Buying a TV v20231

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

I'd say this thread is totally outdated for recommendations at this stage - some of the TV's recommended are in fact better than most of what you can buy now, but are no longer available as model lines have shifted heavily in favour of 4k LED.

If you're buying a good TV right now, there is no question that you should go for OLED. But realistically, it might be worth buying cheap for the interim while this new generation of technology sorts itself out.

[OldDutch]

I would look at these two:

http://www.futureshop.ca/en-CA/produ...rchPageIndex=1

or step up to the better

http://www.futureshop.ca/en-CA/produ...87fc47656ben02

I usually don't recommend buying basement priced sets, spend the money on the right set and you will be rewarded. That said, your friend def does not have the budget for that, and the Vizio sets are getting great reviews at that price point.

As Corsi said, it actually is a good plan to buy a cheap TV now and in 5 years step into a OLED. Right now is a transition between the death of plasma and the birth of next gen OLED sets which will be the best pictures ever.

EDIT: As others have said don't go smaller than 50" for that distance. I have 54" in my living room at same distance and it is right sized. Worst thing you can do is go too small, you really can't go too big until you hit 70" sizes. Also, don't buy 60hrz refresh, that is 10 year old tech. Even my first set in 2007 was 120hrz XBR. You will notice for sure at this size and watching movies, get 120 minimum.

[MickMcGeough]

Originally Posted by OldDutch

I would look at these two:

http://www.futureshop.ca/en-CA/produ...rchPageIndex=1

or step up to the better

http://www.futureshop.ca/en-CA/produ...87fc47656ben02

I usually don't recommend buying basement priced sets, spend the money on the right set and you will be rewarded. That said, your friend def does not have the budget for that, and the Vizio sets are getting great reviews at that price point.

As Corsi said, it actually is a good plan to buy a cheap TV now and in 5 years step into a OLED. Right now is a transition between the death of plasma and the birth of next gen OLED sets which will be the best pictures ever.

EDIT: As others have said don't go smaller than 50" for that distance. I have 54" in my living room at same distance and it is right sized. Worst thing you can do is go too small, you really can't go too big until you hit 70" sizes. Also, don't buy 60hrz refresh, that is 10 year old tech. Even my first set in 2007 was 120hrz XBR. You will notice for sure at this size and watching movies, get 120 minimum.

The Vizio E & M series have full array local LED dimming, which is pretty tough to get at this price point. I've got a 60" M series, and after tweaking the color settings and doing some really basic calibrations, the picture quality is incredible for the price.

It's also plenty bright and looks great in a well-lit room.

Smart TV functionality is pretty good too. It's even got a native Plex client!

It's a great "stopover" until 4K OLED sets are more mainstream.

[MrCallahan]

The whole "waiting a few years" is a long battled concept for me. By the time 5 years rolls around, there'll be a new technology/feature that is all the rave, and that will now be a new requirement for what I want in a TV. But at that time, it won't be mature enough to fully meet my requirements, so I'm stuck waiting again.

To me, if you're a technology junkie, TV's don't have the same lifespan they used to have. You buy today to meet as much requirements as possible, and plan for a 4-6 year replacement cycle. I'm on 3 years with the set I have now, and I'm starting to get the itch to buy a new one, I'm willing to bet within the next year, I'll probably cave and buy a new one.

EDIT: one thing that sucks, is weeding out the fads. 3D has slowly died, but now we have curved and 4K TV's. My gut is telling me that 4K will stick around, but will be a while for content to catch up. Curved? don't know...not feeling this one, don't think it will last.

[Igottago]

I want a curved screen. Not sure how much of a benefit the curve is in practice, but its kind of cool aesthetically. The Samsung curved screens are beautiful.

[Flamenspiel]

I have been liking what i have been seeing at COSTCO lately, of course they never have the latest but TVs change so fast. I like the warranty and when they have sales they have good prices as well.

I have been holding off for about 3 years and it keeps getting better, I usually only buy stuff when it breaks but i have an older Japan made LCD(circa 2007) that looks like it just won't croak. The TV was a FS warranty replacement from a set i purchased in 2003.

A couple of years ago I bought my dad a 55 inch samsung plasma(costco) that has amazing color. Plasma still looks like the best to me.

[MrCallahan]

Originally Posted by Igottago

I want a curved screen. Not sure how much of a benefit the curve is in practice, but its kind of cool aesthetically. The Samsung curved screens are beautiful.

