A TV for under $3500 ?

[Hollywood H0gan]

I've got 10 days to find a TV before Foxtel digital is installed. I don't
really want to pay anymore than $3500.
I was looking at large rear projections this morning but when you look at
them on an angle the screen goes dark.
Plasmas looked very impressive but still a bit too expensive >?



--
Cheers. Slattery (H0llyw00d H0gan). Running on The Internet Group at 56k.

[What The!]

try DLP rear pro, LCD Rear pro and direct view CRT will give you pretty
bloody good pic.


"Hollywood H0gan" <nospam@forgetit.com.au> wrote in message
news:cc0a3q$t25$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> I've got 10 days to find a TV before Foxtel digital is installed. I don't
> really want to pay anymore than $3500.
> I was looking at large rear projections this morning but when you look at
> them on an angle the screen goes dark.
> Plasmas looked very impressive but still a bit too expensive >?
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers. Slattery (H0llyw00d H0gan). Running on The Internet Group at 56k.
>
>

[Justin Stern]

I rate the LG DLP Rear...supurb at my mates watching euro soccer

[Michael K]

Get a front projector. Nothing will beat it.


"Hollywood H0gan" <nospam@forgetit.com.au> wrote in message
news:cc0a3q$t25$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> I've got 10 days to find a TV before Foxtel digital is installed. I don't
> really want to pay anymore than $3500.
> I was looking at large rear projections this morning but when you look at
> them on an angle the screen goes dark.
> Plasmas looked very impressive but still a bit too expensive >?
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers. Slattery (H0llyw00d H0gan). Running on The Internet Group at 56k.
>
>

[Goforit]

"Hollywood H0gan" <nospam@forgetit.com.au> wrote in message
news:cc0a3q$t25$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> I've got 10 days to find a TV before Foxtel digital is installed. I don't
> really want to pay anymore than $3500.
> I was looking at large rear projections this morning but when you look at
> them on an angle the screen goes dark.
> Plasmas looked very impressive but still a bit too expensive >?

What size you after?

[Hollywood H0gan]

i was llooking at the LG 142cm Rear projection but what is turning me off it
is when you watch it from an angle the screen goes dark :-(

100cm plasmas still a bit too much


"Goforit" <blow@me.com> wrote in message
news:40e3b5db$0$24742$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>
> "Hollywood H0gan" <nospam@forgetit.com.au> wrote in message
> news:cc0a3q$t25$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> > I've got 10 days to find a TV before Foxtel digital is installed. I
don't
> > really want to pay anymore than $3500.
> > I was looking at large rear projections this morning but when you look
at
> > them on an angle the screen goes dark.
> > Plasmas looked very impressive but still a bit too expensive >?
>
> What size you after?
>
>

[Goforit]

40/42 inch SD plasma's can be had for that price or very close to it.


"Hollywood H0gan" <nospam@forgetit.com.au> wrote in message
news:cc0dla$vaj$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> i was llooking at the LG 142cm Rear projection but what is turning me off
it
> is when you watch it from an angle the screen goes dark :-(
>
> 100cm plasmas still a bit too much
>
>
> "Goforit" <blow@me.com> wrote in message
> news:40e3b5db$0$24742$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> >
> > "Hollywood H0gan" <nospam@forgetit.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:cc0a3q$t25$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> > > I've got 10 days to find a TV before Foxtel digital is installed. I
> don't
> > > really want to pay anymore than $3500.
> > > I was looking at large rear projections this morning but when you look
> at
> > > them on an angle the screen goes dark.
> > > Plasmas looked very impressive but still a bit too expensive >?
> >
> > What size you after?
> >
> >
>
>

[Pepe Duran]

I would have to say a SONY CRT beats anything hands down on picture quality.
Doesn't have the !!! WOW !! factor that plasmas have though.


