42" Plasma: $1099, Free s/h

Osiris_x11

Osiris_x11

Gold Member, Moderator: Marketplace
Joined
12 August 2003
Messages
4,971
Location
Austin, Republic of Texas
So far this is the best price I've seen on a new 42" plasma, ahipped (whether EDTV or HDTV)... if you don't get digital cable/satelite, not a bad buy! :cool:

(If anyone comes across a 42" Plasma HDTV for <$1250'ish, do tell! :tongue: )

42" Plasma EDTV Refurb
Price: $1,099.00 [free S/H]

Vizio

The gang will gather at your place once the allure of this plasma TV takes hold. This full-feature 42" widescreen from Vizio offers Enhanced-Definition TV. Enjoy full-screen viewing of high definition broadcasts and DVD videos. Show off a brilliant and vivid picture. The built-in NTSC tuner delivers broadcast TV programming. This plasma features a crystal clear native resolution for optimal EDTV performance, producing sharper imagery. The superb contrast ratio provides an incredible picture with deep blacks and bright whites. DVI interface with HDCP support allows the transmission of uncompressed, copy-protected digital content to your TV. Picture-in-Picture is available for ultimate enjoyment while watching content from multiple sources simultaneously.

This is a refurbished product and is only available while supplies last.

5984846.jpg


http://www.pcconnection.com/ProductDetail?Sku=6022665&SourceID=k62079
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
nothin' special as of now...

PoohBEar said:
Very nice....I am looking for a 37". Anyone know of a good deal?
Click to expand...

Plasma? LCD? EDTV? HDTV? :confused:

CL65 Captain said:
Its an Enanced Def TV (EDTV), not true HD! Waste of money, like non-alcohalic beer.
Click to expand...

LOL... :biggrin: (hilarious) However, if HD cable/satellite isn't being used, then a HDTV is just a waste! :redface:
 
The gang will gather at your place and laugh once the allure of this plasma TV fails to takes hold.

Internal Resolution (maximum) 852 x 480 - No thanks EDTV!
 
On display in a house, with no true HD monitor reference to compare to, practically no one would be able to tell that the set was actually EDTV and not HDTV. Having a true HD set, at this size (=<42"), is more about bragging rights than anything else.
 
Autophile said:
On display in a house, with no true HD monitor reference to compare to, practically no one would be able to tell that the set was actually EDTV and not HDTV. Having a true HD set, at this size (=<42"), is more about bragging rights than anything else.
Click to expand...

'practically no one' is definately an overstatement man. Yes, the average person pretty much doesn't know jack about the matter. However i consider myself moderately knowledgable at best and i could spot that no problem...come on that thing is LOW performance compared to most even lower end plasma hd or any lcd.
 
NSEXCESS said:
'practically no one' is definately an overstatement man. Yes, the average person pretty much doesn't know jack about the matter. However i consider myself moderately knowledgable at best and i could spot that no problem...come on that thing is LOW performance compared to most even lower end plasma hd or any lcd.
Click to expand...
Here is a more detailed thread on this topic. I am with the majority of people who believe that there is virtually NO difference in perceptible performance on the smaller panels (=<42") when viewed from normal viewing distances. The signal quality and type will have a greater effect on picture quality than whether the 42" monitor is EDTV or HDTV. Note that in today's signal provider market, most signals are still 480i or 480p (e.g., non-upconverted DVD), and so in these cases an EDTV would look BETTER than an HDTV set because the signal matches the monitor's native resolution.
 
Last edited:
unless you have digital programming, HDTV isn't worth it...

Unless there is a HDTV-tuner attached to HD-programming (HD-cable, HD-satellite), there is no difference between an EDTV unit & a HDTV unit... sheesh! :biggrin:

HDTV only has advantages when/if there is the optional HD-tuner hooked up to digital programming. Even now, digitial programming is very-very limited. Will digital programming become more mainstream in the future? Of-course. But not for a few more years.

(BTW, I have a 52" HDTV... I look back and second guess the decision.)
 
Actually HD transmission is quite widespread, and is growing every day. As some of you may be aware, FCC's current proposed date for analog cutoff is Dec 31, 2008. That means if you don't have a DTV by that time, you'll have to get a Digital-To-Analog set-top-box to work with your older TV since all transmissions will only be in digital.

Over the past two years the number of US TV households that are now passed by at least one cable operator offering HD service has increased from 37M to 92M. According to the NAB, nearly 1300 TV stations were on the air with some level of DTV programming as of Aug 2004, with 84% of all US TV households receiving at least 5 or more DTV channels. Even local channels have increased their DTV content to 504 unique channels in Jan of 2005, vs only 92 in Jan 2003.

