bubbajack

Two years ago I bought an analog Hitachi 60" Ultravision and at the time the picture quality was orders of magnitude better than any other big screen. At that time, the Hitachi Ultravision was so much better picture quality wise, that there was not even any debate on this point among videophiles.

I am now thinking of getting a new HDTV big screen, is the Hitachi still far better than all others in picture quality, or is there a new king-daddy?

Keep in mind that I want the same amount of screen real estate that I have now in the new widecreen set, so I will probably need 72+ inches to accomplish this. I am hoping to keep the price below $5000 at a good discount source.

By the way, I have that rough textured type screen, I hate screen protectors and those TV's with the smooth type screens, they have too much glare reflection and this TV has none and so I am spoiled with having none.

Thanks,

Cowboy Bill

ckolchak

not really answering your question, but are you aware for that kind of money you can get a decent front projection system that will knock your socks off?
there are some trade-offs, but i bought a 53" digital Sony last Jan. and sold it off in sept when i got a front projector for under $2K.
absolutely no looking back.

if your still set on a 350lb RP, i'd check out the RCAs also. the last few i've seen of these have looked very impressive and w/ The Phillips.
i used to like Hitachi, but i don't think they have the best digital RPs at this point in time.
at least not from what i've seen
.
just my $.02- take it for what its worth.

Xytraguptorh

I believe that Mitsubishi and Zenith are the only companies who make a 73" widescreen. For everyone else, 65" is the biggest. I agree with the previous poster. You should consider a digital projector if you're wanting that big of a screen.

Freeloader

ckolchak -- Hey I was hopin you might tell me a little more about your projector that you got. I'm in the market for a new widescreen, and I always thought that front projectors were way more expensive than $2K. Anyways,,,, any help would be greatly appreciated.

etp

Ok// I have the Hitachi 61sdx01b and its perfect/ some other models are not so perfect//also Sony makes a good wide screen TV//and I also considered a projector/Big bucks, but worth it!!

ckolchak

Freeloader:
i guess the $2k figure may be a little misleading.
the projector i have is a NEC LT150.
its been marketed almost exclusively as a presentation pj rather than a HT pj, but i, and a few hundred other happy owners, will tell you it works just dandy for home theater use.
i was lucky enough to be on one of the other forums when someone posted a price drop on these.
Dell had these priced wrong for a while so i was actually able to get it for about $1800.
it weighs 3.3 lbs and is probably smaller than a hardbound copy of LOTR.
i've made several posts here over the last few months, it would probably be eaiser if i just dug up the links and point you that way.
one thing i may not have mentioned earlier is the superior warrenty on these things.
at least for NEC- its 3 years no hassle replacement. if the thing ever goes bad, they'll fed-ex me another one the next day.
try that with your rptv.

you can start with this thread:

http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...ighlight=LT150

i highly recommend this for a first pj for just about anybody (its my first ) but if your at all interested, i'd urge you to try to find one quick. its been discontinued/replaced with a newer, more expensive model. you can still find a few here and there in the $2250-2600 range and they are a BARGIN at that price!

hahn

ckolchak,
thanks for making us aware of FP systems. i was looking at the dell software and accessory site and they have the NEC LT154. looks like a slightly better projector (higher resolution, AutoSense technology, etc.). they have it at $2600 and change. but with instant rebates and coupons, it can be brought down to under $2400. do you know anything about this projector? if it's the same price as the LT150, wouldn't it be better? or is there something about the LT150 that particularly suits it well for HT? oh, and also, i saw your other thread. replacement bulbs can be bought for $300 if you look around hard enough.

bubbajack

Have the front projection systems really gotten as good as rear projection? The last time I saw them, a couple years ago, they looked washed out. If people can buy a FP for less than a RP and it looks better, then why do RP outsell FP by about 50 to 1 in the $3000 price bracket?

This seems a bit fishy.

In other words, what's the catch with a $3000 or less FP system that keeps them from gaining hardly any market share?

Master J

There is no catch, just what you want your system to do. If all you are going to watch is movies or television in near darkness then a FP is for you.

However, if you like to watch alot of TV and do not have the proper set-up for a dedicated area for FP then a RP set is the way to go.

