nekrosoft13 Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 (edited) hello i'm looking for HDTV this is what i'm looking for HDTV (of course) 32 or more inches Preffer 4:3, but if no choice then 16:9 its ok too DVI or HDMI input and under or close to $1,000 and no sony!! Edited January 4, 2005 by nekrosoft13 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxpor Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 Its very stupid to get a 4:3 hdtv, since hdtv content is filmed in 16:9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 I'm confused. Are you asking for a member to sell you one, or point out a link to one for sale, or recommend one or what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axel Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 Dunno how much it is but I've seen this rear projection HDTV and it's awesome. Rear projection has been knocked in the past for being... well... crap, but I would honestly beg to differ on this HDTV... it's very high quality and a very good TV. But if you dont want rear projection I think Sim2 do some other nice ones. http://www.sim2.com/frameset_rtx.htm Why no sony and why no 16:9... everyone knows 16:9 is the future! 4:3 is lame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russ0943 Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 and no sony?.... well, they make about the best there is for around 1000. The 32" HD tube tv they have is insanely clear. I'd go w/ panasonic if not sony. Trust me, i stare at these things all day long where I work. There differences shine out after you see them every day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nekrosoft13 Posted January 4, 2005 Author Share Posted January 4, 2005 I'm confused.Are you asking for a member to sell you one, or point out a link to one for sale, or recommend one or what? 585225332[/snapback] recommend one 16:9 is fine, i'm just used to 4:3 and i don't like sony, i had to many problems with sony products Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiB3R Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 What you got against Sony? They make some cool stuff! Did your PS2 die on you or something? My uncle has a 52" rear projection Toshiba. (Not HDTV) I don?t think much of them personally, never have. To easy to get "burn in" not bright enough, surface of the screen is ridged plastic! But hay, what do I know? Things have probably moved on since then! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Afroman Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 sony sucks at electronics... simple as that.. they are consumer level crud.. ask any one that knows about tv's, stereos, speakers, dig cams, and even monitors... (last think sony made right was trinitron) sony is very entery level/ expensive because of a name electronics.. go for philips LCOS tv's .. they don;t have burn in.. like plasma, and rival lcd tvs in thinness.. i'm getting one this tax return.. i have researched like mad. the philips 62 inch i'm getting is only 18.5 inches deep.. and rivals DLP technology.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russ0943 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 sony sucks at electronics... simple as that.. they are consumer level crud.. ask any one that knows about tv's, stereos, speakers, dig cams, and even monitors... (last think sony made right was trinitron)sony is very entery level/ expensive because of a name electronics.. go for philips LCOS tv's .. they don;t have burn in.. like plasma, and rival lcd tvs in thinness.. i'm getting one this tax return.. i have researched like mad. the philips 62 inch i'm getting is only 18.5 inches deep.. and rivals DLP technology.. 585226198[/snapback] :rofl: :rofl: dude, u have no idea what ur talkn about. Its one thing to say sony is crap, which is understandable if you've had bad luck with them. But its another thing to recommend phillips over a sony. DLP might be the way u wanna go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bangbang023 Veteran Posted January 4, 2005 Veteran Share Posted January 4, 2005 Toshiba 34HF84...beautiful set. It's 16:9, but getting a 4:3 HDTV is assinine. Watching HD content on a 4:3 display will give you letter boxing unless you choose to crop the image. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooya Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 http://www.circuitcity.com/ssm/Samsung-32-...roductDetail.do http://www.circuitcity.com/ssm/Panasonic-3...roductDetail.do I don't think you can go bigger and still be HDTV and under $1k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonComet Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 (edited) Toshiba 34HF84...beautiful set.It's 16:9, but getting a 4:3 HDTV is assinine. Watching HD content on a 4:3 display will give you letter boxing unless you choose to crop the image. 585226429[/snapback] Actually it depends on your preferences. My parents have the 40" and 32" HD wegas, and they wanted them over any 16:9 tv. They assumed that they would be watching predominantly regular content, and they do (they watch csi and malcom in the middle and that's it in hd). Although, I agree, get a 16:9 hd tv that is 42" minimum. 