"Hollywood H0gan" <nospam@forgetit.com.au> wrote in message
news:cc0a3q$t25$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> I've got 10 days to find a TV before Foxtel digital is installed. I don't
> really want to pay anymore than $3500.
> I was looking at large rear projections this morning but when you look at
> them on an angle the screen goes dark.
> Plasmas looked very impressive but still a bit too expensive >?
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers. Slattery (H0llyw00d H0gan). Running on The Internet Group at 56k.
>
>

[Mike]

Looking at recent prices FOB Taiwan, I think that you will see reasonable
quality 106 cm plasmas hitting the market here for around $3500+ in a few
months. Be wary, there are three grades of plasmas being produced, the
cheaper ones being sold here now for the $4000-$4500 are pretty crappy, poor
definition, tending to pixellate on fast moving scenes and low contrast
levels.

"Pepe Duran" <pepeduran533@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hUUEc.74045$sj4.30910@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> I would have to say a SONY CRT beats anything hands down on picture
quality.
> Doesn't have the !!! WOW !! factor that plasmas have though.
>
>
> "Hollywood H0gan" <nospam@forgetit.com.au> wrote in message
> news:cc0a3q$t25$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> > I've got 10 days to find a TV before Foxtel digital is installed. I
don't
> > really want to pay anymore than $3500.
> > I was looking at large rear projections this morning but when you look
at
> > them on an angle the screen goes dark.
> > Plasmas looked very impressive but still a bit too expensive >?
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Cheers. Slattery (H0llyw00d H0gan). Running on The Internet Group at
56k.
> >
> >
>
>

[BenOne©]

Hollywood H0gan wrote:

> I've got 10 days to find a TV before Foxtel digital is installed. I don't
> really want to pay anymore than $3500.
> I was looking at large rear projections this morning but when you look at
> them on an angle the screen goes dark.
> Plasmas looked very impressive but still a bit too expensive >?
>
>
>

How much are the 37inch HD plasmas going for at the moment?

--
Ben Thomas
Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
given nor endorsed by it.

[Ugly]

"Pepe Duran" <pepeduran533@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hUUEc.74045$sj4.30910@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> I would have to say a SONY CRT beats anything hands down on picture
quality.
> Doesn't have the !!! WOW !! factor that plasmas have though.
>

Agreed, the Sony 86cm CRT kicks ass!! If you are going for a Plasma look
out for dead pixels which once you get one, they tend to spread like cancer.
Besides, the Plasma TV's only have a 20,000 hour life expectancy before the
back light dies. Averaged at 8 hours/day you will only get 6.8 years out of
a Plasma TV. If I was spending that much on a TV I would want it to be
working for well over 6.8 years!

[tony_h]

Ugly wrote:
> "Pepe Duran" <pepeduran533@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:hUUEc.74045$sj4.30910@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>> I would have to say a SONY CRT beats anything hands down on picture
>> quality. Doesn't have the !!! WOW !! factor that plasmas have though.
>>
>
> Agreed, the Sony 86cm CRT kicks ass!! If you are going for a Plasma
> look out for dead pixels which once you get one, they tend to spread
> like cancer. Besides, the Plasma TV's only have a 20,000 hour life
> expectancy before the back light dies.

I think you are mixing up plasma with LCD. Plasma doesn't have a backlight,
in fact, it is very similar to a CRT in that it exites electrons and
bombards them onto phosphors that luminesce, but unlike a TV tube that
sweeps a number of lines across the screen from guns, plasma does this on a
per pixel basis. Also, LCD is more likely to have dead pixel problems
that spread...
But I agree, I still reckon that apart from the size, those Sony's are hard
to beat.

Regards
--
http://tonyspage.abock.de for some Topfield info including turning
those recordings into DVDs, adding features with the open source TAP
environment etc...