J

ckolchak

Master J pretty much said it.
FPs aren't for everybody (even some of the people that really do want them).
they usually require complete control of lighting
(if you like to sit w/ a spouse or family while they read, etc its going to be hard to find a pj w/ the lumens and contrast level that gives off a good picture with a light on). -which is one reason you don't see these at best buy or circuit city. you can usually find them at higher end electronics stores, but in those cases they have a vested interest in pushing things that have higher profit margins - like the $7000 sony fps or especially the $17000 runco.
Like Bubbajack, i didn't realize these had gotten as good as they had. The Sony i saw at the same time i purchased my rp last year certainly didn't impress me that much.
a couple reasons may have been;
-it wasn't in a completely darkened room
-the screen may have bee too big (the projected image was 12'-14' diag...thats pretty damn big)
-it was an LCD.

the projector that really got me worked up was the runco and that was a DLP. the difference being the pixel structure ( called screendoor) was much more obvious on the Sony lcd. this contributes to the picture having a very digital, 'electronic' look. also lcds don't, in general, produce very dark blacks ( although they are starting to get better). dlps aren't perfect in this area either, but come much closer (and really aren't far off of what you will see in a actual theater in this regard).
i have 0 complaints with black levels, contrast, or the rendition of colors.
i do notice screendoor , but its pretty rare and only pops up in certain circumstances.
i know there are very many people who enjoy their LCD pjs, but i don't think i could live with the problems i described.
dlps have their own detractors, mostly over something called 'rainbows'. it is too deep a topic to get into here, but i can honestly say, while they gave me serious cause for concern throughout my first 40-50 hrs of viewing- they are NOT a problem now.

there are some other considerations. my best advice for anyone who wants further info on these is to go thru the DLP, LCD board on avsforum.com
just about everybody there has a significant amount more experience w/ these than i do.

the best values , imo, are in the presentation pjs.
there is a definate bias AGAINST these in just about every popular HT magazine on the newsstand.
the only place you find positive, unbiased feedback on them, is on forums like this and avs.

and yes, bulb prices have dropped dramatically since that last thread. i picked up a spare for $381, then the next week they dropped below $300.
i still have 800 hrs left to go on my first though.

Hahn: i believe that model is an LCD. i know there have been other posts about it on avs, and most likely some user reviews. your best bet is to go over there and do a search on it.


i'll try to get some pics up soon of my set-up.

bubbajack

hahn -

one problem with that NEC LT154 may be the 400:1 contrast ratio, the LT150 is 800:1, so I am thinking the extra 100 lumens is not exactly an "upgrade" when you give up all that contrast.

I sure wish I could just upgrade my 60" Hitachi UX Ultravision without so many give-ups.


Here I am shopping for a new TV to "upgrade" my 60" Hitachi at the high end video store:

Me: "but the total screen area is a lot smaller on these widescreen RP's"
Answer: "you'll get used to it" or else "just get an FP"

Me: "but the blacks aren't very black on these FP's"
Answer: "you'll get used to it"

Me: "Why does the picture look pixelated?, somehow this doesn't seem like an upgrade"
Answer: "just give me your credit card, kid"

ckolchak

Bubbajack:
believe me, on a decent dlp the blacks are very consistent with blacks you see in a theater.
People that own crt's always say they they can't live with the blacks on a digital pj, but from everything i've read, the blacks you see on a crt pj, are considerably deeper, inkier than what you get if, for instance, you go see Lord Of The Rings today on the big screen.
as far as pixelation, again this is much more of an issue with LCD pjs.
the only time i can notice this on my pj are under certain circumstances for instance-
in The Fifth Element blue diva scene- on the long shots where the figure is against the planet, i can see the pixel structure around the edge of the figure. not to a great degree, but its there- however as soon as the scene switches to a close-up or medium shot this is completely gone.
its not like on an lcd where this aspect is consistent across the picture on every scene. it usually just becomes apparent in a small area of the screen where there is high contrast or a bright hot white. again this isn't defacto...it only is apparent occasionaly and really isn't a big deal.
especially when you take into account all the other positives.

your right to point out the contrast ratio-
thats always been one of the big strengths of the LT150.

as for trade-offs, it really depends on your viewing habits. once i bought my first rptv ( which i absolutely loved) i noticed all i really wanted to use it for was dvds.
as solely a movie display device, there was just something lacking... namely the immersive quality of sheer size.
you have to make the call as to what your most important needs/wants are.

it seems no matter how big you go, you get used to that size pretty soon and start to crave something even bigger (i still do even with the fp). the difference is with an fp it's possible to 'upgrade' the size without purchasing an entirely new system.