Similarly, both DirecTV and Echostar are rapidly ramping up their HD content in the satellite space. Commercial satellite capacity being leased for HD broadcasting is forecasted to increase from US$47M today to US$324M by 2010. DirecTV also launched two satellites earlier this year, bringing 500 HD channels to most of the US, and are planning on launching an additional two satellites by 2007 which will add another 1000+ HD channels.

I just happened to have these numbers handy because I was doing some research into this recently.
 
Autophile said:
Here is a more detailed thread on this topic. I am with the majority of people who believe that there is virtually NO difference in perceptible performance on the smaller panels (=<42") when viewed from normal viewing distances. The signal quality and type will have a greater effect on picture quality than whether the 42" monitor is EDTV or HDTV. Note that in today's signal provider market, most signals are still 480i or 480p (e.g., non-upconverted DVD), and so in these cases an EDTV would look BETTER than an HDTV set because the signal matches the monitor's native resolution.
Click to expand...

Ok. For most channels this is true but my digital provider has a few HD channels which are definately not 480.

I agree with what you said for the most part, I wasn't just talking about cable though, but other sources. I know what you mean about matching the naive resolution. Damn annoying. I sacrifice a lot of picture quality on most channels so i can enjoy hd channels, but I think it's worth it.
 
Run a search for the EDTV vs HDTV topic over at the home theater enthusiasts forums, www.avsforum.com.

A large number of the plasma owners/enthusiasts over there strongly recommend the EDTVs (95% of the time they recommend the Panasonic sets).

Personally I just picked up a 42" HD panel for my family room. I figure that I get 8-10 years from a TV and would rather spend the few hundred extra for a set that technology will "catch up to" rather than outgrow.

There are some really fantastic deals out there for 42" HD plasmas right now and supposedly much more before the holidays!. HD plasmas are rumored to be into the $2000 or less price range by Dec/Jan.
 
I spent the extra money and bought a Samsung 46" LCD that displays true HD resolution (1920 x 1080). The so called HD plasmas can't display 1080i without downconverting so they are not true HD displays in my opinion either.

With a display capable of 1920 x 1080i you will be able to handle anything that will be transmitted for years to come.
 
CL65 Captain said:
Its an Enanced Def TV (EDTV), not true HD! Waste of money, like non-alcohalic beer.
Click to expand...

No it's not...95% of the time you can't tell the difference if you get a tier 1 product (Vizeo is tier 3) and actually I have read that non high def programs will look better on ED than HDTV TV's. Although, more and more programs are going to be HD soon. :smile:

I would however stay far away from refurbs.
 
Carguy! said:
I spent the extra money and bought a Samsung 46" LCD that displays true HD resolution (1920 x 1080). The so called HD plasmas can't display 1080i without downconverting so they are not true HD displays in my opinion either.

With a display capable of 1920 x 1080i you will be able to handle anything that will be transmitted for years to come.
Click to expand...

While it is true that at 1366x768 or 1024x768 resolutions for most plasma displays (aside from Hitachis) cannot display full-resolution 1080i images the current standards of broadcast HD requires that the display be capable of displaying 720p (which is well within an HD plasma's resolution) and/or 1080i. That being said, things seem to be moving now toward 1080p and there are sets on the horizon (and a few already on the market) that are capable but the vast majority of current HD sets cannot display 1080p natively. Does that make them all obsolete? Nope. The sky is the limit. Technology always moves on.

The reason I chose plasma versus DLP/LCD microdisplays is because I happen to be very sensitive to the so-called "screen door" and rainbow/shimmer visual eccentricities of those technologies which detract from my enjoyment. On the other hand LCD flat panel which has the best resolution has a more limited contrast and viewing angle and becomes cost prohibitive in the 40+ inch range. Plasma color, viewing angle, and brightness for daylight viewing is paramount in my family room setting. The thickness/thinness doesn't really matter to me.

In regard to Vizio as a brand. They have had some decent reviews on a few of their products since their inception. I've only seen a couple of their HD plasmas in a store and thought they were quite good especially their new 50" HD model. Vizio does not actually manufacture their plasma panels. In fact a surprising number of the "name brand" companies who sell plasmas do not make their own plasma glass. Much of the manufacturing these days is outsourced. There are only a select few plasma fabrication plants.
 
Last edited:

That being said, things seem to be moving now toward 1080p and there are sets on the horizon (and a few already on the market) that are capable but the vast majority of current HD sets cannot display 1080p natively. Does that make them all obsolete? Nope. The sky is the limit. Technology always moves on.


Well, sort of.

The ATSC standard specifies a bunch of resolutions for HD broadcasts, and 1080p is not one of them (highest is 1080i). You won't see anything being broadcast higher than 1080i for the lifetime of any set you buy today. Having a 1080p can be advantageous in that a scan-doubler can convert the 1080i signal to a progressive image, but it won't add any more spatial or temporal information.

