Sony 42" 3LCD Technology vs. Samsung 42" DLP Technology (1 Viewer)

[Michael TLV]

Greetings

I hate those words ... "blows away" ... what does that mean anyway?

5% better ... 25% ... 100% ... 200% better? And in who's eye is that?

This industry works in evolutionary improvements ... not revolutionary ones.

Regards

 

[Richard_T]

I'll put my Sony 55XS955 against any DLP TV out there and it'll be sharper, clearer and cleaner that any thing you put it up against.

 

[ChrisWiggles]

*sigh*

 

[Richard_T]

Sigh all you want, the truth hurts I guess.

 

[ChrisWiggles]

What is it with this forum all of a sudden and this silly competitive nonsense? :frowning:


No statement like that in the history of displays has ever even been remotely true in any reasonably objective sense. I'm supposed to be "hurt" that your TV is so marvelous? I'm glad you like your display, but LCD without a DI will have lower on/off CR than comparable DLPs, and certainly than CRT. Imaging is always a set of trade-offs, and there is no display out there that is clearly better than its nearby competitors. Choice depends on user preference in making a specific set of tradeoffs for their use. Further, terms like "sharper, clearer, cleaner" doesn't really mean anything in objective attributes when it comes to an image.

I do say, maybe it's just because I have a cold and am grumpy, but since when has choosing a display, or comparing a display become self-promotional?

:frowning:

 

[Richard_T]

Give me a break here. I'm making a statement about what I see. I went through allot of televisions, DLP, CRT and LCDs before purchasing the one I now own. I'm not trying to hurt anyone here with the statement I made. The original post was which do we see as a best purchase. I made that statement and stand by it. If someone wants to make an asinine comment then I'll call them on it. As far as your comments are concerned I don't believe you. I belive all sets do have trade offs but some are more acceptable than others (eg: rainbows compared to SD effects). The original post asked which is better and I'm saying the Sony. Easy choice.

 

[ChrisWiggles]

Ok, then I'll say a similar thing:

"My CRT is smoother, cleaner, more natural and far better than anything else out there. Clearly superior contrast and color!"

give me a break.

 

[PeterTHX]

Well, I'd call the SXRD in comparison to the last generations of LCD and DLP "revolutionary". No banding, no screen door effect, deep blacks, wide angle viewing, all the inputs you could want, etc.

It's to LCD & DLP what the Sony XBR 910 & 960 was to mainstream CRT sets.

Sorry to use the hyperbole of "BLOWS AWAY" but it's difficult to describe in 2 words or less.

 

[Richard_T]

The SXBR is an awesome set. I apologize if I bothered anyone with my last comments. It's just that forums like this have become a place where no one can just say how they feel about one product or another. I am so tired or reading posts where someone asks, "Which so and so product do you believe is a better product" and the only responses are things like "Your millage my vary" or "Everyone is different. Go see for yourself." If I have been out in the shops and went through several products and picked one in particular, I should be able to tell someone else about it. Especially if it's common knowledge that it is indeed a better product.

As far as my comments about the picture being "sharper, clearer and cleaner than any DLP set. I stand by that. Anyone who says the Sammy set is sharper than the Sony is either lying or is blind, period. As far as it being cleaner, well the lack of rainbows and other artifacts on the set certainly make it an easy choice. Your CRT comments do not make sense here since we are comparing DLP and CRT PROJECTION sets.

 

[Evan M.]

Saying stuff like that makes me feel like I am in the first grade and some kid is saying......."my dad can beat your dad up!!"
It is not constructive and is not helping anybody. All it is accomplishing is getting sighs and people will stop listening to you.

 

[ChrisWiggles]

Terms like "sharpness" are quite vague, and involve resolution, pixel spacing, pixel smearing if applicable, and resolving power/setup on a CRT. Further, without explanation, I'm tempted to believe that this is actually a negative, as many people mis-construe peaking artifcats and SDE visibility as "sharpness" yet they are really degradations to the ideal picture. Ideal images have a gaussian profile, which means CRT spot-profile(or film_, which does not appear "sharp" at all in comparison to the rectangular/defined pixels of a digital display at too-close viewing angles.

 

[Richard_T]

Very god Chris. A very good read indeed. The only problem I have with it is many, many people probably will have no clue what you just said. All the talk about blurring pixels will be lost on someone who just wants to know which "looks" better. Give your opinion as was asked and get on with it. After my first post I was going to go back on and explain the reasons why I felt the Sony was better but I saw the post with the sigh and I must have lost it a bit

As far as trying to make someone feel 5 years old, that was not my intent, actually quite the opposite. I felt that I was being laughed at about my opinion. I had no intent to hurt anyone or abuse anyone. As far as people not listening to me..I get enough of that from my wife . Anyway, enough of this. best of luck, which ever television you buy.

 

[Mike_J_D]

I will say that the 50"SXRD I say at BB looks freaking amazing. If it would work in my living room I might have taken back the Samsung 42" DLP I just purchased. As far as the argument about which is better, well it is in the eye of the beholder. I spent a lot of time looking at LCDs and DLPs before I bought mine, and it was by far, IMVHO the best buy for ME. Now, when I move into a bigger living room I'll have that SXRD delivered, until then it'll be the 42" DLP. I'm really happy with it, and I haven't even calibrated it yet.