Jump to content


Photo

Pro Reviewer Has Low Opinion Of High End Sony Led.


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 TheFrog

TheFrog

    AV Forum Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 282 posts

Posted 13 February 2012 - 09:32 AM

Users who are concerned primarily with picture quality, and who want a large-screen display, are still better served by Plasma televisions from both Panasonic and Samsung, in our opinion. LED LCDs have their benefits, most notably their very low power consumption and ability to produce very bright images, but picture quality appears to be lower down the list of priorities with this display type. If LED LCD is your thing, then the Sony KDL-55HX823 is one of many good choices in this category.


http://www.hdtvtest....age=Performance

This is embarrassing.....many years ago many people lusted after Sony products, but now they're producing mediocre products and have the gall to hit you with a Sony tax.

#2 robertr

robertr

    AV Forum Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 913 posts

Posted 13 February 2012 - 10:00 AM

Frog,

The model quoted is not the top model - HX 925 or in the case of Europe HX923 is the top of the range.

It is obvious that you cannot say anything good about LCD TV's & any negative reports about them you sieze your moment in the sun.

It is very disappointing that the majority of your posts are all about trashing a certain type of television & you dont seem to post a balanced argument.

Edited by robertr, 13 February 2012 - 10:48 AM.


#3 TheFrog

TheFrog

    AV Forum Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 282 posts

Posted 13 February 2012 - 10:14 AM

Amps??????????
The fact is, you're paying a Sony Tax aka you're being ripped off.
$1800 for the Sony tax indulgent 46in LED in Australia vs a 59-60in plasma for about the same price.

#4 re-boot

re-boot

    AV Forum Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 372 posts

Posted 13 February 2012 - 10:31 AM

Frog,

The model quoted is not the top model - HX 925 or in the case of Europe HX923 is the top of the range.

It is obvious that you cannot say anything good about LCD TV's & any negative reports about them you sieze your moment in the sun.

It is very disappointing that the majority of your posts are all about trashing a certain type of television & you dont seem to post a balanced argument.


Totally agree.

I'd hate to see this forum descend into the gutter and turn into trash, much like the Whirlpool forums did a while back until a particular poster was permanently banned.

#5 TheFrog

TheFrog

    AV Forum Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 282 posts

Posted 13 February 2012 - 10:39 AM

Silence the truth hey fella's.....that's what you call balanced postings, LOL.

#6 robertr

robertr

    AV Forum Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 913 posts

Posted 13 February 2012 - 10:52 AM

Amps??????????


Corrected - bug in system.

#7 robertr

robertr

    AV Forum Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 913 posts

Posted 13 February 2012 - 10:56 AM

Amps?????????? The fact is, you're paying a Sony Tax aka you're being ripped off. $1800 for the Sony tax indulgent 46in LED in Australia vs a 59-60in plasma for about the same price.


Just to correct you , you can buy a Sony 46 LED for under $800.00 - another illinformed post by you.

#8 bassett

bassett

    AV Forum Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 811 posts

Posted 13 February 2012 - 11:05 AM

Everyone is entitled to there own opinion, and the writer is presumably quoting from an unknown source.

Frankly if you want a quality picture buy a Fujitsu. End of story

But in these days of mass production, most of the circuit boards are identical regardless of the
name on the front of the panel. So we pay our money and we make out choice.

#9 TheFrog

TheFrog

    AV Forum Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 282 posts

Posted 13 February 2012 - 12:48 PM

Just to correct you , you can buy a Sony 46 LED for under $800.00 - another illinformed post by you.


Bottom of the range junk...no thx.

#10 TheFrog

TheFrog

    AV Forum Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 282 posts

Posted 13 February 2012 - 12:48 PM

Everyone is entitled to there own opinion, and the writer is presumably quoting from an unknown source.


huh...?

#11 Owen

Owen

    AV Forum Member

  • Senior Member
  • 11,984 posts

Posted 13 February 2012 - 06:41 PM

It seems Sony's "top model" LCD that used local dimming is now discontinued, anyone who wants one should get a move on.

There is no "Sony tax" as there once was, Sony is now very price competitive but with today's low prices you also get what you pay for.

#12 Lomu

Lomu

    AV Forum Member

  • Member
  • 22 posts

Posted 14 February 2012 - 05:23 AM

A few points I'd like to make:

-the KDL-55HX823 is NOT a "High end" panel by any stretch of the imagination. It's a mid-range panel. This is something you could discover in 5 minutes with a PC and a Google search box- or you'd already be aware if you knew anything about HDTVs.

-your "pro reviewer" DOES NOT have a "low opinion" of the Sony panel. In fact, he's rather happy with it. Allow me to quote, directly from the article you link:

"SD processing left us without complaints – scaling was fairly crisp and clean, diagonal interpolation (jagginess concealment) was of a good standard, and the KDL-55HX823 successfully detected the most common Film-to-SDTV transfer cadences (for both PAL and NTSC) and rendered a jaggy-free image"

"Let’s start with the positives: Greyscale tracking (after calibration) was great, with the only uncorrectable problem being the common LED LCD problem of visibly blue (or purple, depending on where you’re sitting) tinted shadows. Measured Gamma (the distribution of light output from dark to white) was absolutely excellent, resulting in a picture that had a decent amount of “richness”. There were also no huge colour gamut inaccuracies, although the KDL55HX823 couldn’t fully saturate the blue colour, producing a slightly purple hue instead (again, something we often see with LED LCDs). All of these attributes afford the Sony HX823′s images a good amount of realism and depth."

