41 replies to this topic

[gatty8889]

Hey I've been considering buying the new sharp 70" led LCD, has anyone had any expierence with this tv or know of anything I should?

Thanks

[Owen]

Its a larger version of Sharps smaller LED LCD's, other than size and price there is not much positive to say about it.
If you like the look of the smaller models you should be happy with the 70".

[drzeus]

Owen, on 13 May 2012 - 02:21 PM, said:

Its a larger version of Sharps smaller LED LCD's, other than size and price there is not much positive to say about it.
If you like the look of the smaller models you should be happy with the 70".

Does that mean it's not a good TV? I saw a demo of if running a proper HD Blu Ray demo and it had stunning picture quality. Unfortunately everywhere else the geniuses are displaying SD sport on it which looks pretty average.

If there was something I could criticise about it is that it lacks the sexy thin design of the Samsungs, has no smart TV features and no 3D (the Australian model anyway, the US ones do)

[dyates69]

It's as good as or better than any of the other LCD's currently out, if you don't mind LCD. Seems great value at the size.

[Owen]

drzeus, on 13 May 2012 - 02:41 PM, said:

Does that mean it's not a good TV? I saw a demo of if running a proper HD Blu Ray demo and it had stunning picture quality. Unfortunately everywhere else the geniuses are displaying SD sport on it which looks pretty average.

The TV may be good for your needs but for ultimate picture quality its not competitive with the Panasonic 65" or Samsung 64" Plasmas.

Remember most TV's even crappy ones can look quite good with Bluray source, but feeding them SD or low quality source soon sorts the good from the ordinary.

[jsmith]

gatty8889, on 13 May 2012 - 10:03 AM, said:

Hey I've been considering buying the new sharp 70" led LCD, has anyone had any expierence with this tv or know of anything I should?

Thanks

That model is not too bad.

This one though is alot more expensive, but is better.

Quote from posted review;

"The overpriced Sharp Elite LED-based LCD produces the best overall picture quality of any TV we've reviewed since 2008."

JSmith :ninja:

[jsmith]

Owen, on 13 May 2012 - 04:08 PM, said:

Remember most TV's even crappy ones can look quite good with Bluray source, but feeding them SD or low quality source soon sorts the good from the ordinary.

Rubbish, all that displays is whether some kind of SD softening/filtering is employed. True to the source anyone?

JSmith :ninja:

[foxtail]

Saw this Sharp 70" TV in US last Nov at Sears was selling @ $2499!

See its now at JB for $4200?, it was showing David Attenborough nature series, looked bloody awesome, and the set looks very thin to me.

[fat]

I noticed that with the demo loop playing that colors looked good and there was no motion judder as well. I am considering this panel or the Panasonic VT50 as a possible upgrade to my Pioneer LX508

[Owen]

jsmith, on 14 May 2012 - 10:42 AM, said:

Rubbish, all that displays is whether some kind of SD softening/filtering is employed. True to the source anyone?

JSmith :ninja:

Totally wrong, there is a very significant difference in how poor quality source is handled on various displays, one display can look quite decent and another intolerable with the same source.

My 100" projector and 70" Sony TV both look a lot better than my 52" Samsung LCD at the same viewing distance, which is remarkable give the size difference. That's not because the Samsung is below par for an LCD, far from it. LCD's are invariably poor with less than best source and I doubt any will ever be as good as a decent Plasma.

Plasma's are not all the same either, I observed very obvious differences between Panasonic and Samsung Plasmas when viewing free to air TV.

[Owen]

fat, on 23 May 2012 - 01:56 PM, said:

I noticed that with the demo loop playing that colors looked good and there was no motion judder as well. I am considering this panel or the Panasonic VT50 as a possible upgrade to my Pioneer LX508

Judder only occurs when film source is displayed at 60Hz. Film displayed properly should show low frame rate jitter on medium speed panning shots, this at first looks similar to judder but is actually very different and is entirely normal.
Jitter can be removed with frame interpolation but the result is what's called the "soap opera" effect, its not natural or normal for film to be perfectelly smooth.

