal Display TVs (also known as LCD - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LCD_television) have brighter whites. If they have deeper blacks, the difference between them is greater and therefore contrast is greater. Does it make sense?
No - I meant the letter code referring to the year. Yes - I know what the codes mean. A Series 6 from 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 , 2010 and 2011 - have different pictures and black levels. Had I said 'the series 6 has equivilant black levels' it's be incorrect as from what I've read, it's 2009 models onwards (ie B, C etc) do.
You mentioned lighting when you explained what Light Emitting Diode Liquid Crystal Television systems really are ie edge lit. I agreed with you - don't be so defensive.
As for the 'best TV in the world being plasma' - I have no idea what you are trying to say ... ?
A random sentenance thrown in for what ... ?
Everything in that post - opening IR paragraph aside - is the truth and factual?
There's nothing wrong with anything said - but you feel the need to reply and say pretty much ... nothing of value?
Call it LED, LED-LCD, LED lit LCD, Light Emiting Diode Liquid Crystal Display or whatever you want - we all know what it is. There's no secret about what it is and we all are talking about the same at the end of the day.
Constrast is the difference between the deepestblacks and the brightestwhites - it's got nothing to do with colour. Liquid Crystal Display TVs (also known as LCD - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LCD_television) have brighter whites. If they have deeper blacks, the difference between them is greater and therefore contrast is greater. Does it make sense?
No - I meant the letter code referring to the year. Yes - I know what the codes mean. A Series 6 from 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 , 2010 and 2011 - have different pictures and black levels. Had I said 'the series 6 has equivilant black levels' it's be incorrect as from what I've read, it's 2009 models onwards (ie B, C etc) do.
You mentioned lighting when you explained what Light Emitting Diode Liquid Crystal Television systems really are ie edge lit. I agreed with you - don't be so defensive.
As for the 'best TV in the world being plasma' - I have no idea what you are trying to say ... ?
A random sentenance thrown in for what ... ?
Last edited:
Dolby
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2005
- Messages
- 39,197
- Reaction score
- 6,168
As for me being anti plasma - that's also incorrect.
You're anti LCD without ever owning one - ever. You're protecting your own investment.
At least I bought a plasma and had it for 2 years before making the switch and realised it wasn't idea for me. And technology couldn't have changed that much as my issue was IR ... which even now, people are pointing out.
The difference could be that I don't want to have to wait 5 minutes for things to settle and clear?
I don't want to stop viewing and take a break from gaming etc every 2 hours?
I don't want to sweep the screen with special Pixel software?
You're anti LCD without ever owning one - ever. You're protecting your own investment.
At least I bought a plasma and had it for 2 years before making the switch and realised it wasn't idea for me. And technology couldn't have changed that much as my issue was IR ... which even now, people are pointing out.
The difference could be that I don't want to have to wait 5 minutes for things to settle and clear?
I don't want to stop viewing and take a break from gaming etc every 2 hours?
I don't want to sweep the screen with special Pixel software?
- Status