"If we had to sum up Sony’s LCD (and LED LCD) output for the last few years in one word, we’d probably choose “decent”"

" If LED LCD is your thing, then the Sony KDL-55HX823 is one of many good choices in this category."

And right at the end of the article, this panel receives the "Recommended" award.
With the above in mind, I can only conclude that you are being deliberately deceptive and- dare I say it- dishonest in your choice of words. Your topic heading is completely at odds with the article you posted. Perhaps you'd like to explain this discrepancy?

#13 jliang70

jliang70

    AV Forum Member

  • Senior Member
  • 2,718 posts

Posted 14 February 2012 - 09:27 AM

A few points I'd like to make:

-the KDL-55HX823 is NOT a "High end" panel by any stretch of the imagination. It's a mid-range panel. This is something you could discover in 5 minutes with a PC and a Google search box- or you'd already be aware if you knew anything about HDTVs.

-your "pro reviewer" DOES NOT have a "low opinion" of the Sony panel. In fact, he's rather happy with it. Allow me to quote, directly from the article you link:

"SD processing left us without complaints – scaling was fairly crisp and clean, diagonal interpolation (jagginess concealment) was of a good standard, and the KDL-55HX823 successfully detected the most common Film-to-SDTV transfer cadences (for both PAL and NTSC) and rendered a jaggy-free image"

"Let’s start with the positives: Greyscale tracking (after calibration) was great, with the only uncorrectable problem being the common LED LCD problem of visibly blue (or purple, depending on where you’re sitting) tinted shadows. Measured Gamma (the distribution of light output from dark to white) was absolutely excellent, resulting in a picture that had a decent amount of “richness”. There were also no huge colour gamut inaccuracies, although the KDL55HX823 couldn’t fully saturate the blue colour, producing a slightly purple hue instead (again, something we often see with LED LCDs). All of these attributes afford the Sony HX823′s images a good amount of realism and depth."

"If we had to sum up Sony’s LCD (and LED LCD) output for the last few years in one word, we’d probably choose “decent”"

" If LED LCD is your thing, then the Sony KDL-55HX823 is one of many good choices in this category."

And right at the end of the article, this panel receives the "Recommended" award.
With the above in mind, I can only conclude that you are being deliberately deceptive and- dare I say it- dishonest in your choice of words. Your topic heading is completely at odds with the article you posted. Perhaps you'd like to explain this discrepancy?


I think the review is pretty thorough and it confirmed what many have said in this forum that the picture quality of plasma is superior than LED and LCD panel.

"Users who are concerned primarily with picture quality, and who want a large-screen display, are still better served by Plasma televisions from both Panasonic and Samsung, in our opinion. LED LCDs have their benefits, most notably their very low power consumption and ability to produce very bright images, but picture quality appears to be lower down the list of priorities with this display type"

#14 Owen

Owen

    AV Forum Member

  • Senior Member
  • 11,984 posts

Posted 14 February 2012 - 11:12 PM

"Users who are concerned primarily with picture quality, and who want a large-screen display, are still better served by Plasma televisions from both Panasonic and Samsung, in our opinion. LED LCDs have their benefits, most notably their very low power consumption and ability to produce very bright images, but picture quality appears to be lower down the list of priorities with this display type"


That sums it up nicely and alignes with my opinion.

An LCD is an LCD no matter how it is illuminated and the generic LCD look is always there so the "top models" are not all that diferent to mid range units.

#15 TheFrog

TheFrog

    AV Forum Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 282 posts

Posted 15 February 2012 - 02:38 PM

And right at the end of the article, this panel receives the "Recommended" award.
With the above in mind, I can only conclude that you are being deliberately deceptive and- dare I say it- dishonest in your choice of words. Your topic heading is completely at odds with the article you posted. Perhaps you'd like to explain this discrepancy?


No, we can only conclude you have a hard on for me and don't like that I seek to inform people rather than worship any ole crap that has a brand name.

#16 TheFrog

TheFrog

    AV Forum Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 282 posts

Posted 15 February 2012 - 02:40 PM

I most notably their very low power consumption and ability to produce very bright images, but picture quality appears to be lower down the list of priorities with this display type"


As I suspect you know, the diff in power consumption is meaningless as well, especially as it can be gobbled up in the price+ any screen that needs an excessively high brightness won't be producing top notch PQ anyway.

#17 Robbks

Robbks

    AV Forum Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 211 posts

Posted 15 February 2012 - 03:31 PM

urghh.

well, that's 5 minutes of my life (reading this thread) i'll never get back.....!