Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

Which 27 inch TV?


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 of 15 OFFLINE   Jonathan Dagmar

Jonathan Dagmar

    Supporting Actor



  • 723 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 29 2002

Posted April 29 2003 - 06:49 PM

I am trying to put together a modest home theatre system (still). I am limited by budget and space to a regular old 27 inch tv. I insist on only a flat screen and a 16:9 squeeze mode. The TV is primarily for DVD wathcing and video games. Regular cable TV will be watched, but I dont give a damn how it looks.

Okay, so I have moslty narrowed it down to two models

This one from Samsung http://www.samsung.c......XM2790FX/XAC

And This one from JVC http://www.jvc.ca/en....odel=AV-27F803

Both have all the features I care about. The only real difference is that the HVC is several hundred dollars more, and it has more horizontal resolution, 750 lines, versus the Samsungs 550.

So my question is how much of a differecne does horizontal resolution make when watching DVDs? I can't really afford the JVC, but I will buy it over the Samsung if there is going to be a big difference in picture quality.

#2 of 15 OFFLINE   Jonathan Dagmar

Jonathan Dagmar

    Supporting Actor



  • 723 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 29 2002

Posted April 30 2003 - 07:14 AM

oh come on people! please, someone must have something to say!

#3 of 15 OFFLINE   Karl_Luph

Karl_Luph

    Supporting Actor



  • 974 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 05 2002

Posted April 30 2003 - 08:25 AM

If you insist on getting a flat screen in the 27" size, see if the toshiba will do the squeeze mode. I was going to suggest you check out the sharp 27" but I'm not sure if it can do the squeeze mode either. I bought a 27" JVC 27D303 at Christmas but it's not a flat screen, picture still looks great though. About the lines of resolution, I've been told it's kinda misleading and that on tv's with screens this size and smaller it's not going to be as noticeable as you'd think between 550 -750 lines of resolution. Someone more knowledgeable on this can probably explain it better, but nobody else was replying to your post. Good luck and let us know what you decide!

#4 of 15 OFFLINE   Jonathan Dagmar

Jonathan Dagmar

    Supporting Actor



  • 723 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 29 2002

Posted April 30 2003 - 08:52 AM

The Toshibas in this size to not seem to have a squeeze mode. the only other brand besides samsungs and JVS that does, is the Sony Wega, of course. I like samsung as they make good quality products for hundreds less than the competition, often with more features. Botht the JVC and the sony cost a lot more than the samsung.

#5 of 15 OFFLINE   Ronn.W

Ronn.W

    Second Unit



  • 333 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 16 2002

Posted April 30 2003 - 10:00 AM

Just curious, but why have your ruled out the Wega? If it's on price alone, you may want to reconsider.

#6 of 15 OFFLINE   James Davis

James Davis

    Agent



  • 43 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 13 2003

Posted April 30 2003 - 11:04 AM

My 30 day trial ran up today on my FS100 27" Wega. I've been very happy with it, and have found a good deal of info on how to fine tune wegas. My colors all look very good testing with AVIA now and the price wasn't bad either. I got it from Best Buy at $449.99, but an additional 10% since I bought an accessory, didn't matter what, cables, etc. 16X9 mode is easy to switch in and out of also.

