or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › LCD TV; LED and 240hz Worth It?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

LCD TV; LED and 240hz Worth It?

post #1 of 66
Thread Starter 
I am looking to buy a new LCD for my room, probably a size 46". I definitely want at least 120Hz but I am curious if the 240Hz is worth the extra price?

The same goes with the LED version, is the higher price worth it to get an LED over a regular LCD?

I am considering these one, is it good for the price? Which one is better?
Samsung

Sony Bravia

Any help is appreciated.
post #2 of 66
What are you mainly going to watching. If you are into video games, sports, and have a blu-ray player, i'd go for the 240hz. If you are just going to watch a random show here and there, it's not worth it. Honestly, I can not really tell the difference, but I wasn't really blessed with great eyesight. LED vs LCD the greatest advantage is LED will give you better light uniformity in specific areas. light uniformity has been an issue with LCDs since their inception. without going into great detail is that it'll produce an overall sharper picture, especially in dark lit scenes. Blacks will be black, not some charcoal grey on your screen. this is product of having hundreds of light sources instead of one. to make your decision even tougher, there are two technologies for LEDs now. local dimming sets and edge-lit sets, with local dimming being more expensive. you can achieve darker darks with local dimming sets. more $$ though. basic article on gizmodo Samsung vs. Sony I can't provide any tangible comparison, but I would get a samsung. I have experienced great things with all samsung devices in the last few years. i have a DLP and LCD from them. my grandparents and parents have bought samsung TVs and we have had no problems at all. what it really boils down to you is determining what you are going to watch.
post #3 of 66
I'd go with the LCD since you said this is for your room. I usually save the real money for the living room entertainment system.
post #4 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdeuce22 View Post
local dimming sets and edge-lit sets, with edge-lit being more expensive. .

I think it is the other way around...edge lit is cheaper than local dimming. Good info, nonetheless.
post #5 of 66
shit you are right. i changed what i originally wrote. local dimming is the newer technology and obviously more dinero.
post #6 of 66
IIRC the edge lit sets actually have backlight uniformity issues due to the nature of being lit from the edges...I could be talking out of my pooper though.

Also, I'm sure Samsung has fixed this by now, but I have the LNT4069FX set, top of the line about 3 years ago, and I was getting the dreaded capacitor issue. Google it, it's a huge issue with Samsungs from around that time where the capacitors they used on their power board were not rated at a high enough voltage for the task and usually ended up leaking. I replaced them myself so it wasn't a HUGE issue, but it kind of left a bad taste in my mouth. I also get overheating issues when my backlight is set to anything above 4 (out of 10) and the TV shuts off after being on for an hour or so and takes a minute to reboot; this happens constantly after the TV has been on for a while...Thinking about installing a fan to keep it cooler.
post #7 of 66
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdeuce22 View Post
what it really boils down to you is determining what you are going to watch.

Great info, thanks. It won't get much video games playing time but mostly movies, sports and I do have a bluray player. I particularly like the what Sony calls motion flow or the "soap opera effect," where the motion looks faster. I believe it is due to the higher refresh rate but I am not sure if I will get that with the 120Hz though, thats why I am considering the 240Hz. A lot of people hate it because they feel it gives a fake movement but I actually like it, feels like I am right there in the scene. Do you know which motion I am talking about?
post #8 of 66
it's inherent all all LCDs. i'd say it might not be as noticeable on 240Hz, but I'm not sure. I honestly haven't done any comparisons between 120 and 240. Makers have been putting settings to get rid of the effect. Samsung and Sony both have them, with a lot of other companies too.

I think if you are going for HD movie and sports, go for 240Hz.
post #9 of 66
Thread Starter 
I hate that most of the LED LCD with 240Hz at Best Buy are also 3D now so the price jumps 3x. I might have to look around and check out if I can tell the difference between 120Hz and 240Hz.

I honestly don't get the point of 3D TVs either if you still have to wear the glasses. Couldn't a person just watch 3D with the glasses on a regular TV or is it also of higher quality? I mean if I watched on a regular 1080p LCD TV in 3D, compared to a 1080p LCD 3D TV, would there be a significant difference?
post #10 of 66
yeah. it's bullshit because the technology for 3d has been around a couple years. thanks to james cameron's creation, the 3d has really taken off again. no-glasses 3D is coming but it's super expensive. some company in China had one display at CES estimated to be $20,000. the animations were short and infinitely looped, so you can tell that the tech is very very new. we are years away from 3d being mainstream, so i wouldn't base your purchase now on it. i am trying to find the damn article for you, but there are really only a handful of panel manufacturers out there that produce the panels for the TVs, so that $700 vizio tv may have the same panel as the $1500 sony.
post #11 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdeuce22 View Post
no-glasses 3D is coming but it's super expensive. some company in China had one display at CES estimated to be $20,000. the animations were short and infinitely looped, so you can tell that the tech is very very new. we are years away from 3d being mainstream, so i wouldn't base your purchase now on it.

shit son, that reminds me of ~98...I was in Paris and saw one of the first consumer plasma displays on sale for ~$10k (iirc).
post #12 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdeuce22 View Post
yeah. it's bullshit because the technology for 3d has been around a couple years. thanks to james cameron's creation, the 3d has really taken off again.

no-glasses 3D is coming but it's super expensive. some company in China had one display at CES estimated to be $20,000. the animations were short and infinitely looped, so you can tell that the tech is very very new. we are years away from 3d being mainstream, so i wouldn't base your purchase now on it.

i am trying to find the damn article for you, but there are really only a handful of panel manufacturers out there that produce the panels for the TVs, so that $700 vizio tv may have the same panel as the $1500 sony.

Yes, but the rest of the components make a big difference.
post #13 of 66
Thread Starter 
Yeah, I'm definitely not considering 3D at all, I just hate how it limits my options. I like buying at Best Buy but they only have one or two choices of 46" LED LCD with 240Hz that is non-3D.
post #14 of 66
With Samsung, watch out. Recently they have been sourcing panels from different manufacturers, using different technologies. So you might get a great screen or you might get a crap one.
post #15 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by RFX45 View Post
Yeah, I'm definitely not considering 3D at all, I just hate how it limits my options. I like buying at Best Buy but they only have one or two choices of 46" LED LCD with 240Hz that is non-3D.

Look up reviews on the LG LH90 series of LED TVs. They are highly rated for the price from the reviews I read a few months ago. They aren't cheap but much cheaper than the comparable 8500 series from Samsung (which I believe are rated better).
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › LCD TV; LED and 240hz Worth It?