Edited by Owen, 23 May 2012 - 04:26 PM.

[fat]

The Samsung panels did show low speed panning judder but the Sharp didn't so it was not a 24/60hz conversion issue. Just the way the different panels handled it

[Owen]

Samsung's do not have "judder" when displaying 24 fps source in Cinema Smooth 96Hz mode which is not on by default. They do show jitter in this mode just as they should, frame interpolation can be enabled to remove that for the "soap opera" look if desired but its not a true depiction of the source.

For Cinema Smooth to work the Bluray Player must be set for 1080p 24 output, some players come set to 1080i 60 by default.

You will find the Sharp is using frame interpolation as film source can never be smooth without it on any display. Turn the frame interpolation off (assuming you can) and it will look like the Samsung or any other display with frame interpolation disabled.

[Chill]

Owen, on 23 May 2012 - 07:26 PM, said:

Samsung's do not have "judder" when displaying 24 fps source in Cinema Smooth 96Hz mode which is not on by default. They do show jitter in this mode just as they should, frame interpolation can be enabled to remove that for the "soap opera" look if desired but its not a true depiction of the source.

For Cinema Smooth to work the Bluray Player must be set for 1080p 24 output, some players come set to 1080i 60 by default.

You will find the Sharp is using frame interpolation as film source can never be smooth without it on any display. Turn the frame interpolation off (assuming you can) and it will look like the Samsung or any other display with frame interpolation disabled.

Who cares what it's called, if the Sharp looks better on panning shots that all that matters

[Owen]

I explained why they look different and that the Samsung will look very juddery if in the wrong mode or with the wrong input.

Some people find the artificially smoothed motion interpolated look "better" and others don't, LCD's have relied heavily on motion interpolation over the last couple of years but Plasmas are now moving away from it. I think this year Samsung no longer offer motion interpolation on their Plasma range, not sure about Panasonic.

If you want film to look like video LCD with motion interpolation is the way to go.

Edited by Owen, 23 May 2012 - 10:20 PM.

[Trigg]

A display set up in a store set to default settings showing a better picture than the set next to it in a store does not mean it is superior! It's about calibrating and tuning the settings to give optimum performance! Owen is well experienced when discussing settings outside of manufacturers default settings and inexperienced salesbot settings!

The OP threw the question out there, and a each will have their own view point! No need to rubbish that!

[Trigg]

Trigg, on 23 May 2012 - 10:19 PM, said:

A display set up in a store set to default settings showing a better picture than the set next to it in a store does not mean it is superior! It's about calibrating and tuning the settings to give optimum performance! Owen is well experienced when discussing settings outside of manufacturers default settings and inexperienced salesbot settings!

The OP threw the question out there, and a each will have their own view point! No need to rubbish that!

I must disclose however that I have a 64" Samsung Plasma, however purchased for the very reasons stated by Owen above! Unfortunately if you watch a great deal of FTA, then you want to ensure that it displays an acceptable picture!

[TheFrog]

Owen, on 23 May 2012 - 10:19 PM, said:

If you want film to look like video LCD with motion interpolation is the way to go.

Yuk....yuk, yuk, that soap opera effect is an obscenity to me.
I honestly don't know how people can tolerate or want it....I know you reject is, and I totally agree.

[TheFrog]

Trigg, on 23 May 2012 - 10:22 PM, said:

I must disclose however that I have a 64" Samsung Plasma, however purchased for the very reasons stated by Owen above! Unfortunately if you watch a great deal of FTA, then you want to ensure that it displays an acceptable picture!

People also have to be careful what size TV they buy, I was surprised to view Conan in HD, however it was only 8mbps, basically DVD spec with higher res, that said, it did look awesome on my 42in plasma and would've assumed it was closer to 11mbps, either way, it seems that FTA is constantly siphoning the bitrate out of HD channels and makes the purchase of a very large TV for FTA questionable.