[Sam Richards]

On Mon, 5 Jul 2004 13:35:11 +1000, "Ugly" <ugly@ugly.com> wrote:

>"Pepe Duran" <pepeduran533@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:hUUEc.74045$sj4.30910@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>> I would have to say a SONY CRT beats anything hands down on picture
>quality.
>> Doesn't have the !!! WOW !! factor that plasmas have though.
>>
>
>Agreed, the Sony 86cm CRT kicks ass!! If you are going for a Plasma look
>out for dead pixels which once you get one, they tend to spread like cancer.
>Besides, the Plasma TV's only have a 20,000 hour life expectancy before the
>back light dies. Averaged at 8 hours/day you will only get 6.8 years out of
>a Plasma TV. If I was spending that much on a TV I would want it to be
>working for well over 6.8 years!

You are completely full of crap mate..

Plasma TVs do not have a backlight and the half life on many of them
is 60,000 hours

LCD TVs have a backlight and some of those have a 50,000 hour half
life. http://www.nelt.co.jp/nhe_hp/cfl/cfl.htm

Stop tugging yourself.

Sam

[Ugly]

"Sam Richards" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:2kso51F5rasiU1@uni-berlin.de...
> On Mon, 5 Jul 2004 13:35:11 +1000, "Ugly" <ugly@ugly.com> wrote:
>
> >"Pepe Duran" <pepeduran533@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:hUUEc.74045$sj4.30910@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >> I would have to say a SONY CRT beats anything hands down on picture
> >quality.
> >> Doesn't have the !!! WOW !! factor that plasmas have though.
> >>
> >
> >Agreed, the Sony 86cm CRT kicks ass!! If you are going for a Plasma look
> >out for dead pixels which once you get one, they tend to spread like
cancer.
> >Besides, the Plasma TV's only have a 20,000 hour life expectancy before
the
> >back light dies. Averaged at 8 hours/day you will only get 6.8 years out
of
> >a Plasma TV. If I was spending that much on a TV I would want it to be
> >working for well over 6.8 years!
>
> You are completely full of crap mate..
>
> Plasma TVs do not have a backlight and the half life on many of them
> is 60,000 hours
>
> LCD TVs have a backlight and some of those have a 50,000 hour half
> life. http://www.nelt.co.jp/nhe_hp/cfl/cfl.htm
>
> Stop tugging yourself.
>
> Sam
>

None the less, the CRT are light years ahead of the LCD and Plasma TV's in
quality of picture. You can't tell me that any plasma TV's surpass the
quality of a CRT TV in the price range mentioned in the subject. I have not
witnessed a plasma TV with a better image quality than a CRT in a reasonable
price range. Although you seem to be missing the point, I doubt you will be
getting a good quality plasma which has 50 000 hours of life for under
$3500, so maybe you can stop tugging yourself, mate.

[Ugly]

Cheers Tony,

Thanks for clearing that one up, I don't know what I was thinking. I must
have been spacing out too much at work to get the LCD and Plasma technology
mixed up. What was I thinking?

Nuff said.


"tony_h" <tony_h@REMOVE.bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:KH8Gc.79109$sj4.39317@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> Ugly wrote:
> > "Pepe Duran" <pepeduran533@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:hUUEc.74045$sj4.30910@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >> I would have to say a SONY CRT beats anything hands down on picture
> >> quality. Doesn't have the !!! WOW !! factor that plasmas have though.
> >>
> >
> > Agreed, the Sony 86cm CRT kicks ass!! If you are going for a Plasma
> > look out for dead pixels which once you get one, they tend to spread
> > like cancer. Besides, the Plasma TV's only have a 20,000 hour life
> > expectancy before the back light dies.
>
> I think you are mixing up plasma with LCD. Plasma doesn't have a
backlight,
> in fact, it is very similar to a CRT in that it exites electrons and
> bombards them onto phosphors that luminesce, but unlike a TV tube that
> sweeps a number of lines across the screen from guns, plasma does this on
a
> per pixel basis. Also, LCD is more likely to have dead pixel problems
> that spread...
> But I agree, I still reckon that apart from the size, those Sony's are
hard
> to beat.
>
> Regards
> --
> http://tonyspage.abock.de for some Topfield info including turning
> those recordings into DVDs, adding features with the open source TAP
> environment etc...
>
>