The concept totally makes sense to me.

Each pixel on the display, will be the same distance from the screen to your eye. Rather than a flat panel, where the pixels in the center are closer to your eye, and pixels on the edge of the monitor being farther. Apparently skewing or distorting the image slightly the closer you are to the edge. (color, focus, brightness).

All makes sense in theory! But not sure how it is in practice when it's more than one person watching the screen, from different viewing angles.

This makes sense to me in a theater aspect (IMAX does this already). But for home? maybe for 80" and bigger screens?

[Bobblehead]

I just can't see the love for the smart circuitry on TVs.

You already see how loathe phone makers are to keep their software up to date. I can't see TV makers any excited to keep their software patched.

If I want the additional features just pick up a Roku or something external where the maker isn't necessarily in the business of selling a new TV. Plus it is much cheaper to replace or upgrade.

[cupofjoe]

Originally Posted by bobblehead

i just can't see the love for the smart circuitry on tvs.

You already see how loathe phone makers are to keep their software up to date. I can't see tv makers any excited to keep their software patched.

If i want the additional features just pick up a roku or something external where the maker isn't necessarily in the business of selling a new tv. Plus it is much cheaper to replace or upgrade.

+1

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

I just can't see the love for the smart circuitry on TVs.

You already see how loathe phone makers are to keep their software up to date. I can't see TV makers any excited to keep their software patched.

If I want the additional features just pick up a Roku or something external where the maker isn't necessarily in the business of selling a new TV. Plus it is much cheaper to replace or upgrade.

I get your point. But on the other hand any roku besides the roku 3 has long been left for dead in terms of meaningful updates.

[Bobblehead]

But the Roku is cheap compared with a new TV.
Or use your XBox/PS as the media streamer.

From what I've read, 90+% of the "smart" features people use is Netflix. Web browsing - you'll do it once or twice to see if you can, but using a remote is far from optimal.

Samsung has had bad press this year on their smart TVs for 3 issues that cropped up.
1) Voice commands - they are passing all that data over the internet and then to a 3rd party to interpret the commands. People were unaware that anything they said was being sent over the internet, so that revelation triggered some worries. link
2) One of their servers went on the fritz and suddenly smart sets couldn't "call home". And since they couldn't contact the Samsung servers, none of the internet enabled features would work - Netflix, etc were disabled. (This was also an issue with some Sony sets) link
3) Samsung Owners in Australia were getting extra ads interrupting their viewing. This was happening while they were using Plex. link

I have no doubt manufacturers will fix these issues with newer TVs, but I question they will keep those features up to date once a model goes out of production. As has been mentioned, some people view TVs as something to be replaced regularly. It isn't in a company's interest to spend money and support old software when they could earn money by selling a new TV.

So many TVs come with Smart tech now that I think it will be rare to find one without. But don't make your buying decision based on that feature. And if you want to watch Netflix, just pick up a Chromecast for $39 and use that instead. Or Plex. Or Apple TV. Or Google Tv, or any of a myriad of products coming onto the market to fill that niche.

[Old Yeller]

Originally Posted by OldDutch

I usually don't recommend buying basement priced sets, spend the money on the right set and you will be rewarded. That said, your friend def does not have the budget for that, and the Vizio sets are getting great reviews at that price point.

Thanks, when I was last in the market if you strayed away from Samsung/Panasonic/Sony/Sharp to a budget model, you got budget PQ and budget features... but in doing some research and reading the reviews it's amazing how much brands like LG and Vizio have caught up.

Not so much Magnavox...

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Flamenspiel

A couple of years ago I bought my dad a 55 inch samsung plasma(costco) that has amazing color. Plasma still looks like the best to me.

That's because it still is, aside from some of the better OLED sets and even there the difference isn't night and day.

The whole "waiting a few years" is a long battled concept for me. By the time 5 years rolls around, there'll be a new technology/feature that is all the rave, and that will now be a new requirement for what I want in a TV. But at that time, it won't be mature enough to fully meet my requirements, so I'm stuck waiting again.

Depends what the technology is. 4k TV and curved screens are basically a gimmick - in the vast majority of home setups, 4K is unuseful and curved screens are pretty but impractical. OLED, when developed, could change TV, but the problem is whether it gets developed as OLED sets have a higher average price to produce than 4K's.

