Okay boys and girls,

I'm picking up a 27 inch flat screen tonight. I have gotten quoted really good prices (a little over cost) on either the:

Sony WEGA KV27FV16 (the model with Picture in Picture!)
-or-

JVC 27F802

I was leaning towards the Sony (just because I've always had good luck with them), and the guy at the store recomended the JVC too. He said it has a "4 meg buffer" that helps clean up the picture a little better than the sony. He said you could tell the difference in TV broadcast shows quite a bit.

He also stated that the JVC had better color, and the extra benifit of having another set of RCA inputs on the back of the JVC (2 sets instead on 1 on the WEGA).

I'm in the process of looking up any info on the net at work today, before I go pick either up tonight. Any and all input is greatly appreciated.

Also, if anyone knows any good links on info (possible comparisons) on these 2 sets, that would be the best!

Thanks in advance all! :D

[Edited by Keyser Soze on 02-08-01 at 01:57 PM]

That salesmen was feeding you a line. 4 meg buffer? Perhaps he said 3D Comb Filter or something like that but I doubt it. Anyhow, given the choice, I'd get the wega if you can afford it. Great sets with an easy to use service menu for fixing any problems. My set(20" KV20F12) looks great once I set the proper brightness, picture, etc so you don't need to worry about bad image quality. Stil though it's your call. I'd get the Wega but it's up to you. Also, another excellent option would be the 27" Panasonic TAU. It is alot like the Wega but a little less expensive(even the cabinet on it looks like a Wega). good luck.

I would go with the Wega too. If you want to compare at http://www.audioreview.com . They should have some info you may be looking for. These are owners, not professional review though.

Keyser,

IMO, buying a wega that is smaller than 32" is almost like wasting your money on a fancy TV that you will eventually replace anyway. I suggest only buying a wega if you're sure that you're going to keep it for a long while.

I assume you're not looking at the 32" either because of space restrictions or cash limitations. If it's cash limitations, always remember that Best Buy is running a no-interest-same-as-cash deal until June 2002. That's 15 months at no interest to pay off a $1000 TV.

I'm in love with my Wega and am quite happy with the choice I made. The only downfall is that it's a real bitch to get upstairs because it's so damn heavy.

Does the JVC have component inputs? This is also a key factor, as the Wega does and the picture difference is amazing when compared to that of composite inputs.

The best thing I can recommend for you right now is to print out specifications of each TV, lay 'em side by side, and figure out what specs are most important to you and make your purchase from there.

I'd have to agree with DTSC on this one. Less than a 32" Wega and you might be itching for an upgrade fairly soon. However, if you're set on a 27" I'd highly recommend the Wega. This is definitely the best set I've owned and well-worth the $$$ spent.

Make sure you bring the new set to the Outback :)

Thanks for the input.

As far as size, and price. I'm looking at the 27 just for a tv in my room. Don't need anything bigger (and don't want to carry up to the 2nd floor) a 32 or bigger. Over time, I'll p/u a 36' for downstairs, I still have a 50' Mitsi that's downstairs, and that is fine for now.

This is basically the size I'm looking at, and for the price, I can't beat it.

I can get the 27' Wega for <B><I>$499.00</B></I> (Basically a great deal). What do you guys think on the price?

Any other input? Thanks again!

[Edited by Keyser Soze on 02-09-01 at 02:28 PM]

Keyser,

I have the Wega. Bought it when the old bedroom TV blew a couple months ago. We were gonna get a cheap set, but when we saw the Sony, we were hooked. Price is great, the same that I could negotiate with the Good Guys back then. The TV is HEAVY as others have mentioned, so be forewarned.

WE (wife and I) LOVE THE SET!!! We also have sony components the s-300 dvd/surround setup in the bedroom and it works great together. Our room/stand could only hold a 27" and it's more than sufficient. When they come out with a widescreen direct view 35+ wega my old 35" upstairs is gonna go.

Have had NO problems with the set. Picture quality is terrific. Got the model I think you are looking at (FS12) which does not have dual tuners. We never use PIP anyway.

As for the other guys, remember the 27" for some of us is a second or third TV, not a main one. So, before you get on people's case about the size, it might help to know. I don't want a behemouth tv in my bedroom and am sure others feel the same.

Get the Wega!!!
 

Me and my g/f have had the 27" FS12 (model below the one your thinking of) and we absolutely love it. The picture is outstanding. Especially in 16x9 mode with an anamorphic dvd. Video games and cable look great as well. I can't give you a direct comparison though, because I've never even seen the JVC or know anything about it.

The first thing you will want, after watching an anamorphic dvd being squeezed, is a bigger display.