#7 of 15 OFFLINE   Jonathan Dagmar

Jonathan Dagmar

    Supporting Actor



  • 723 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 29 2002

Posted April 30 2003 - 01:37 PM

I haven't ruled out the Wega, but I have been less than impressed with Sony's products in the past. I know people who have gone through three PS2s already, the build quality is so shoddy. Also, I can't find detailed specs of the sony anywhere, sony's own website gives only a very basic abbreviated list. Since no one has yet answered my question about horizontal resolution, I did a little research of my own. If I assume that broadcast is 330 lines, then that means it has 1.33 times that on the horizontal, or 440 lines of horizontal resolution. Any TV has more than enough horizontal resolution to display 100% of the detail in boradcast TV. However, DVD has apparently 540 lines, and therefore about 730 lines on the horiszonatal. This would indicate that to see all the deatil DVD has to offer one needs a TV with 750 lines of horizontal resolution. Of course, a tv can only display 480 of those 550 lines anyway, so uning that number we have a DVD resolution of 640 on the horizontal. Still not enough with the 550 lines the samsung tv offers. It would be so much easier if TVs resolution was used in the same way computer monitor resolution is. If I knew that all TVs had a resolution of exactly 640X480, live would be so much easier. I guess that is part of my problem, I come to home theatre from the computer world, and i think in the absoloute terms of computers, rather than the "fuzzy" analog terms of TVs. So, hopefully someone will come along shorty and expklain to me just exaclty what part the horizontal resolution has to play in my choice of a 27 inch TV with squeeze mode for DVD watching.

#8 of 15 OFFLINE   Jonathan Dagmar

Jonathan Dagmar

    Supporting Actor



  • 723 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 29 2002

Posted April 30 2003 - 02:07 PM

Okay, I did some more looking..... From the DVD FAQ "[3.4.1] What does "lines of resolution" mean? Everyone gets confused by the term "lines of horizontal resolution," also known as LoHR or TVL. It's a carryover from analog video, it's poorly understood, it's inconsistently measured and reported by manufacturers, but we're stuck with it until all video is digital and we can just report resolution in pixels. Technically, lines of horizontal resolution refers to visually resolvable vertical lines per picture height. In other words, it's measured by counting the number of vertical black and white lines that can be distinguished an area that is as wide as the picture is high. The idea is to make the measurement independent of the aspect ratio. Lines of horizontal resolution applies both to television displays and to signal formats such as that produced by a DVD player. Most TVs have ludicrously high numbers listed for their horizontal resolution. Since DVD has 720 horizontal pixels (on both NTSC and PAL discs), the horizontal resolution can be calculated by dividing 720 by 1.33 (for a 4:3 aspect ratio) to get 540 lines. On a 1.78 (16:9) display, you get 405 lines. In practice, most DVD players provide about 500 lines instead of 540 because of filtering and low-quality digital-to-analog converters. VHS has about 230 (172 widescreen) lines, broadcast TV has about 330 (248 widescreen), and laserdisc has about 425 (318 widescreen). Don't confuse lines of horizontal resolution (resolution along the x axis) with scan lines (resolution along the y axis). DVD produces 480 scan lines of active picture for NTSC and 576 for PAL. The NTSC standard has 525 total scan lines, but only 480 to 483 or so are visible. (The extra lines are black. They contain sync pulses and other information, such as the Closed Captions that are encoded into line # 21). PAL has 625 total scan lines, but only about 576 to 580 are visible. Since all video formats (VHS, LD, broadcast, etc.) have the same number of scan lines, it's the horizontal resolution that makes the big difference in picture quality." Okay, now, I think perhaps I may have figured it out. Is the reason that the JVC reports that it has 750 lines or horiztonal resolution because they are fudging the numbers by measuring the full width of the screen rather than using the proper method of measuing only only the portion of the width that is equal to the height? That would make snese, if we assume that samsung is using the standard method, with thier tally of 550 lines, but if we multiply that by 1.33, which gives us the number of lines across the entire width for the screen, we get 730... So I am betting that Samsung usuing the archaic, but correct method of measuring only the portion of thw width equal to the hieght to arrive at thier number, and JVC is using an incorrect, but more logical method of measuring thie entire width to arrive at thier number. This would also explain why I have seen the horizontal resolution of DVD listed as both 540 lines and 720 lines, the 540 is the number when measured "offically" but the true resolution is 720... If I am right about my thoery that JVC and samsung simply have different methods of measurment, then my choice of tv just got a lot easier. If someone could clarify that I am understanding correctly, that would be a big help.

