LCD TV/Monitor recomendations

[KBD]

Guys, i need to help a friend of mine buy a LCD TV that can double as a monitor, he is looking for a 26-32" size. Basically, i need to know what to look for in a good LCD monitor, i've been using CRTs up til now because of their superior image quality and know little about LCDs. This doesnt have to be a gaming monitor, just for general PC/TV use. He wants to spend no more than $500-550 and it needs to have an HDMI input to connect to PC and cable box. Also, is he gonna need a TV tuner card to use as both TV and monitor?

 

[timta2]

Contrast and Black Levels (how dark can the black portions actually get) are two of the most important things to watch for when picking an LCD. Speed is important also since you want action to be smooth (nothing higher than 6ms!!!).

Consumer Reports has a nice review in their current issue on LCDs (Dec 2008 "Best Electronics").

The top rated 32" is the Samsung LN32A550 ($850) followed by the Panasonic TC-32LZ800 ($900) followed but the Sony Bravia KDL-32XBR6 ($1100). The top rated 26" is the Panasonic TC-26LX85 ($600) followed by the Insignia NS-LCD26-09 ($480) followed by the Sony Bravia KDL-26M4000 ($600). The hard thing about recommending TVs nowadays is that models and lines change so frequently and there are so many companies involved compared to what I remember about CRTs.

It sounds like he should be shopping for a TV first especially if he doesn't want a PC running all the time to support a tuner card (which I do and it gets kinda annoying). Just about everything is going to have a HDMI input (all of the six listed have at least 2).

 

[KBD]

thnx for your answer




the situation has changed a bit since i first posted. We were looking though the papers tonight and found a 42" panasonic plasma on sale in the local retail chain store on sale for $650 down from $1200, now he wants to get it and is all excited, i'm talking about this one here, it seems to have great reviews at egg but whats the opinion around here:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16889187079

 

[Mussels]

plasmas are bad. they suffer burn in from static images, which is mostly what windows is (not to mention HUD views in games)

plasmas often have silly resolutions too, i've seen 1024x768 on widescreen models, they simply use rectangular pixels and stretch to fit.

avoid plasma at all costs, for a PC screen.

edit: hah i was right

"Aspect Ratio 16:9
Native Resolution 1024 x 768"

 

[KBD]

well, i'm glad you told me that, mussels.

resolution is not an issue really as its not for games but the burn thing is annoying i would think. thanks for the warning, i'll have to tell him to get an LCD TV like this:

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8808061&type=product&id=1206142174666

this is also on sale locally and another one we've been looking at, any problems with this model?

 

[Mussels]

well, i'm glad you told me that, mussels.

resolution is not an issue really as its not for games but the burn thing is annoying i would think. thanks for the warning, i'll have to tell him to get an LCD TV like this:

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8808061&type=product&id=1206142174666

trust me the resolution is a killer. if you have access to one, set a widescreen LCD to 1024x768, and you'll see exactly what i mean. EVERYTHING is stretched and it looks terrible.

putting it into context for you: non widescreen movies will stretch to look widescreen, while widescreen movies will still have black bars top and bottom... they will just be stretched even wider. plasmas are cheap for a reason, they bloody suck.

 

[KBD]

trust me the resolution is a killer. if you have access to one, set a widescreen LCD to 1024x768, and you'll see exactly what i mean. EVERYTHING is stretched and it looks terrible.

putting it into context for you: non widescreen movies will stretch to look widescreen, while widescreen movies will still have black bars top and bottom... they will just be stretched even wider. plasmas are cheap for a reason, they bloody suck.

well, thnx again, i do own a 37" Sharp Aquos LCD and i'm gonna set the resolution like you suggested and show him if neccesary to prove a point.

Whats your opinion on that Sony model, is it worth it?

 

[Mussels]

well, thnx again, i do own a 37" Sharp Aquos LCD and i'm gonna set the resolution like you suggested and show him if neccesary to prove a point.

Whats your opinion on that Sony model, is it worth it?

it has similar specs to my screen, so it seems pretty decent for the price.

 

[KBD]

it has similar specs to my screen, so it seems pretty decent for the price.

i just hope they still have some in stock here when he goes to buy tomorrow, the price is even lower than best buy, lol

thnx 4 all your help

 

[3870x2]

plasmas are far outdated, I dont know why they still make them, i guess they have to sell what they have left in their factory. They were too expensive, some reaching up to the 10,000 range for a 60" 1600x1200 or w/e when they first came out. Plasmas eventually came to be known as a big mistake, not to mention the picture quality is probably worse than a CRT, fuzzy and drawn, aspect ratio is dead, you will rarely see a 1080p plasma. LCD is the future.

"The lower weight, falling prices, and often lower electrical power consumption of LCDs make them competitive with plasma television sets. As of late 2006, analysts note that LCDs are overtaking plasmas, particularly in the important 40-inch (1.0 m) and above segment where plasma had previously enjoyed strong dominance. Another industry trend is the consolidation of manufacturers of plasma displays, with around fifty brands available but only five manufacturers. In the first quarter of 2008 a comparison of worldwide TV sales breaks down to 22.1 million for CRT, 21.1 million for LCD, 2.8 million for Plasma, and 124 thousand for rear-projection."
^ "LCD televisions outsell plasma 8 to 1 worldwide", Digital Home Canada (2008-05-21). Retrieved on 13 June 2008.