No...not necessarily. It all depends on how close you are to the television and what you are upgrading from?
I JUST bought the 27" Wega (Base Model) tonight going from a 20" Wega. All I can say is WOW!!!! The screen is A LOT bigger than I thought it would be. I was thinking about getting a 32" but lesser quality, but I am sure glad I went with the 27" Wega. The Anamorphic screen ROX and for $570 you can hardly beat it.

GO WITH THE WEGA MAN, especially for the $518 that you mentioned. That TV that you want (the higher end) goes for $800 reguraly!!!

Just so you guys know though. The ONLY difference between the Base Model and the High End model is PIP and their comb filter. The style is a little different two....but those two feature I mentioned about are the big ones. For me I don't want PIP and don't need the super duper nice comb filter (the base model one still has a good one) because I bought the TV to primarily watch DVDs and that bypasses the comb filter.

I can't wait to calibrate it tommorow and pop in Toy Story!!!!

I too prefer 27" 4:3 sets and c35" 16:9 sets to larger ones. Perhaps if I was less critical or viewed from further away I wouldn't, but with conventional NTSC (not HDTV) the lines of resolution become very obvious at 32" and up on direct view sets. Our viewing is on a 27" from about 10' away, incorporating component connections. We auditioned high-end 32" and 36" sets, but they didn't hold a candle to the 27" ones in this situation.

Component connections are certainly not wasted on on 27" monitors. In fact the key advantages of YIQ connections are actually often easier to discern on smaller sets, as the primary indicators of lesser connectivity are more obvious.

Sure, as this applies to home viewing it is somewhat subjective and applicable only to viewing room configurations... But the industry professionals that I know and work with have very high end 27" sets at home (and considering this stuff is tax deductable, that's saying something for image quality;)). And in professional settings when film is transfered to video, color corrected, whatever, it's rarely if ever on a screen larger than 27" (usually smaller). The only large displays in post houses are usually plasma displays in lobbies or large sets in meeting rooms. About eight years ago I supervised a transfer of about 8000' of B&W film at FilmWorkers in Chicago on a c20" monitor, with calibrated bias lighting, and the image was so good that I still think about it all the time...

I couldn't find a pic from 525 Post, but here's a room at CCI (where my friend has worked on many DVDs we all own)... You can see the critical monitor is not large:
http://www.ccipost.com/telecine.html

If you look at professional monitors a lot, 36" sets like the Sony WEGAs look like a screen full of horizintal lines. A DVD (for example) is encoded with a certain number of lines of resolution... A 27" and a 36" television display the same number of lines of resolution. Thus the lines are further apart on the larger set and the image is simply not as sharp. This is less discernable from futher away, but it's how it is. And yes, my point is somewhat moot regarding a 36" Sony WEGA that has a 16:9 mode used for viewing anamorphically enhanced DVDs. But I've seen the 27" do this and it is an even sharper and better image. In fact one of my best friends wanted a 32" Sony, but chose the 27" after comparing them side by side in 16:9 mode and identical source material.

Point is, size is irrelevant on a showroom floor. Consider your viewing environment and these facts. Good luck. Oh, I too would choose the Sony;)


Wow, I really rambled on there... Sorry about that guys. It's late and The Balvenie is present:)

[Edited by reverb on 02-09-01 at 03:27 AM]

Another vote for the Wega. I picked up the upper end 27" last year, and I love it. Great video, lots of features, lots of different ways to connect. Good luck!

I've had a 27" Wega and don't want a bigger TV any time soon. My couch is only 6 feet or so away from the tv, so it's more than big enough. Plus, 27" is the ideal size for Video Games since most controller cords are 6', and I play video games as much, if not more, than I watch DVDs/TV.

Thanks for all the input guys!
 

I went with the Wega!

You can see my "price matching" story here:
http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...threadid=79733

Still in the box, can't wait to get home, and hook it up!

I only have about eight feet and am nursing along an old 27" tube. I have grown tired of staring at a box and wouldn't mind refocusing my vision on something wide. I have found that I can get very close to an RPTV once the scan lines are dispatched. Six to eight feet from a 56" 16x9 screen with no lines is no problem at all.

That is one of the best deals I have ever heard of. I just picked up the base model for the 27" Wegas for $569.99 and I thought I was getting a good deal :p

Welcome to the club Keyser Soze! Enjoy the set!


:johnwoo:

Now Keyser, all you need to do is make some mattes for your TV and you will be set :)

mattes? :confused:

Yes, mattes. You make them out of very black material, like foam board or of the like, and you put them on your TV to 'black" out the gray bars that are above and below widescreen dvds. It makes a HUGE difference and only costs $10 or so.

Mattes are cool... I spend less than a dollar to make a set out of black posterboard.