#9 of 15 OFFLINE   SandeepS

SandeepS

    Extra



  • 17 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 18 2003

Posted April 30 2003 - 05:41 PM

I bought the JVC 27" FS703 Model (without PIP) and it looks and sounds awesome! The variuos picture modes and the wide-screen option from the remote is very satisfying, especially if u choose components as your DVD hookup. I ain't a TV expert but I had the chance of comparing both the JVC and the Samsung side by side before making the commitment. The JVC beats the other set by a margin. The scan lines also appeared less noticable on the JVC set. I've had the TV for a month now and couldn't be happier! Highly reccommended set! Later
"There are three kinds of people in this world...those who can count and those who can't"

#10 of 15 OFFLINE   Jonathan Dagmar

Jonathan Dagmar

    Supporting Actor



  • 723 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 29 2002

Posted April 30 2003 - 06:10 PM

how much of a margin? The price differecne is significant enough...

#11 of 15 OFFLINE   Dennis Heller

Dennis Heller

    Second Unit



  • 288 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 29 2001

Posted May 01 2003 - 01:31 AM

Jonathan--this is a stretch, but if you are near a BJ's Wholesale Club, the one near me (Saratoga Springs, NY) has the JVC 27F703 for $299.99. It's not the exact same TV, but it's a pretty good price, I think.
"I was wandering the woods, thinking about Christ. If He was a carpenter, I wondered what he charged for bookshelves."

#12 of 15 OFFLINE   Ronn.W

Ronn.W

    Second Unit



  • 333 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 16 2002

Posted May 01 2003 - 02:39 AM

[quote] Also, I can't find detailed specs of the sony anywhere, sony's own website gives only a very basic abbreviated list. [quote]

As you've already discovered, detailed specs can be misleading and at best confusing when applied to analog TV's. TV's are sold by features, not specs, so finding anything accurate in that area is like a needle in a haystack. I'd suggest doing a side by side comparison of the TV's you're interested in at a store instead of trying to figure out lines of resolution. All of them should be adequate to handle DVD, and all should have a fairly nice pic when using component cables and the 16:9 squeeze. Let your eyes and ears be the judge, they will tell you more than a spec sheet.

#13 of 15 OFFLINE   Jonathan Dagmar

Jonathan Dagmar

    Supporting Actor



  • 723 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 29 2002

Posted May 01 2003 - 06:03 AM

Well I live just outside of vancouver, canada, and at every store I have been to that carries both the JVC and the Sony, the JVC is actually MORE expensive...by $100. I think I am going to go for the samsung. I don't see any reason to spend $2-300 more for a Sony or a JVC when I am only going to reaplce this TV a couple years downt he raod (when i finish school) with a HD Widescreen.

#14 of 15 OFFLINE   Karl_Luph

Karl_Luph

    Supporting Actor



  • 974 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 05 2002

Posted May 01 2003 - 08:44 AM

I think you'll be quite happy with the Samsung Jonathan. They do make some outstanding TV's and computer monitors. Any of the top 4 brands that we've mentioned all are good sets, none are perfect, but they all look very good. Like you say, in a couple of years you'll trade up to a better set. You'll have to read some of the posts from other Samsung owners explaining how to tweak the set for the best picture once you have it out of the box. I want to say the factory color settings are all cranked up, but once you have this done, sit back and ENJOY! If you run into any problems someone here will help, this is really a wonderful forum and the folks here are great.

#15 of 15 OFFLINE   Paul Thomas

Paul Thomas

    Auditioning



  • 2 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 05 2003

Posted May 01 2003 - 11:47 AM

If you trust Consumer Reports, in 27" TVs they rate the Toshiba 27AF42 the top pick ($475). Sony's KV27FV300 is second, but very pricey at $700. Third is the Sony KV27FS100 which is a nice Wega set without PiP. As stated above, it can be had in the $400 range. I purchased the Sony FS100 for my folks and the pq is pretty darn good, IMHO. Good luck with the specs on any of those models.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users