# Best television under $1000???



## Guest (Sep 10, 2009)

Help me spend money.

I spent the weekend building shelves for the rec room and after dry fitting everything tonight we realized: the widescreen CRT is just eating our tiny space.

So out it goes.

My budget is $1000 before tax. My only criteria is it has to mount on a wall. It'd be nice if it had built-in audio because we don't listen to stuff very loud (heck, we hardly watch television). And that's about it.

Help guide me through the murky waters of televisions and home electronic purchases!

Thanks in advance!


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

I'm fond of plasma's others will disagree with me.

I'm going to recommend:

http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?logon=&langid=EN&sku_id=0770HDS0010121047&catid=


----------



## Rumble_b (Feb 14, 2006)

http://www.bestbuy.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?logon=&langid=EN&sku_id=0926HDS0010122398&catid=24558

Newer version of the TV I have. I'm really happy with mine. LCD of course, plasma sucks. (Just kidding Jeff, I had to do it)


----------



## Guest (Sep 10, 2009)

So 2" and different technologies -- but how else do I tell them apart? I guess I should go and look at each, pick the one I think looks better?

Thanks guys!


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

Good choices so far. A friend just picked up a Samsung 450 42" plasma for $799 at Costco. Really good reputation on that model.

You say "tiny space" so I assume that 42" would be a good size.


----------



## EchoWD40 (Mar 16, 2007)

Jeff Flowerday said:


> I'm fond of plasma's others will disagree with me.
> 
> I'm going to recommend:
> 
> http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?logon=&langid=EN&sku_id=0770HDS0010121047&catid=


I am one of them. While plasma's in theory would have been amazing, their overall life, picture quality, and color definition isn't something to brag about.
I would go with what Rumble suggested, i have that tv, and 3 other friends have them as well.
Great tv's, and no problems.


----------



## hollowbody (Jan 15, 2008)

I'm with Jeff on this one. There's a lot of misinformation out there about plasma technology and I don't know why. It provides by far the better picture. The black levels are richer and deeper, the contrast levels are better and it provides for a much sharper picture.

Oh, unless you want to watch in a brightly sunlit room, in that case go for LCD. You know, cuz everyone has their tvs in a solarium.


----------



## Guest (Sep 10, 2009)

42" is going to look huge in my rec room. My CRT Toshiba is 32" 16:9 and it's MONSTEROUS.

I'll check out that Costco one tomorrow!

I'm off my anti-plama bend. I was wrong about plasmas (I'm sure Jeff remembers that).


----------



## Guest (Sep 10, 2009)

hollowbody said:


> Oh, unless you want to watch in a brightly sunlit room, in that case go for LCD. You know, cuz everyone has their tvs in a solarium.


Funny you should mention this. I had this CRT because the apartment we rented when we moved to Ottawa was essentially a wall of floor to ceiling, 10' window in the living room. Gorgeous to look out. With shears. And it faced South so it got sun all day long. LCD or plasma would have been useless in that room. But the CRT worked.


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

dude, for $75 you can buy my 100% functional antique 1948 GE television.
complete with the original tubes! hows that for a bargain! be the first on your block to catch on to the newest trend of antique t.v.:smilie_flagge17:


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

TDeneka said:


> I am one of them. While plasma's in theory would have been amazing, their overall life, picture quality, and color definition isn't something to brag about.
> I would go with what Rumble suggested, i have that tv, and 3 other friends have them as well.
> Great tv's, and no problems.


Banding, clouding and stuck pixels are issues on large glass LCDs. An absolute show stoppers for me, I'm extremely sensitive to any of these anomolies if they exist. If you don't see these issues when watching your LCD count yourself lucky, but don't invite me over to critique your TV. :smile:

Plasma's don't suffer from these issues and will give the the most consistant/anomoly free picture across the screen.

Plasmas give you the best blacks in the market, LCDs give the best whites. LCDs will perform better than Plasma in bright rooms. Dark rooms are the opposite because of the far better blacks on plasmas.

As for color definition and picture quality you are wrong, unless you mean over saturated, exagerated colors that LCDs are set up to show off on the show room floor? Those over saturated, extra vivid colors dazzle the crap out of our eyes and brain by nature and sell allot of TVs.

Realistically, movies and television are mastered on ISF calibrated screen which is far from the vivid set up you see on the show room floor and many run in their living rooms.

Most plasmas by default are far closer to ISF calibration off the factory floor which is why most people think LCDs have "better" color.