Yeah mine costed about $10. I got some nice Extremely Black Matte Board, some velcro, and some elastic so I would not have to put velcro on my Wega. It rox!! Makes you think you are looking at a true 16:9 TV :)

So are you going to use mattes on your 16:9 TV? Just curious.

Huh? Um, I don't have a 16:9 TV. But if I did, I would use mattes for the 2.35:1 Aspect Ratio.

I understood that you don't yet have a 16:9 TV, but was just curious if you would use mattes for 1.85:1 and 2.35-2.42:1 AR films on a 16:9 TV. You said that the mattes made you think you were watching a 16:9 TV, and I didn't understand the correlation since you would use mattes with a 16:9 TV too;)

Um.......well if you use mattes for 1.85:1 for a 4:3 TV it will make you think you are looking at a 16:9 TV.

No, using mattes for 1.78:1 on a 4:3 TV will make you think you are looking at a 16:9 TV at native AR;)

Sorry, don't mean to give you a hard time, it's just the only thread that interests me tonight:)

[Edited by reverb on 02-13-01 at 08:31 PM]

Alright, Alright you win...lol. But 1.85 comes close :). I was just saying man......it does make you think you are looking at a 16:9 TV even if a 16:9 TV would still have the "black bars" on top or bottom.

But seriously, Mattes ROCK!!!

Sony Wegas are ichiban, however if you're going to go bigger don't get a Sony RPTV from my studies in stores they get the worst ratings.

I've never got the appeal of mattes. The black bars and the rest of the tv don't distract me. If I put mats up I wouldn't think I was watching a 16x9 TV, I'd think I was watching my 27" Wega with matte board attached to it. ;)

Well the idea is they dissapear in a dark room. If you are watching in a lit room, I dont think they would help too much. I havent really tried though.

I guess I could see how some people would like them in a dark room. Myself, I just don't really notice the black bars or tv anyway whether watching in the dark or with a light on. When watching at night I usually have my g/f's lava lamp on. TV in the dark is too hard on my eyes.

Yeah...if you do not watch the TV in a dark room than mattes are no good. It sounds like you contrast and brightness levels are up too high if it hurts your eyes watching tv in the dark....don't knock mattes till you try them. They are simply amazing if done right.

Looks like we're getting off of Keyser's original topic.

However....
Most experts agree that watching TV in a completely dark room is not the most effective. A few weeks ago, there was a thread here about using a 6700K light behind your screen to make the colors look best. (Note: most florescent (also spelled fluorescent) lights are around 2300K. Too warm.)

And....
It seems to me that if you are watching in a correctly lit room with a VVega, you should use SILVER mattes to match the rest of the VVega case. Then you wouldn't be seeing "black" bars. :)


[Edited by Scott on 02-14-01 at 08:21 AM]

Scott... Seems that your equally off topic;)

What you are referring to is bias lighting, and I highly recommend it. Not to disparage mattes, but I never encounter them in edit or transfer suites and I won't use them at home. And I rarely view CRTs (TVs) in total darkness, but always with some ambient light. Bias lighting is often used in professional post houses as it provides for a reference 'white point' while viewing (bias light color temp is monitored).

I would point out that most flourescent lights are far cooler than a 2300K average... More like c4000K or higher average. Though they usually have a discontinous spectrum and color accuracy is iffy. Even the small 'screw in bulb' variations, marketed for power efficiency and such, are metering over around 3800K and up for me.

Nope, my contrast and brightness are fine, both calibrated with Avia. I just don't like watching tv in total darkness. I'm not into home theater enough to spend money on a bias light, so I just use the lava lamp as it puts out very little light, but enough to save my eyes. :)

Yes, I am, but we want Keyser to have the best possible look at his new VVega, don't we?

My estimate on "most" was based on a quick survey at several local hardware stores and big-box supply houses. What K would you recommend?

(Additionally: It shouldn't be too hard to install a fluorescent fixture in back of a HT center. I wouldn't pay for a real bias light if I could make one myself. Just have to find a 6700K bulb, or whatever reverb recommends. Seems to me that this would also give me a work light for the countless times I change the cabling in the back.)

Well, the corrected white point of a properly calibrated TV should be 6500K, so a 6500K bias light would be optimal. Regarding the work light type fixtures, if you are being attentive to detail, you would need to make sure that while the bulb is one color temperature the plastic 'lens' doesn't effect the color temp or discolor over time.

Incidentally, I don't use a bias light at home, but I have experienced professional setups that sold me on it, without question. Check out my fisrt post in this thread for details

All I can say is don't know Mattes till you try them...but like I said before, it would be a waste if you don't watch movies in the dark.

Thanks for the "matte info", gonna check that out.

Just FYI, I watched the Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon DVD on the Wega last night in 16x9. <B>WOW!</B>

All I have to say is:

CTHD+WEGA=:D

Thanks for the info all,