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

Just purchased the Sony Grand Wega 42" KDF-E42A10, picture is great but have concerns. Don't know whether the DLP technology is superior to Sony's 3LCD technology. I am considering Samsung's 42" DLP model HL-R4266W. Not much info on the net about Sony's 3LCD.

I stare at em both all day. The samsung DLP to me is better. DLP is a better techonology, less motion blur, no burn in, better color(espedically black levels) overall, etc etc etc.

In my opinion, I like LCD and DLP technologies, and for different reasons, but between the two, I would go for the Samsung, I just think it looks better. The only LCD projection to me that looks good is the Mitsu's. Do you have the option to go look at either of them in one room?

Huh?

LCD has no burn in. Better color? Hardly. DLP requires that annoying color wheel that blurs and flickers. Fleshtones shouldn't look sunburn orange/green either.

Just try turning the DLP contrast below 90%. Turn both the LCD and DLP to 50%. Tell me again which looks better.

The Sony LCD also has much better RESOLUTION. Picture is sharper, more accurate. Less noise, less DOWNCONVERSION ARTIFACTS (from a 1080i source). Black level is excellent.

Don't fall for the DLP hype. Pro DLP systems require 3 chips , just like LCD does. Screen door effects are there for LCD, but invisible at proper viewing distance. The extra resolution and less artifacts make up for this. No rainbows either.

Greetings

Neither technology is "superior" to the other. Each has its own list of positives and negatives which everyone should weigh for themselves. It's like saying an apple is better than an orange.

Regards

Downconversion artifacts are a shortcoming of the electronics and are not a part of the LCD vs. DLP argument.

Resolution depends on the electronics, the native resolution of the LCD or DLP element(s) inside, and the fineness of the ribs on the screen for RPTV. Resolution is not part of the LCD vs. DLP argument.

Video hints:
http://members.aol.com/ajaynejr/video.htm

I'm looking at either one too.

I was at a local electronics store last Saturday that had a 42" Sony and the 42" Samsung DLP next to each other broadcasting the Notre Dame game. Sony looked better and seemed to capture the motion of the players better too. Both had some digital "blocks". I'm assuming that's because of the transmission of the game?

Which is a better TV for video games? I hear it's the Sony, but I like the fact that Samsung has so many inputs. I don't know how I'd hook up my DVR/cable box and my DVD/VHS recorder into one input and get a pure signal. (Right now I have the cable box going through the DVD/VHS recorder. Don't even know if that's a pure digital signal, but it looks fine and seems to be the only way for me to get it to work.)

The Sony is much better for video games considering LCD has no burn in and videogames typically have lots of extreme colors.

The Sony has 7 inputs, including VGA, 3 component, HDMI.
Plenty.

Sony all the way...I was looking at both 50 inch versions and to me the Sony won hands down.

Cool. Thanks. May get one next week!

DLP has no burn in either, right? Sony still looked nicer to me though.

You should note that LCD has slower response time than DLP, so motion may suffur blur because of the lag in response time. However, DLP too suffers loss of bit-depth cabapility with fast motion, since its colors are created temporally. So both may show weaknesses in fast-motion applications like gaming. However, the lack of burn-in risk makes them appropriate for long-term use while gaming.

I always worry that this kind of "side by side" comparison isn't a true "apples to apples" comparison. What are the odds any two sets in a retail outlet have been ajusted with Avia or Digital Video Essentials, much less truly calibrated. Does Sony really have a better picture, or has the image been tweaked. Or does the Sony (in this case) or the Samsung or JVC (in another0 just happen to come out of the box with settings that produce the best image under the viewing conditions in that particular store, which probably don't in any way resemble your viewing environment. Given the effect user-accessible controls can have on image quality, I frankly don't trust my own eyes when looking at display model TVs. But it is hard to know what else to trust. Testimonials are nice, but even at the HTF you don't find many members who have two 40 or 50 inch TVs in the same room.

Regards,

Joe

But doesn't Sony's WEGA technology make up for the slower response time?

erm, it's an attribute of the LCD panels used in the display. I'm not aware of antyhing special about sony's LCD panels, I believe they have fairly normal response time as far as LCD chips go.

I am a DLP guy but one thing you may want to consider if you will be using this for gaming is the DLP rainbow issue. Since your eyes will be moving all over the place with a game this can cause RBE to be more evident. Also, DLP and LCD DO NOT suffer from burn in. Do not goby what you see in your local BB or CC. These units are obviously not calibrated and the signal they get is poor. If you have a real shop near you that happens to have the sets and are callibrated similarly than that is the only way to choose. My personal favorite digital RP is the JVC Dila. I saw it the other day at BB next to the Samsung and Mits and Sony models and it looked like CRAP. I also compared them at an excellent B&M and they do callibrate all sets and the Dila was far and away the winner with the Samsung and Mits second and the Sony trailed. It really is a shame that so many people were turned off by the Dila at BB because of their poor setup.

just felt the need to note that LCD certainly can burn in. This is a myth that it cannot. Burn in is possible on any technology that doesn;t constantly move and adjust (like DLP) Now, burn in is more likely on some types, like plasma, but it is still very possible on an LCD (either rear proj. or flat panel) Cheers.

Brad, you may be getting ghosting confused with actual burn in. It is very possible that an LCD will have a ghost type of image stick around for awhile if something is allowed to stay stagnant on the display but it will eventually go away. Burn-in does not go away.

Evan M.

You may be absolutely right, I certainly am not THE authority on it, however, I have seen first hand LCD burn in. I work for a major electronics retailer, and recently we had to send a Hitachi 42v525 to the tv graveyard because of burn in. We were told at the time that leaving it off for an extended period would solve the issue, but after a week of leaving it turned off, the "ghosting" remained! Hitachi saw fit to replace the tv, but granted, without much explanation. Maybe it was a different problem than burn in, but it certainly fit the description. If you have any more insight on this, I'd be glad to hear it! It may have been something that we (or hitachi) just didn't know! Cheers

Greetings

I have seen a few LCD computer laptop screens exhibit burn-in like effects over the years so it's not like it does not happen, just generally unlikely unless it is a case of extreme abuse. The desktop on these screens always displayed with a windowbox, but other material like DVD playback would take up the whole screen. When DVD was player back, you could see the residual black windowbox in the image and it did not go away.

Kind of like some guy intent on wearing out a few frames of information on their CAV laserdisc.

Regards

Sigh.

Burn in is not an issue for 99% of normal use. It isn't even "burn in" but stuck pixels (something that could theoretically happen to DLP as well). There is an AVI video floating around there that you can burn to DVD-R. It flashes the R-G-B colors. It can "unstick" a lot of displays that exhibit the problem.

Besides, if you have the oney buy the new Sony KD-SR50XBR1. SXRD blows away anything else on the market!