The picture detail and shadow detail on a properly calibrated screen is absolutely stunning in comparison to the LCDs on the floor room show, but also a little boring colorwise to the eye in comparison. The guy that calibrated my TV actually told me he quite often gets complaints from people that he broke their TV after calibration. :smile:

Overall life isn't an issue for someone who barely watches TV or anyone for that mater. 30,000-60,000 hours till half life. Ian would have to watch TV for 4.5 hours a day for 18-36 years to reach that.

Can a LCD outperform a Plasma, sure but in a small format where it's much easier to create an anomoly free screen. Even then the blacks aren't quite up to Plasmas. That said LCDs are the future and not far distant future either.


.02


----------



## EchoWD40 (Mar 16, 2007)

Jeff Flowerday said:


> Snip.
> Plasma's don't suffer from these issues and will give the the most consistant/anomoly free picture across the screen.
> 
> Plasmas give you the best blacks in the market, LCDs give the best whites. LCDs will perform better than Plasma in bright rooms. Dark rooms are the opposite because of the far better blacks on plasmas.
> ...


See i do not agree with most of this. 
Have you ever watched a LCD with LED backlighting? Those completely dummy plasma's in every single aspect, including darks and lights. 
Another note is that the native resolution is higher on lcd's. They can display better image quality on a higher resolution. This is particularly important if you ever use something like a gaming console, or run a media server into your television for live streaming.

I agree with the way of the future though 

Side note, i am sure i use my tv for completely different purposes then all of you so you guys can probably ignore me anyway lol.


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

TDeneka said:


> See i do not agree with most of this.
> Have you ever watched a LCD with LED backlighting? Those completely dummy plasma's in every single aspect, including darks and lights.
> Another note is that the native resolution is higher on lcd's. They can display better image quality on a higher resolution. This is particularly important if you ever use something like a gaming console, or run a media server into your television for live streaming.
> 
> ...


Don't want to turn this thread in to a LCD vs. Plasma fight. I have both .... and find the plasma to be far superior in all areas that matter to me. The LCD wins in simplicity and convenience (a bit lower power consumption, lighter, more durable, less glare) and gets used in the brighter living room for news and reality shows. The plasma is in the family room and it is used for any serious viewing.

Bottom line is that if you like your CRT then you'll prefer the plasma. If you like your laptop display then you'll prefer LCD.


----------



## Rugburn (Jan 14, 2009)

Hi Ian

I just bought a Sharp Aquos 40" LCD for $1010 before tax. I wemt to a local independent store, but Futureshop has them for less $$. Plasma may be slightly better for darks, or "contrast ratio" as the sales folk like to throw at you in the showroom. Honestly, the TV that I noticed having the best picture in the place was a Sharp 50" LED. Of course this was far from being $1000!! The next big thing is supposed to be the OLED or Organic Light Emitting Diode. Sony has a 9" desk top model availlable; it's pretty amazing. I thought the Sharp model I bought had better picture quality than the Sony equivalent, but at a better price point. Sharp is the leader when it comes to LCD, so check them out. The Panasonic Viera plasma range has great picture quality at very good prices. 

Shawn.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

allthumbs56 said:


> Don't want to turn this thread in to a LCD vs. Plasma fight. I have both .... and find the plasma to be far superior in all areas that matter to me. The LCD wins in simplicity and convenience (a bit lower power consumption, lighter, more durable, less glare) and gets used in the brighter living room for news and reality shows. The plasma is in the family room and it is used for any serious viewing.
> 
> Bottom line is that if you like your CRT then you'll prefer the plasma. If you like your laptop display then you'll prefer LCD.


Also worth noting if you want to go less than 42 inches for size you pretty much have to go LCD. I have 2 Panasonic Plasmas in my house, a 42" and a 50". I had a 27" Samsung but it only lasted 2 years and the picture gave out. It as great for carting out to the deck in the summer as it was light. Its sitting in a closet in my house. I really should take it somewhere to see if its worth fixing.


----------



## Rugburn (Jan 14, 2009)

guitarman2 said:


> Also worth noting if you want to go less than 42 inches for size you pretty much have to go LCD. I have 2 Panasonic Plasmas in my house, a 42" and a 50". I had a 27" Samsung but it only lasted 2 years and the picture gave out. It as great for carting out to the deck in the summer as it was light. Its sitting in a closet in my house. I really should take it somewhere to see if its worth fixing.



