Why would you pay more for 1080p ??? on a less than 42in TV&gt;??? Why do people like to waste money on things they don't need???
776159
Yes at 12 feet you probably can't tell the difference between 720 from 1080 on a 32". Same could be said for a 50" at 16 feet. Details has to do with distance from the screen (all other things being equal). You will see more detail in 1080 on a 32" at 6 feet than you can a 1080 on a 50" at 12'. At 6' a 50" will also look pixalated and appear to be lower quality. Pick your size/resolution based on what your viewing distance will be.
1235282
I agree somewhat! But there is still lots of 4:3 content on tv! A 26 inch 16:9 tv will not "blow" anyone away! I suggest at least a 37 inch 16:9 tv if you like 'Letterboxed" 2:35 ratio DVD's--it is still the most common movie aspect ratio around ! Too bad!
1588042
Thanks for your response, but what is 1080p content? Are tv shows? THe difference between the two sets is approximately $40.
16522
I am looking to buy this tv as well. Bestbuy has it for the same price. + tax of course. i hear alot about a buzz. that is why i am thinking best buy might be the way to go just in case of a return.
2016355
I bought the 50" Samsung Plasma 3d and have never been happier. Don't believe the hype with LED tech... I do not think it is worth it. The 720p plasma looks better than the 1080p LCD. Turns out most signals are 720p. Also the burn-in has been fixed so if you watch ESPN and the ticker at the bottom is ghosting when you change the channel it goes away soon. Ummm... I also know that with the LCD you have to pay a ton to get a refresh rate that is any good. I paid $900 at Sears for my 50" 3d with a refresh rate of 600 Hz with 2 pairs of glasses. Once again... pull the trigger on the plasma. I bought the 50" Samsung Plasma 3d and have never been happier. Don't believe the hype with LED tech... I do not think it is worth it. The 720p plasma looks better than the 1080p LCD. Turns out most signals are 720p. Also the burn-in has been fixed so if you watch ESPN and the ticker at the bottom is ghosting when you change the channel it goes away soon. Ummm... I also know that with the LCD you have to pay a ton to get a refresh rate that is any good. I paid $900 at Sears for my 50" 3d with a refresh rate of 600 Hz with 2 pairs of glasses. Once again... pull the trigger on the... » Read More I bought the 50" Samsung Plasma 3d and have never been happier. Don't believe the hype with LED tech... I do not think it is worth it. The 720p plasma looks better than the 1080p LCD. Turns out most signals are 720p. Also the burn-in has been fixed so if you watch ESPN and the ticker at the bottom is ghosting when you change the channel it goes away soon. Ummm... I also know that with the LCD you have to pay a ton to get a refresh rate that is any good. I paid $900 at Sears for my 50" 3d with a refresh rate of 600 Hz with 2 pairs of glasses. Once again... pull the trigger on the plasma. « Show Less
1410957
Thats almost laughable to consider a 92" tv priced at 4k as too expensive. If you cant afford it the 73" models can be found around 1k now though... I currently am using a 73838, but will be soon upgrading to this 92" and the price for a screen this size is unbeatable. If you really need 92" just wait a couple years and they will drop in price, but in the mean time you will be missing out and IMHO the extra grand or two you will spend now is well worth not having to wait.
329572
I agree D. I guess Amazon deleted them because they don't want people to hold off buying the TV just because they think the price will decrease. To Amazon, they'd prefer it if MORE people paid 1749 for the TV than a reduced price of say1249. My thing is: why make the link to this forum available in the first place?
1161855
HDTV is definitly here. However, there is a cavet. An HDTV program not produced originally in an HDTV format (720p, 1080i) but what I like to call EDTV format (400i, 480p, 576i, 576p) and has been upconverted from EDTV to HDTV resolutions just can't compare to a natively produced HDTV program. There is alot of HDTV programming, but there is also a lot of EDTV programming out. While EDTV looks better than regular television, it only slightly an improvement. If you haven't seen your first high-definition image your in for a treat. 1080p is a bonus resolution that, at this time, is only supported by Blu-Ray/HD-DVD movies and computer inputs in all their glory. It is not necessary for broadcast or cable television, yet. The only gain to waiting a year is holding on to your money. Yes, the initial outlay for a television is expensive, especially if you haven't seen it in action, but once you have it and start enjoying you'll soon realize I am glad I bought the tv. Until broadcast television and high-definition movies increase the resolution past 1080p, a 1080p tv all your going to need. Just make sure you pay attention to the connectivity on the back of the set.