42" 16:9 = 37" 4:3 which isn't bad at all. but anything smaller like 34" 16:9 = 29" 4:3 isn't really worth it unless you watch only hd and dvd content or are putting it in a pretty small room. Edit: Just saw your price range of 1000 or below. The only HDTVs that really fall into that range are 32" 4:3 sets and 30" 16:9 sets. 32" 4:3 = 29" 16:9 whereas 30" 16:9 = 25" 4:3. So if you plan on watching mostly hdtv and dvds then maybe that extra 16:9 inch of the 30" set will benefit you. If you plan on using it for a wider variety of things like watching alot of regular tv (mtv, cartoon network, hgtv, etc.) and maybe play games on it that don't support widescreen (most gamecube games are 480p but not widescreen, and a lot of ps2 games are not widescreen :() then maybe 29" 16:9 and 32" 4:3 are better for you. And if a 34" 16:9 set exists in your price range then that is probably the best tradeoff. I have only seen 1500+ 34" sets, but I haven't looked too hard ;). Although if a 34" set exists in your price range then a 36" 4:3 set might too. Thus you will have to make the same decision no matter which size you look at in this price range, lol. Edited January 4, 2005 by SonComet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nekrosoft13 Posted January 4, 2005 Author Share Posted January 4, 2005 i know that old projector tvs were pretty bad but how bad are the new ones? stuff like this http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detai...g=UTF8&v=glance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bangbang023 Veteran Posted January 4, 2005 Veteran Share Posted January 4, 2005 SonComet: You have to think long term, though. Everything is going over to HD, slowly but surely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bangbang023 Veteran Posted January 4, 2005 Veteran Share Posted January 4, 2005 i know that old projector tvs were pretty badbut how bad are the new ones? stuff like this http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detai...g=UTF8&v=glance 585226606[/snapback] That particular one is pretty decent, but is still pretty crappy compared to a direct tube or digital projection set. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonComet Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 (edited) SonComet: You have to think long term, though. Everything is going over to HD, slowly but surely. 585226609[/snapback] I don't really think a TV of this size, price, and type is a very long term investment. He's bound to replace it in 5 years tops(after 5 years crt tvs begin to show their age), and then maybe 1080p will be the new standard; the sharp aquous 45" is 1080p and the next-gen dlps are rumored to be 1080p aswell... Although I do admit that all next-gen videogames will be 16:9 and hd, and they should be out within the year (if the xbox next release date is to be believed). But still the point stands: 34" 16:9 with 29" 4:3 or 36" 4:3 with 33" 16:9. I'd say that that is a tough choice. At this point 16:9 is only a really easy choice future or not, once you get to atleast 37" 16:9 or 42" 16:9. But maybe a 30" or 34" (if you can find one for the right price) is best for your needs. I don't see hdtv taking over anytime soon (they keep pushing the date back :angry:), but maybe that extra inch will be what you're looking for in your dvd and next-gen gaming content. Edited January 4, 2005 by SonComet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bangbang023 Veteran Posted January 4, 2005 Veteran Share Posted January 4, 2005 I don't really think a TV of this size, price, and type is a very long term investment. He's bound to replace it in 5 years tops(after 5 years crt tvs begin to show their age), and then maybe 1080p will be the new standard; the sharp aquous 45" is 1080p and the next-gen dlps are rumored to be 1080p aswell... Although I do admit that all next-gen videogames will be 16:9 and hd, and they should be out within the year (if the xbox next release date is to be believed). But still the point stands: 34" 16:9 with 29" 4:3 or 36" 4:3 with 33" 16:9. I'd say that that is a tough choice. At this point 16:9 is only a really easy choice future or not, once you get to atleast 37" 16:9 or 42" 16:9. But maybe a 30" or 34" (if you can find one for the right price) is best for your needs. I don't see hdtv taking over anytime soon (they keep pushing the date back :angry:), but maybe that extra inch will be what you're looking for in your dvd and next-gen gaming content. 585226740[/snapback] For someone like myself, enthusiast or not, I never have the money needed to be able to just buy a TV like that. The current set in my room is a 7 year old 19" RCA. If I were to buy a new set (currently eyeing the 26hf84) I would expect it to at least give me 8 years of life which will be definitely go into the HD era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LlamaTrauma Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 I have this tv and it is a great set. It gets really good reviews from consumer reports and the like as well (Which is one reason I got it.) Good luck with you purchase - it's a life changing decision ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nekrosoft13 Posted January 4, 2005 Author Share Posted January 4, 2005 For someone like myself, enthusiast or not, I never have the money needed to be able to just buy a TV like that. The current set in my room is a 7 year old 19" RCA. If I were to buy a