I went through two Samsungs in a row. The first lasted almost 4 years, the second about eight. As far as I'm concerned these guys make garbage. Both of mine were large tube TVs, and the second was a good used deal I couldn't pass on. Sounds like their plasmas and LCDs offer the same terrible reliability.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

TDeneka said:


> See i do not agree with most of this.
> Have you ever watched a LCD with LED backlighting? Those completely dummy plasma's in every single aspect, including darks and lights.
> Another note is that the native resolution is higher on lcd's. They can display better image quality on a higher resolution. This is particularly important if you ever use something like a gaming console, or run a media server into your television for live streaming.


Sorry but the Native Resolution isn't higher on LCD Televisions. Computer monitors aren't part of this discussion.

But I see you are comparing based on gaming, so I'll leave you with your opinion because LCDs are better for gaming in all situations except lag and motion blur. Color accuracy just isn't that important in that environment.

PS) LED backlighting has helped but the blacks still aren't on par with plasmas. Nothing worst than watching star wars on an LCD in a dark room and having clouds in space.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

Rugburn said:


> Hi Ian
> 
> I just bought a Sharp Aquos 40" LCD for $1010 before tax. I wemt to a local independent store, but Futureshop has them for less $$. Plasma may be slightly better for darks, or "contrast ratio" as the sales folk like to throw at you in the showroom. Honestly, the TV that I noticed having the best picture in the place was a Sharp 50" LED. Of course this was far from being $1000!! The next big thing is supposed to be the OLED or Organic Light Emitting Diode. Sony has a 9" desk top model availlable; it's pretty amazing. I thought the Sharp model I bought had better picture quality than the Sony equivalent, but at a better price point. Sharp is the leader when it comes to LCD, so check them out. The Panasonic Viera plasma range has great picture quality at very good prices.
> 
> Shawn.


I can't wait for the OLED technology to get affordable and on something much larger than a 9". :smile: From what I've read we are a ways away from that, unfortunately. At that point I'll most likely move away from my plasma.


----------



## david henman (Feb 3, 2006)

Jeff Flowerday said:


> I can't wait for the OLED technology to get affordable and on something much larger than a 9". :smile: From what I've read we are a ways away from that, unfortunately. At that point I'll most likely move away from my plasma.


...i'm waiting for OLED, too. the new sharp 50" is around $3K, i think. that's actually not a bad starting point.

-dh


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

david henman said:


> ...i'm waiting for OLED, too. the new sharp 50" is around $3K, i think. that's actually not a bad starting point.
> 
> -dh


No you are thinking LED back lit LCD. That's not the same as OLED, OLED is an actual different type of display than LCD.


----------



## david henman (Feb 3, 2006)

Jeff Flowerday said:


> No you are thinking LED back lit LCD. That's not the same as OLED, OLED is an actual different type of display than LCD.


...kind of misleading - pictured on the cover of marketnews as the AQUOS LED:

http://www.sharp.ca/pdf/release_AQUOS_LED_August_4_09.pdf

$3,300 FOR THE 52".

-DH


----------



## bscott (Mar 3, 2008)

Great thread!! I too have a CRT but am waiting a bit to upgrade. Good info on the difference between LCD and plasma and backlit LCD. I have heard on the radio some advertising for LED TV's but have not investigated whether they mean the LED backlit LCD's or the OLED.
I will keep an eye out for what is coming technology wise. We will most likely not go for anything bigger than 36 inches.

Brian


----------



## Starbuck (Jun 15, 2007)

*And on that note:*

http://ca.tech.yahoo.com/home_entertainment/accessories/article/3868

I also know that if you are watching a Sony BD and type in 7669 (sony) from the main menu, it gives you a calibration easter egg.


----------



## hollowbody (Jan 15, 2008)

Starbuck said:


> http://ca.tech.yahoo.com/home_entertainment/accessories/article/3868
> 
> I also know that if you are watching a Sony BD and type in 7669 (sony) from the main menu, it gives you a calibration easter egg.


Nice find!

A lot of people complain about calibrated sets, or the cinema setting as being too dark or grainy, but I guess these people have never seen what a movie theatre's projected image looks like with the lights on.

A friend of mine bought a nice 50" Sony LCD, and I swear he has it set to retina-fry. The picture's so bright, you gotta wear shades!


