Best 32" display? (1 Viewer)

[Baenwort]

So, I've been authorized to update the TV that lives in a built in nook. The Max dimensions are 18" tall x 30.5" wide with up to a foot and a half available for depth.

There's no chance it is not getting mounted there so this pretty much limits the choice to the 32" class.

Right now there is a 7 year old 32" 1080p LCD that has no HDR or wide color support.

This, by number of hours, is the primary screen in the house. Although there is a 127" projection screen for special occasions and events that sees maybe 4-6 hours a week compared to the 20 to 25 hours of this screen.

I'd love to get OLED but I don't think they come this small?

 

[David Norman]

Unless you want to wait or consider the very expensive 32 in OLED computer monitor (ex LG Ultrafine or ASUS ProArt) there are no current models. SUPPOSEDLY by the end of 2023 LG may be releasing 27 and 32 inch OLED version possibly extending their current 42 and 48 inch line.

 

[Robert_Zohn]

For now the best 32" TV is Sony's KD32W830K. It's 720p, but at 32" image the 720p progressive scanned resolution (every line has image information and is Illuminated and displays on the screen) the resolution is more than sufficient with no pixels visible. The high performance HDR and Wide Color gamut and Sony's exceptional processing makes this new 32" TV stands out as the best picture quality when compared to all other 32" TVs.
Here's the .pdf spec. sheet

 

[Baenwort]

For now the best 32" TV is Sony's KD32W830K. It's 720p, but at 32" image the 720p progressive scanned resolution (every line has image information and is Illuminated and displays on the screen) the resolution is more than sufficient with no pixels visible. The high performance HDR and Wide Color gamut and Sony's exceptional processing makes this new 32" TV stands out as the best picture quality when compared to all other 32" TVs.
Here's the .pdf spec. sheet

The spec sheet doesn't seem to list what DHR brightness standard it reaches? Just that is accepts HDR10?

Also, it seems the actual panel is 768 pixels and I've never been a fan of scaling errors. Do you know of one that is an actual 1080 pixels? Our current TV is 1080p and the kids sometimes sit only 3 or 4 feet away.

It looks like I might have to hope for the purchase authorization to still be OK when the LG comes out as if that is the best Sony can do, I'm worried about that Samsung or others have in this size range.

 

[Robert_Zohn]

When done properly scaling down is fine, it's upscaling that can create unwanted anomalies.

Sony's KD32W830K the best 32" class TV available today. Samsung's UN32N5300A is 1080p resolution, but at the 32" screen size the slightly higher resolution is not noticeable, but Sony's W830K adds HDR, WCG and 10 bit processing, which is a very big enhancement in the overall picture quality.

 

[Baenwort]

When done properly scaling down is fine, it's upscaling that can create unwanted anomalies.

Sony's KD32W830K the best 32" class TV available today. Samsung's UN32N5300A is 1080p resolution, but at the 32" screen size the slightly higher resolution is not noticeable, but Sony's W830K adds HDR, WCG and 10 bit processing, which is a very big enhancement in the overall picture quality.

I haven't been able to turn up on Google or your PDF any info about contrast ratios or brightness stats. Do you have any of those?

I'd like to compare to my ColorMunki spectrophotometer results on my current TV.

 

[Robert_Zohn]

We sold our last KD32W830K last week ago. Email or text me where you live and I'll ask my Sony rep if any dealer nearby has them in stock.

 

[LeoA]

When done properly scaling down is fine, it's upscaling that can create unwanted anomalies.

Downscaling is essentially the exact same process as upscaling.

Instead of converting a lower resolution signal to match a television's higher native resolution, it's instead converting a higher resolution than the display's native resolution in order to enable it to be displayed on what's a fixed pixel display.

So I don't understand why it would be any less prone to creating issues?

 

[Robert_Zohn]

Thanks for your post and I understand that both upscaling and downscaling are a function of the processor. Let me know if you have any questions or comments on my brief and non technical explanation and why it's always easier to take a high resolution image and down-convert it to a lower resolution.

All of the detail is already natively in the higher resolution image. When you have a lower resolution image and need to display it on a higher resolution display the processor needs guess to make up the missing information and that's where the trouble starts.

So in the end it's not about the processor trying to guess and make up color, gradation, and detail that is not in the low resolution image. But when you have a high resolution image it's much easier and you get a significantly better rendition of the original high resolution image when you are starting off with the better quality image and then use the processor to lower the resolution. The original reference quality of the higher resolution image is one of the key factors to understanding the benefits of the easier job the processor has in rendering the lower resolution image.