i have no vested interest in pushing these. i just remeber when i was in your situation last year, i wish i would have known there were other options out there-something i wasn't finding at CC, BB or any of the hi-end stores i went to.

to get back to the original question of this thread,
i don't think there is a great deal of difference among the major brands of digital RP's- ON HIGH QUALITY SOURCE MATERIAL. digital animation, excellant dvds , hi-def programming, etc will good on all brands.
I know that CC has some deal with Hitachi, which is why you see so many displayed in there stores. i'm sure they're fine sets.
if you plan to watch a lot of VHS material, i'd haul my vcr into the store and hook it up to any set your interested in. on lower quality sources, there IS a difference in digital tvs.

bubbajack

VHS?? YUCK!!

I haven't owned one of those snow & streak machines in years!!

I do watch a lot of DVD's in the dark, but I also love watching TV in giant size with some ambient room light.

Nothing like NFL Sunday Ticket/Direct TV on this giant 60" 4:3 aspect TV that has the same square footage as a
73.5" widescreen.

I sure can't afford a seperate setup for HDTV and another one just for movies.

All I want is a widescreen digital TV with HDTV that doesn't short me with what I currently have as far as screen real estate or contrast, black level, pixelation or anything else.

In other words, I want an "upgrade", not a "trade-off". But all the video dealers want is my money. And I can't afford a giant plasma screen for $16,000 (which would still be smaller than the Hitachi I have now)

ckolchak

since i don't watch any tv on mine, my knowledge in this area is really thin
however i believ that with an htpc you can feed in a tv signal from whatever source you have (dish, cable, etc) and it sould look great.
but if you'll be using the set 4-6 hours every night, your going to be going thru bulbs fairly quickly.
you may just be better off with another rptv.

it seemed like last time i looked (6-8 months ago) 16:9 sets were still overpriced in regards to 4:3's.
this may have changed a little since.
all i know is, everytime i'm buying dvd's, i'll saunter over to the rptv section to look around and i always leave the store with a smile on my face.


good luck in whatever you eventually decide on.
i hope you post your decision and impression when you finally get it locked in.

bubbajack

4-6 hours ?? Ha!!

Try 18-20 hours per day this Hitachi stays on per day.

By the way, the Hitachi has been absolutely perfect in reliability the 2 years since it was purchased new, and amazingly, the picture is as bright and sharp and vivid as the day I took it home.

I think the Mitsubishi WS-73909 may be what I need, it is 73" so the screen real estate is the same, though I can't find any mention of 720p in the specs and that worries me, though 480p and 1080i are mentioned.

What a monster TV..............muhahaha

Do you know where the cheapest place to buy a Mitsubishi is?

Xytraguptorh

bubbajack, since a front projector probably wouldn't be right for your needs, you should check out this site to compare screen sizes before buying: http://www.cavecreations.com/tv2.cgi

One thing to remember is that if you buy a widescreen TV and watch a lot regular 4:3 programming on it, you're probably not going to want to use the "normal" mode with the gray bars, especially if you have it on 12-18 hours per day. You'd easily have uneven screen wear (burn-in) from the gray bars within 6 months. Some of the stretch modes are really good, though. I love watching NFL using the stretch mode, which is slightly noticeable when you first get the TV and not at all noticeable later (my opinion anyway). So remember that when comparing screen sizes.

One thing about the Mits. 73" is that it usually costs about twice what you would pay for a 65" (although you might find a great deal on it).

Comparing screen sizes, since you'll probably want to use a stretch mode on the widescreen which would utilize all of the screen, a 65" widescreen would still be bigger than your 60" 4:3. The 65" is 1808 square inches vs. 1728 square inches for the 60". So it's not actually smaller, it's just...different. And widescreen DVDs will be much bigger on the widescreen TV.

I think the main point is that comparing the 4:3 size picture on a 16:9 TV to a 4:3 TV isn't very realistic if you won't be using the widescreen in 4:3 mode(which you shouldn't for the reasons mentioned above).

bubbajack

OK, I think I used the wrong terminology, I mean screen height is what I don't want to give up, and to have a widescreen with as tall of a picture vertically as my 60.5" Hitachi, would require 74.5" in a 16:9 TV.

Hey, if MS-NBC or CNN is burned into my screen from watching the war from their stationary logos that never go away, then they legally owe me new picture tubes, right? I mean, I did nothing wrong, just watched TV. I guess that is why FOX News's logo is moving now, because they are going to have to share the cost of my new TV as well.