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

hollowbody said:


> Nice find!
> 
> A lot of people complain about calibrated sets, or the cinema setting as being too dark or grainy, but I guess these people have never seen what a movie theatre's projected image looks like with the lights on.
> 
> A friend of mine bought a nice 50" Sony LCD, and I swear he has it set to retina-fry. The picture's so bright, you gotta wear shades!


My LG plasma came with a feature called Picture Wizard: A do-it-yourself calibration toolkit. With a few attempts, I've managed to get a very realistic picture. The set also has a THX certified setting for watching movies. It has taken me time to appreciate and accept these settings because they do not have the pop, flash, and brilliance of the showroom/vivid settings, which seem to draw the eye at first. Much like music that is "real" vs. the more recent overprocessed/compressed stuff, the differences become apparent in time. Watching something like the original Pirates of the Caribbean with the room darkened (like the theatre) will really show how much everything looks, well............... real.


----------



## Guest (Sep 11, 2009)

allthumbs56 said:


> My LG plasma came with a feature called Picture Wizard: A do-it-yourself calibration toolkit.


My dad had an older LG set that had an IR sensor on the front that would adjust the television settings based on the ambient light in the room. I always wondered why more sets didn't do something like that.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

iaresee said:


> My dad had an older LG set that had an IR sensor on the front that would adjust the television settings based on the ambient light in the room. I always wondered why more sets didn't do something like that.


Allot do actually, but the purests turn that setting off pronto. :smile:


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

bscott said:


> Great thread!! I too have a CRT but am waiting a bit to upgrade. Good info on the difference between LCD and plasma and backlit LCD. I have heard on the radio some advertising for LED TV's but have not investigated whether they mean the LED backlit LCD's or the OLED.
> I will keep an eye out for what is coming technology wise. We will most likely not go for anything bigger than 36 inches.
> 
> Brian


Well since there is really one OLED TV on the market and it's only 9 inches I guess it can be implied LED backlit LCD.


----------



## Jim DaddyO (Mar 20, 2009)

I use CRT. I was looking into a bigger set and the Sharp Aquos always ranked in the top in the price/performance category. Best bang for the buck.


----------



## jimsz (Apr 17, 2009)

The Panasonic plasmas are awesome and the technology has changed dramatically for them. They not only rival lcd but have better specifications now.

We also bought an Aquos lcd, which turned into a boat anchor just after the 1 year warranty expired. Stay away from these lemons.


----------



## Guest (Sep 12, 2009)

The CRT is gone. Time to go shopping. Jeff, I took a look at that Panasonic and unfortunately my cap is $1000. So it's a no-go. I couldn't really find any 1080p Plasma's under $1000 from a named manufacturer.

So that means LCD I guess.

Anyone got an opinion on this one: http://www.costco.ca/Browse/Product.aspx?Prodid=10322702&lang=en-CA

Versus: http://www.costco.ca/Browse/Product.aspx?Prodid=10323867&lang=en-CA

I can convince the wife to do the extra $20 for the Samsung I think. 

I'm kind of partial to Costco because they've got a killer warranty extension and warranty service.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

iaresee said:


> The CRT is gone. Time to go shopping. Jeff, I took a look at that Panasonic and unfortunately my cap is $1000. So it's a no-go. I couldn't really find any 1080p Plasma's under $1000 from a named manufacturer.
> 
> So that means LCD I guess.
> 
> ...


When I originally posted the link it was $999.99 you missed the sale. :zzz:


----------



## Guest (Sep 12, 2009)

Jeff Flowerday said:


> When I originally posted the link it was $999.99 you missed the sale. :zzz:


I _thought _it said $999 when I first looked at it! Man, phew! I thought I was losing my mind there for a second.

Anyhow...TV "sales" like that are what have kept me out of the new TV market for so long. It's such a load of bull.


----------



## Guest (Sep 28, 2009)

An update for anyone interested. I ended up buying a 42" Samsung plasma at Costco. I looked at a really nice Pioneer plasma at the local high end store (Signature Audio & Video) and while they were super-nice guys, they just couldn't compete on the price or the warranty. Oddly enough: the Samsung looked the best of all the sets I could afford on the Costco floor, which is an absolute hellish TV viewing environment.

It came to a steal of a deal with Costco knocking another $100 off at the register and, of course, extending the warranty by a year (which made me feel a little less worried about buying a non-MiJ plasma).

Done. I'm happy. Looks nice hanging on the wall. Next up: surround sound. 

Thanks to everyone for all the help picking this out!


----------



## Budda (May 29, 2007)

good to hear


----------

