samsung plasma hp-r5052 vs hp-r5072
Posted by: davidf on 15 January 2006
anyone familiar with either of these two models? Any opinions. I am getting ready to buy a 50" plasma and these are on the top of my list. Any other ideas. I don`t think I want to spend the really big bucks on the likes of fujitsu or pioneer or runco. thanks in advance, david
Posted on: 15 January 2006 by David Dever
quote:I don`t think I want to spend the really big bucks on the likes of fujitsu or pioneer or runco.
It's worth pointing out that the extra money spent on a Fujitsu / Pioneer / Runco will likely get you better video reproduction per $. Each might use the exact same display panel, with different menus, electronics, compatibility, and calibration, the research and design for which is paid as a premium over a bare display panel.
I wouldn't buy a PC maker-branded display if they offered it for half off; these units are often targeted at a less-sophisticated sector of the market and often have OEM issues that, once the re-brander exits the market, often leave the end-user high and dry when problems arise.
This excludes, of course, the obvious problems with non-standard connectors or HDCP-compliance issues.
Buyer beware...purchase price isn't everything.
Posted on: 16 January 2006 by davidf
thanks, dave. Do you consider Samsung a "PC maker"? I didn`t. I am still not sure I want to spend on hi end video. I thought that the quality of the picture on the samsung was quite good, especially with an HDTV signal. david
Posted on: 16 January 2006 by David Dever
The 50" panel used in the Samsung is made for them by Panasonic (also used by Fujitsu/Hitachi in their 50" models, as they manufacture most of the 42" panels themselves).
As stated before, the largest difference in performance will be in the menus / electronics / calibration / compatibility. With the specific models you mention, the dealbreaker is whether the image enhancement (DNIe) can be turned off on the inputs you'll be using.
Pioneer is downsizing their plasma manufacturing capabilities, though the electronics etc. tend to be excellent.
As stated before, the largest difference in performance will be in the menus / electronics / calibration / compatibility. With the specific models you mention, the dealbreaker is whether the image enhancement (DNIe) can be turned off on the inputs you'll be using.
Pioneer is downsizing their plasma manufacturing capabilities, though the electronics etc. tend to be excellent.
Posted on: 16 January 2006 by davidf
dave, what does "image enhancement" mean, and why would I want to turn it off? You mean it is not a GOOD thing? Keep it simple, dave, I am not too "sharp" when it comes to this stuff (pun intended!). david
Posted on: 17 January 2006 by David Dever
You should really visit a good AV dealer who can show you a good range of models, properly calibrated–and who can set up, mount and calibrate the units themselves. They can also anwer your questions as to why, for example, image enhancement is generally unfatihful to the original video signal in a system with good video sources.
Otherwise, it's not worth spending any additional cash beyond what a decent direct-view CRT Sony TV might cost, IMHO.
Otherwise, it's not worth spending any additional cash beyond what a decent direct-view CRT Sony TV might cost, IMHO.
Posted on: 17 January 2006 by davidf
dave, if you were in my shoes, would you rather get a Pioneer Elite 43" plasma or a Sony SXRD rear projection 50" for viewing from about 8 ft away? Are you familiar with the new Sony? The Sony would cost me at least $1000 less than the Pioneer. The room is only 15 X 10.5 ft and the set will be on the long wall. Need advice. david
Posted on: 17 January 2006 by David Dever
IF the SXRD is the 1080p model AND you can get someone to come out and calibrate it in your room, I'd choose the Sony.
If not, I'd go for the Pioneer plasma (1366x768, I presume) while considering the possibility of a video scaler later.
If your room has a lot of ambient light, the plasma might be the better bet.
If not, I'd go for the Pioneer plasma (1366x768, I presume) while considering the possibility of a video scaler later.
If your room has a lot of ambient light, the plasma might be the better bet.
Posted on: 18 January 2006 by davidf
what calibration is necessary? I mean, is this simply playing around with the different settings such as brightness, red, green, etc or is it something more sophisticated? So far no dealer has ever mentioned calibration. They have just said we "set it up" for you.
The sony is the 1080p model, and it looks cool, but it is 19" deep. Also, someone advised me that sitting 8 ft away, a 50" screen is too big. Do you agree? This is tougher than buying audio. Audio for me is simply Naim, which model and how much to spend. Help! thanks, david
The sony is the 1080p model, and it looks cool, but it is 19" deep. Also, someone advised me that sitting 8 ft away, a 50" screen is too big. Do you agree? This is tougher than buying audio. Audio for me is simply Naim, which model and how much to spend. Help! thanks, david
Posted on: 18 January 2006 by David Dever
quote:someone advised me that sitting 8 ft away, a 50" screen is too big. Do you agree?
Not at 1080p
As for calibration, any projection TV (or, projector + screen) should be (for best viewing results) set up and calibrated in-room to proper levels, inasmuch as every room's ambient light is different. Most recommend an Imaging Science Foundation (ISF)-trained technician to perform this process.
Yes, video may be tougher than buying audio, but it's not insurmountable.
Posted on: 18 January 2006 by davidf
dave, I am sorry to be so pesky, but since many broadcasts are not in Hi Def and not at 1080P at all right now, how about sitting 8 ft from a 50 inch screen watching Seinfeld re-runs? Will I be upset with a 50" screen for all my non-hidef viewing? david