new set (currently eyeing the 26hf84) I would expect it to at least give me 8 years of life which will be definitely go into the HD era. 585226959[/snapback] i know how you feel i got a 6-7 year old 22 inch sanyo. i hate that tv. only one RF input, so i got this box where i gotta switch cables between xbox and dvd player. also the tv got two burned out dots. and a reddish area in top right corner. :angry: i really hate this tv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erftek Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 double post error... :wacko: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erftek Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 This is very nice for the price. I saw it at CC the other day. TV link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notuptome2004 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 well we got a TV tho not HDTV we got a Panasonic FLat 32" model http://www2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/store...Model=CT-32SL14 we orderd from Fingerhut but no payments for 3 more months we was ina pinch for a new Tv cause are 2 year old 27" Sanyo went out and we are on SSI so money is so tight the Peanut butter Leaks /JK but yea money issues so thats what we got Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonComet Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 For someone like myself, enthusiast or not, I never have the money needed to be able to just buy a TV like that. The current set in my room is a 7 year old 19" RCA. If I were to buy a new set (currently eyeing the 26hf84) I would expect it to at least give me 8 years of life which will be definitely go into the HD era. 585226959[/snapback] I get what you are saying. But even if you do wait 8 years before purchasing a new tv. If you watch primarily 4:3 content for the next 2-3 years, is it better to buy a 36" 4:3 HDTV over a 34" 16:9 HDTV. You only lose one inch in choosing the 36" HDTV (since it is 33" in 16:9 mode) in comparison to the 34". My question is: Is that 1" in future HD programs and dvds worth more to you than 7" of traditional 4:3 content. This decision is based entirely upon what you use your tv for, and cannot be solved by anyones opinion but your own. Obviously, that 1" in HD and DVD and future gaming content is worth it to you. But maybe that 1" is not worth the 7"es lost in regular TV that will be with us for some time to come. No one truely knows how fast HD will be implemented (I still can't believe the 1 day delay for HD content during the olympics). And even if it is implemented on all basic channels for every show, how long until the same is true for cable and satelite channels. If 29" 4:3 content is perfectly suitable for your everyday current tv watching needs then the 34" set is better. If 33" 16:9 and 36" 4:3 is better for your needs then buy all means buy that. Just because a TV is 16:9 doesn't mean it is better than a larger 4:3 if the 4:3 set has a comparable 16:9 measurement. So it all comes down to what kind of tv shows you watch and whether or not than 1 extra inch is worth sacrificing you current TV viewing for future hd standard and eventually cable tv. I am not saying that you are wrong or that I am right. I think that in this size range the decision to go for a 34"/30" or 32"/36" TV is much harder and more up to personal opinion than you would think. That being said, in the end I would choose the 4:3 tv. Why? Simply because I use the tv to primarily watch dvds, maybe play a game for 2-3 hours a week, and watch some regular tv on cable (maybe 2 hours a week on HD channels). Also, in this price range I would probably upgrade to more expensive and larger set within 1.5-2 years (Just because I am currently a student and would expect to be on a larger budget for a larger tv when I have the job, house, and space for it). But hey that's just me. Look at what your own wants, needs, and current/future financial situation are and make your decision based on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazog Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 (edited) buy a 30XS955 Its a Sony BEST TUBE in the market I have the 34 inch Read reviews if you don't believe me Every other tube is crap Sony is teh S#it By the way the 4:3 HDTV's have a LOWER screen res then there 16:9 counterparts just so you know contrary to what people in here are telling you Edited January 4, 2005 by Dazog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jakkyl Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 I've got to agree with the others.........do NOT buy a 4:3 TV just because you are used to it. If money was no object and you had a choice between a Corvette and a Cavalier would you take the Cavalier because you are used to a regular car? No sense getting 4:3 when all HD content is filmed in 16:9. I gotta disagree with your opinion of Sony as well. I have 3 Sony TV's in my house (27" Wega, 32" Wega, and 52" Wega HD) and am very pleased with all of them. Also have 2 Sony receivers and they have been the most reliable receivers I've had. If you don't want Sony I think I'd probably look at a Toshiba. I saw an earlier reference to Phillips, and while they are not BAD TV's, they are not better than a Sony! Just my two cents! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts