Hehe, you have the big bro to my 61" one! ;) I wanted that one, but with
the space that I have the 61" is almost too big, so couldn't have done the
67"; oh well! :P
Blu-ray is awesome but it does HDTV really well too (and I mostly watch TV
on TW cable since I have 7 DVR tuners in the LR currently! :P). And I was
like you too-paying a lot less for it now and it's much nicer and bigger
than my old tv.
Even though I debated getting a $4-6k Pioneer Kuro Elite plasma (50 or 60"),
I'm happy paying <$1k and having something this good for that much less; and
yeah, my last one was the Sony WEGA XBR400 36" CRT which I paid $2500 for in
2000, so not bad when you amortize it out...if this lasts ~4 yrs then I'll
be happy (and I did pay $200 for the Best Buy plan for 4 yrs, so one way or
another I'll get a tv that lasts that long! ;P).
Looks like $250/yr for a TV is the sweet spot (at least for me).
BINO
P.S. I think there are still Best Buys that have those TVs lying around out
front, or maybe in the back b/c they didn't sell b/c people are buying the
LCDs now just b/c they're thin...you could probably get one for a steal if
you were interested Duncan...I paid $950 for my 61" (make sure it has the
LED tho; model # is HL61A750) so you should probably be able to get it for
less with a little negotiating. HTH!
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Anthony Q. Martin
Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:56 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [H] Digital TV buying
I have one of those DLP LED Samsungs...67-inches of gorgeousness, but no
longer made. Great for high-def TV and blu ray. Watching BSG on Bluray
now. Fantastic. Sometimes, old things dying works to your advantage,
because I swore I would not buy another TV until my last one died. It
didn't quite make it 10 years, but I paid less for this new one and have
a far, far better TV and overall viewing experience.
Duncan, you are lucky!
DSinc wrote:
> Greg/Bino,
> Thanks for the concise answer. I only shared what I see in ads for the
> past many months. Now I know that "240Hz is hype." Off to look at
> choices, and, figure out what to do with the very large Pioneer hulk!
> Best,
> Duncan
>
>
> Greg Sevart wrote:
>> 120Hz provided real value. Being a multiple of 24 (as in, standard 24fps
>> film content), it allows for nice smooth 5:5 pulldown, vs the 3:2
>> that must
>> be performed when displaying at 60Hz. 240Hz, in contrast, is
>> marketing. Any
>> 240Hz set that looks better than a 120Hz set has nothing to do with the
>> refresh frequency and is simply a result of newer/better backlight,
>> panel,
>> and/or electronics, etc.
>>
>> Also note that not all 120Hz TV sets are capable of 5:5 pulldown.
>>
>> Greg
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:hardware-
>>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of DSinc
>>> Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:19 PM
>>> To: [email protected]
>>> Subject: Re: [H] Digital TV buying
>>>
>>> Don't you mean 240Hz?
>>> Best,
>>> Duncan
>>>
>>>
>>> swzaske wrote:
>>>> Try to get 120 HZ as well because it won't blur as much during action
>>>> scenes.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> snip
>>
>>
>>
>
