The 32" 1080p debate

M

Moericus

n00b
Joined
Jul 14, 2005
Messages
24
I begin finishing the basement soon and I need a TV for the new room when it is done. My wife and I decided to buy a smaller HDTV for right now. This way we don't stretch our savings too thin after finishing the basement. This TV will eventually move upstairs in the living or bedroom. At that point, I'll get myself a bigger TV and build a HTPC. I still hope to run some wires upstairs to connect the HTPC to the smaller TV as well as the monster downstairs.

I stopped in Tweeter today. I asked the guy for a 32" flat screen that I can hook up to a multimedia PC. Here's what he suggested:
Samsung LN T3253H - 32", on sale $900

I am relatively new to researching HDTVs but it seems like a good deal. I can get it $100 cheaper online, but I want to buy it from tweeter in case it blows up in 30 days. I did notice it's only 720p and all you ever hear about is 1080p. I've seen some mixed opinions on having 1080p in such a small screen. So, I wanted to see what you all thought for this specific application.

I plan on hooking it up to Comcast digital and running the HTPC on it with recorded programs and movies. It will occasionally have a game console hooked up to it, but I think I'm only going to get a Wii because I don't do much console gaming anymore. EQ2 is about the only PC game that might ever be on it.

Here are some 1080p options I saw:
Sharp LC-32D62U
Sharp LC-32GP1U

Please let me know what you all think. What is the best 32" screen at a reasonable price? What is the benefit of having 1080p on a small screen? Is there anything else I should consider?

Moericus
 
For living room type viewing, it won't much matter if you are sitting more than 7 feet away. 1080p in a small tv/monitor size (say under 37 inches or so) is good for in close viewing like being used as a PC monitor, typically 3 to 6 feet away.

But 1080p is good to have regardless, if the price is right. The first thing that comes to my mind is the 37'' 1080p Westinghouse monitors. I'm using one as my PC monitor, but it also looks excellent with HD media and HDTV channels. It can be had for around $700-$800 most places. Here's the newegg link for example.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16889234025

The Sharp LCD's are very nice as well. I've set a few of them up at work and they look great. I don't have much personal experience with them though.

Another option to look at is a Samsung DLP. They have a good price tag for the features they pack, the picture they provide, and the screen size you get for your money. My friend just got lucky and scored a 61'' Samsung 1080p DLP HDTV for around $900. Keep you eyes peeled for closeouts on last year's models at places like ABC Warehouse, Sears, Best Buy, or Circuit City.
 
http://www.engadgethd.com/2006/12/09/1080p-charted-viewing-distance-to-screen-size/

Interesting chart they have there. Looks like you'll have to be about 6' or closer to even start to notice the advantage of 1080p vs 720p. But, as stated, 1080p is good to have. Any difference in price would have to be pretty small to justify 1080p on a screen that small IMHO. Now, if you were to migrate it to a PC for use as a monitor when you can afford a bigger set....
 
Well, if you're just buying it for a stopgap until you can afford a bigger TV, you never really know where it's going to end up. You might decide to use it as a monitor, or use it somewhere else where the viewing distance is close enough to notice the added resolution of 1080p. Nothing like one of those "If only I'd spent a little more" moments. If the price difference is minimal, I'd spring for the added resolution. But really, get a realistic measurement of your viewing distance, and go check out some TV's in both resolutions, using your viewing distance. And in all honesty, it's REALLY easy to spend someone else's money on a forum. To some, an extra couple of hundred bucks is nothing, to others, it's the difference between eating or not (or having to stand tall before the wife). Both 720p and 1080p are HUGE leaps beyond standard def stuff and there really is no wrong choice here...
 
I got a 720p 42" lcd for the reason that lower resolution stuff looks better, and I mostly play analog TV or downloaded AVIs on my TV. At some point in the future I might decide to upgrade to whatever 4096p is available but for now it doesn't really make that big a difference.
 
the sharp aquos lc32-gp1u or later units in the series have phenomenal PQ and features.
 
Logan321 said:
I got a 720p 42" lcd for the reason that lower resolution stuff looks better, and I mostly play analog TV or downloaded AVIs on my TV. At some point in the future I might decide to upgrade to whatever 4096p is available but for now it doesn't really make that big a difference.
Click to expand...

there is a difference on a 42" tv with 1080p over 720p, but it really depends on how close you sit.

i have a Westinghouse lvm-42w2 that is 1080p and when i play my 360 over vga, i sit ~4 feet away and am able to see the benefits. i've also sat farther away, ~12ft, and at that distance i couldn't tell the difference. i'd say anything closer than 8 feet and 1080p on a 42" tv would be worth the investment. if you sit farther away, get a bigger screen and 1080p. :) future-proof yourself as much as you can.

whatever resolution comes next, 4096, won't be out for another 10 years, most likely. companies want to earn their money back from investing in 1080p technology and cable/satellite tv can't even send a 1080p signal yet. any higher resolution is still many years away.

the only thing that reaches the masses and delivers 1080p are hd-dvd, blu-ray, ps3 and xbox 360 (htpc's haven't reached the masses yet). hd-dvd is dead and blu-ray, imo, won't last more than 3 years once digital downloads take over.
 
Yes, I struggle with being told 1080p is the standard when i have to buy a blu-ray DVD player to see it.

I think I'll settle for the 720p for at least 2 years and re-evaluate what is actually being broadcast.
 
MstrHnky said:
whatever resolution comes next, 4096, won't be out for another 10 years, most likely. companies want to earn their money back from investing in 1080p technology and cable/satellite tv can't even send a 1080p signal yet. any higher resolution is still many years away.
Click to expand...

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5i8aMIX26vE-3xAaOShwrMP54ExQA says they're expecting to have 33 million pixels by 2015, which basically amounts to 4000ish vertical lines of resolution.
 
buffbiff21 said:
I'm not sure what's turning me on more: the TV, the strawberries, or the girl in the skintight reflective skirt.
Click to expand...

at what point do people stop buying into new technology altogether?

let's say that article is accurate, and that 4000p is available in 7 years. for someone buying a new 1080p tv today, which is the current cream-of-the-crop, to see it become obsolete well before it's physical life span is ridiculous. 1080p has become the "norm" only in the past 12 months or so. before that, it was 720p with the occasional 1080p here and there and at a much higher cost.

you're always going to have your early adopters, but to reach the main stream, technology like this will be way more than 7 years away.

also, think of japan's infrastructure and compare that to america's infrastructure. it will be much easier for japan to implement new standards than it will be for america. i'm still waiting for FiOS to become available in my area of rochester, ny.

if time warner tries to make me pay for road runner by the amount of bandwidth i use, i'm dropping them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top