44382
Guy's,I need a little advice. I know nothing about LCD TV's. I'm moving into a house and ran into a guy that wants to sell a Samsung 40" 4061. The TV has been siting in his bedroom and is hardly used as he watches a bigger set in the living room. The set looks and works great and he's asking $500 for it. I think the set is several years old. Does anyone out there have any advice on buying this?Anything to look for? Is this a good price on a set with prices coming down this Christmas?Thanks for any input,Rudy
2039845
Can't make up my mind between Sony KDL-32L4000 for $474.53 or Sony KDL-40S4100 for $858.83 out the door. Will be for master bed room or for "fitness" room (incentive...). Any recommendations? Which one is a better deal?-This depends upon how far your equipment is from the television. 8 more inches for $400 seems like a big jump. There has to be better values if you want a bigger television. However, the price for the 32" is a great deal.
2039480
I agree that this TV is excessively priced, especially since this is an old model as pointed out by Shaq. I don't understand Amazon's strategy. If they are sitting on a bunch of old TVs in their inventory, why don't they price them with a true sales price ?? Like in the week before the Super Bowl for example ?? Just a suggestion... I know I would consider buying it then !!
551698
Jonathan,Which model did you end up going with? I was super interested in this TV, but it apparently doesn't support 1080i, which is no good for my Xbox 360. Also, does anyone know what the difference is between the older model (32HL67) and this one (32HL67U, "U" indicating a newer iteration)?
1412066
Sheila: At $278, that wasn't an issue for me. At that price, it's almost a throw away. I'd ask Google. BTW, stay away from extended warrenties. They are not worth the price. If a TV has something wrong with it, you'll know in short order.
1006045
Why buy a player that can produce a resolution of 1080 P to a device that is only capable of 320 I or less via a s-video connection. It is like owning a Ferrari with a 4 cylinder engine.
2055053
I was going to probably place my order tonight for this TV and now I see they jacked up the price 400 bucks. So much for that. Why does Amazon mess with the price so much? Rather annoying.
561930
I know I am going to get blasted for this. I personally think that as far as Blu-Ray standalones that this player is the best option available. That being said investing over $400 in one of these when you don't have an HDMI V1.3 display (1080p/24p) is just plain insane as you are spending a whole bunch of extra money with technology that you won't use until you upgrade your set/projector. I would go with a Toshiba A3 which has 720p/1080i capabilities and costs a whopping $118.49 shipped. If nothing else the price difference is significant enough that you could make use of it until the prices on things like the panasonic or the better HDTV sets comes down to the point where it is more affordable. I know I am going to get blasted for this. I personally think that as far as Blu-Ray standalones that this player is the best option available. That being said investing over $400 in one of these when you don't have an HDMI V1.3 display (1080p/24p) is just plain insane as you are spending a whole bunch of extra money with technology that you won't use until you upgrade your set/projector. I would go with a Toshiba A3 which has 720p/1080i capabilities and costs a whopping $118.49 shipped. If nothing else the price difference is significant enough that you could make use of it until the... » Read More I know I am going to get blasted for this. I personally think that as far as Blu-Ray standalones that this player is the best option available. That being said investing over $400 in one of these when you don't have an HDMI V1.3 display (1080p/24p) is just plain insane as you are spending a whole bunch of extra money with technology that you won't use until you upgrade your set/projector. I would go with a Toshiba A3 which has 720p/1080i capabilities and costs a whopping $118.49 shipped. If nothing else the price difference is significant enough that you could make use of it until the prices on things like the panasonic or the better HDTV sets comes down to the point where it is more affordable. « Show Less
1928197
What do you mean by lower the resolution slightly to match the TV? Do you mean lower the resolution right back to 1366 x 768 and you get no visual benefit from a resolution higher than 1366 x 768? There would be no visual benefit by accepting a 1080i or 1080p signal?