[Winsor_Pilates]

I have the Samsung F9000 55" and love it. I don't play games on it much though, so can't comment on it for that.

[DoubleF]

Ignorance is bliss. I'm betting whoever is using this TV wouldn't even know the difference between 60 and 120Hz (assuming already on 60 Hz). Now, going from 120 to 60Hz, might see a difference, but I doubt it. (We can see it, they can't. I've tried this on my parents before. Can't tell the difference.)

Smart TV features are like built in GPS in cars. Doubt it will disappear, clunky, but sooner than later (hope sooner) they're figure out how to keep it from being "held back" in comparison to other options.

[I-Hate-Hulse]

Originally Posted by OldDutch

Also, don't buy 60hrz refresh, that is 10 year old tech. Even my first set in 2007 was 120hrz XBR. You will notice for sure at this size and watching movies, get 120 minimum.

Which Hz is it that you get the terrible "camcorder" effect making TV/Movies/Sport all looking like it was shot with a HandyCam? Anything else I should look out for other than Hz to avoid this?

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by I-Hate-Hulse

Which Hz is it that you get the terrible "camcorder" effect making TV/Movies/Sport all looking like it was shot with a HandyCam? Anything else I should look out for other than Hz to avoid this?

It is a "feature" of most 120 hz and above tvs. It is usually called something like motion enhancer, and is often turned on by default. Most sources are 60 hz (60 frames per second) so a 120 or 240 hz tv will not improve upon the picture in any meaningful way. The exception to this is if you have a blue ray players(and some other 1080p sources) set to output at 24 fps. There is a slight advantage to having a 120 or 240 hz set because it basically leaves the frame on for 5/120 of a second on a 120 hz, or 10/240 of a second on a 240 hz. 60 hz tvs are left doing a 3:2 pulldown or something similar to convert the 24 fps to 60 fps. It is not very noticeable. The only time I can ever really see it is on slow pans in a movie, when it can get a little jittery.

The dreaded soap opera or camcorder effect comes from the circuitry in the tv doing processing on 120 and 240 hz tvs. Basically, it smooths out the motion by trying to average out the pixels between each frame. It takes the 60 or 24 hz source and makes up frames in between. It makes the motion smoother, and I suppose more realistic, but IMO, and many others gives an awful looking soap opera/camcorder/old school canadian television effect that is not in any way desirable.

Luckily that effect can be turned off on all those 120/240 hz tvs, so if you don't dig the motion enhanced effect, the only real advantage of 120/240 hz over 60 is the more pure presentation of 24 fps source. And if you don't have a 24 fps source, then you will have zero benefit.

Bottom line is 240 is really no better than 120. 120 might give you a benefit over 60. But in either case, refresh rate is not the most important factor anyone should be looking at.

For what you actually notice in most living rooms, I would say the following is the order which I would consider when looking at a tv. It seems like advertising and salesmanship tend to reverse these.

1) Black level, shadow detail. Especially if you watch a lot of movies, having blacks that look black (not grey), and being able to see details in dark scenes vs just dark blobs makes so much difference. This is where plasma used to shine, and OLED will.

2) viewing angle - being able to see a good picture no matter where you are sitting in a room.

3) Accurate colors.

4) Resolution. This is another over-hyped category, but the closer you sit to a tv, and the larger the screen, the more important this is and can make a difference. But not much benefit in going to a resolution higher than the source you plan to use.

5) Refresh rate.

[DoubleF]

Motion blurring tech to make things smoother is super weird in movies. I hate it so much. It makes watching a movie feel like a documentary, which was super bizarre.

I have heard it is only useful for watching sports on TV which can make it more awesome?

[I-Hate-Hulse]

So I bought the 65" Vizio at Costco for $999. I'm trying to dispose of the old 58" Samsung Plasma's carcass now.

What have people done to do this in as painless a way possible? Seems a bit big to leave at Staples's recycling bin. Anyone used Bestech, they claim to pay up to $65 for old broken Plasmas.

[Hemi-Cuda]

My old 46in Sony Bravia finally died so I'm looking at replacing it with a Samsung 55in H7150 (http://www.memoryexpress.com/Products/MX51140). Reviews all seem pretty good for it, anyone happen to have one and can recommend it or not? I was looking at some Vizio ones before that but there doesn't seem to be anywhere in Calgary to buy them and I'm not big on buying large items like that online