[AndrewWilliams]

I'm a big fan of the newer Samsung Plasmas.  I thought LCDs were going to take over about five years ago but it just hasn't happened.  LCD picture quality has stagnated and plasma picture quality has moved ahead in leaps and bounds while plasmas have gotten much thinner too.

I also love the colour management systems (CMS) and 10-point white balance on newer TVs and I wouldn't buy one without those features any more.  They allow you to calibrate to astonishing colour accuracy without the need for an external video processor.

[drzeus]

AndrewWilliams, on 01 June 2012 - 08:29 PM, said:

I'm a big fan of the newer Samsung Plasmas.  I thought LCDs were going to take over about five years ago but it just hasn't happened.  LCD picture quality has stagnated and plasma picture quality has moved ahead in leaps and bounds while plasmas have gotten much thinner too.

I also love the colour management systems (CMS) and 10-point white balance on newer TVs and I wouldn't buy one without those features any more.  They allow you to calibrate to astonishing colour accuracy without the need for an external video processor.

Unfortunately in today's age most manufacturers are dropping more and more plasma models from their line ups every year as the consumers gravitate towards the brighter, slimmer, sexier bezelled, more power efficient LCDs. It is impossible to find a reasonably priced plasma in over 70" in Australia (if they even exist) so LCD is the only way to go.

I LOVE the look and design of the 2012 Samsungs but a 60" Samsung LCD (or even plasma) is priced not that far off the 70" Sharp.. .granted the Sharp does look dated in its design and features though but dollars for inches it does pretty well....

[Owen]

The last company to discontinue Plasma production was Pioneer and that was back in 2008 simply because not enough consumers where prepared to pay for a quality product, to my knowledge no company has done so since. LCD sales vastly outnumber Plasma but when it comes to quality (not a significant factor for most consumers) Plasma is still king.

If I had to replace my 5 year old 70" Sony today I would buy a 65" Panasonic Plasma. I own a Sammy LCD and could not bring myself to buy another LCD, they just dont cut it for quality IMHO.

[pc9]

Owen, on 04 June 2012 - 10:13 PM, said:

The last company to discontinue Plasma production was Pioneer and that was back in 2008 simply because not enough consumers where prepared to pay for a quality product, to my knowledge no company has done so since. LCD sales vastly outnumber Plasma but when it comes to quality (not a significant factor for most consumers) Plasma is still king.

If I had to replace my 5 year old 70" Sony today I would buy a 65" Panasonic Plasma. I own a Sammy LCD and could not bring myself to buy another LCD, they just dont cut it for quality IMHO.

Owen, this question is a bit off thread, but do you have any comment on how Panasonic plasmas handle compression.   I don't think there are any arguments about Panasonic PQ, black levels, contrast with good quality video but a lot of the reviews (and indeed some in this forum) question the Panny with poorer quality stuff.  I was in HN the other day looking at GTs and VTs and definately notice a little bit of jagged edge on local terrestrial standard definition broadcasts.

I've never owned a Panasonic but am considering one for my next purchase.  Currently own a Samsung 51PD550 and am reasonably happy with the picture quality, but the lack of a reflective screen drives me mad.

[jsmith]

Owen, on 04 June 2012 - 10:13 PM, said:

IMHO.

... and that says it all.

JSmith :ninja:

[robertr]

Unfortunately this forum is dominated by a handfull of posters that are hell bent on criticising LCD- personally I have the Sony 55HX925 & am more than impressed with its quality.

Acknowledgement should be made that the top of the line LCD such as the HX925 are of a very high standard & not be brushed off as simply average LCD.

I have been a member of this forum since inception & have had some lively discussions over the years however I am spending the majority of my time in US forums as I am very disappointed with non balanced posts on this forum.

There is no perfect display device out there.