Most so called HDTV's on the market today only go up to 720p anyways, and downconvert from 1080i. I don't know if this is necessarily a bad thing as most HD signals currently broadcast only go up to 720p anyways. Personally I wouldn't get anything lower than this. Scaling a 480p signal up to 720p is a very simply scale/interpolation operation (since it's exactly 1.5 times as tall) so the quality level is excellent.

Also, for those who can't tell the difference between 720p and 480p on a 42", your eyes are also not discerning enough to tell the difference between playing a DVD at native res on an EDTV vs upscaled on an HDTV. In my opinion, if you have the choice, get a 720p set rather than 480p, particularly for anything > 40".
 
Arshad said:

Also, for those who can't tell the difference between 720p and 480p on a 42", your eyes are also not discerning enough to tell the difference between playing a DVD at native res on an EDTV vs upscaled on an HDTV.
Click to expand...


No doubt that with a true HD program broadcast through a HDTV there is no contest, but I didn't feel like it was worth the extra $1500 especially since only a few programs broadcast in HD anyway. 95% of the time, we watch our TV with signals that are no better than DVD levels or 480 which on my Panasonic looks just as good as any HDTV, but most of that is due to the quality of the brand. I know they will be moving towards HD programming more and more in the future, but hopefully by then the cost of the plasma's will have gone down enough so that is isn't such a huge investment or the next best "it" product will be invented. :smile:

My eyes can tell the difference, but for only 5% of my viewing I didn't feel $1500 was worth it. :wink:
 
32" LCD HDTV $899... Free S/H

32" Hyundai ImageQuest LCD HDTV

Price: $899.00
Free S/H on orders over $499, expires 10/31

6053875.jpg


The specs don’t lie, nor do your eyes. See for yourself why industry insiders and consumers alike rave about the Hyundai ImageQuest’s stunning images, realistic colors and striking visual compositions. Aesthetically, the ultra-slim chassis, contemporary lines and handsome styling set this model apart from its competitors. Technologically, the HQL320WR has no peers. Here are the features and benefits: Picture in Picture multiple screen. Progressive scan technology. Panoramic 170-degree viewing angles. Built-in speakers. SRS WOW sound enhancement. AM/FM bands. Plug & Play ease of operation. And much, much more. This is a phenomenal product. For a price that is every bit as amazing as the Hyundai ImageQuest itself, imagine owning it. Imagine giving it to a loved one.

http://www.pcconnection.com/ProductDetail?sku=6053875&SourceID=k41970
 
Couple of questions.

Do these 42" plasma monitors connect directly to the cable wire coming out of the wall? (sorry if I sound ignorantabout this, I am)

Also, do these deals on that sits come with all needed wires to set up and go?

Basicly Im asking, If I order one of these am I going to need to have a professional set it up for me or am I going to be able to plug and play?

Thanks.
 
What you aren't taking into account is that with fixed pixel devices such as LCD's and Plasma's they can only display a 1080i image correctly if they have a resoultion of 1920x1080. Most high end rear projection TV's can make two passes with 1080i and display 1920x1080. So any device that has a fixed resolution must be capable of 1920x1080 to handle all of the HDTV broadcasts without downconverting the image. Watching a 1080i or 1080p picture on a true 1920x1080 display is incredible and looks better than any 720p image.

Arshad said:

That being said, things seem to be moving now toward 1080p and there are sets on the horizon (and a few already on the market) that are capable but the vast majority of current HD sets cannot display 1080p natively. Does that make them all obsolete? Nope. The sky is the limit. Technology always moves on.


Well, sort of.

The ATSC standard specifies a bunch of resolutions for HD broadcasts, and 1080p is not one of them (highest is 1080i). You won't see anything being broadcast higher than 1080i for the lifetime of any set you buy today. Having a 1080p can be advantageous in that a scan-doubler can convert the 1080i signal to a progressive image, but it won't add any more spatial or temporal information.

Most so called HDTV's on the market today only go up to 720p anyways, and downconvert from 1080i. I don't know if this is necessarily a bad thing as most HD signals currently broadcast only go up to 720p anyways. Personally I wouldn't get anything lower than this. Scaling a 480p signal up to 720p is a very simply scale/interpolation operation (since it's exactly 1.5 times as tall) so the quality level is excellent.

Also, for those who can't tell the difference between 720p and 480p on a 42", your eyes are also not discerning enough to tell the difference between playing a DVD at native res on an EDTV vs upscaled on an HDTV. In my opinion, if you have the choice, get a 720p set rather than 480p, particularly for anything > 40".
Click to expand...
 

Similar threads

drmanny3
Manny's High Definition Rear Projection TV $1350 OBO
Replies
0
Views
934
drmanny3
drmanny3
J
SONY FWD-32LX1 (SILVER) HDTV-Ready LCD Television
Replies
2
Views
1K
JDMHONDA
J
Back
Top