[PCWorld]

Post your comments for Mitsubishi Unfurls a 92-inch 3D TV here

[CharlesRoyal]

92"

[waldojim]

Glossy screen? Fark that. I don't care what the excuse is, I will not settle for some glossed over screen reflecting everything at me. That is why I got rid of my CRT in favor of a flat screen years ago... Well, I went projection lately, but the same reasoning applies. Big screens+NO GLARE = WIN!

[RaeG.DeLeon]

92 inches? Sure! 3D tv? Of course! Rear projection? NO THANKS!! Size isn't everything (no pun intended) it sounds nice, but if you know anythingact about projection tv's you know about their angle issues. And the fact that it's a glossy screen just makes really expensive fancy mirror. The majority of the consumers that would like a 92" are going to want to hook-up surround sound systems and game systems, who wouldn't? Again, if you have any experience with projection Tv's you know that the life of your 92 incher will be short. So if I can't hook up a game system or surround sound and im unable to enjoy the 92inces to its full capacity, there is no logical reason to purchase such non-sense.

[waldojim]

RaeG.DeLeon, on 22 January 2011 - 02:17 PM, said:

92 inches? Sure! 3D tv? Of course! Rear projection? NO THANKS!! Size isn't everything (no pun intended) it sounds nice, but if you know anythingact about projection tv's you know about their angle issues. And the fact that it's a glossy screen just makes really expensive fancy mirror. The majority of the consumers that would like a 92" are going to want to hook-up surround sound systems and game systems, who wouldn't? Again, if you have any experience with projection Tv's you know that the life of your 92 incher will be short. So if I can't hook up a game system or surround sound and im unable to enjoy the 92inces to its full capacity, there is no logical reason to purchase such non-sense.

I own 2 rear projection screens (one DLP, both HD) and have zero angle issues. But I do have colors that my LCD panels never seem to reproduce, and contrast levels that they cannot hope to match... also - the rear projections have BLACK! Real, true, honest black. Not grey, or purple, or almost black. Game systems on a rear projection? Work just fine - that was an issue with OLD SYSTEMS not the newer ones. Surround sound? What on earth do you think that has to do with a projection TV?

This post has been edited by bcappel: 24 January 2011 - 10:07 AM
Reason for edit: No personal attacks

[Nuke61]

waldojim, on 22 January 2011 - 02:44 PM, said:

I own 2 rear projection screens (one DLP, both HD) and have zero angle issues. But I do have colors that my LCD panels never seem to reproduce, and contrast levels that they cannot hope to match... also - the rear projections have BLACK!

I switched from a rear projector to a plasma because of angle issues, and according to http://www.dlptvrevi...television.html it's still an issue, "VIEWING ANGLE
Manufacturers claim viewing angles of 160-170° for both LCD and DLP displays. The viewable picture at these extreme angles is quite impressive for both technologies. The picture on the LCD displays remained consistent throughout all viewing angles. This was not the case with the DLP TVs. Viewing a DLP set from various angles will impact the overall color accuracy of the image. There is a considerable shift in the tints when changing vertical positions. You will notice this if you shift positions (i.e., stand up or sit down) while watching your DLP unit." -- lot's of reviews and first hand reports say that viewing angle on a RP is still less than on a good LCD, and not anywhere near that of a plasma.

The black levels are much better than they used to be on a newer quality LCD. I have a 58" plasma and a 60" LCD and the black levels are better on the plasma, but not nearly as big a difference as I saw a few years ago.

[Nuke61]

RaeG.DeLeon, on 22 January 2011 - 02:17 PM, said:

The majority of the consumers that would like a 92" are going to want to hook-up surround sound systems and game systems, who wouldn't? Again, if you have any experience with projection Tv's you know that the life of your 92 incher will be short. So if I can't hook up a game system or surround sound and im unable to enjoy the 92inces to its full capacity, there is no logical reason to purchase such non-sense.

The majority of consumers who could afford to purchase a 92" TV is going to be vanishingly small, and I suspect that if you can afford to purchase of TV that costs closer to $10K than $1000, the price of bulbs will be a non-issue. Who's going to buy these things to hook up to game systems? Maybe pro athletes? When I read the article title of "Unfurls" a 92" TV, I took it to mean the definition, which is along the lines of unroll or open up. I was looking forward to reading about some new OLED or spray on technology, not just another big RP TV...

[waldojim]

Nuke61, on 22 January 2011 - 06:18 PM, said:

waldojim, on 22 January 2011 - 02:44 PM, said:

I own 2 rear projection screens (one DLP, both HD) and have zero angle issues. But I do have colors that my LCD panels never seem to reproduce, and contrast levels that they cannot hope to match... also - the rear projections have BLACK!

I switched from a rear projector to a plasma because of angle issues, and according to http://www.dlptvrevi...television.html it's still an issue, "VIEWING ANGLE
Manufacturers claim viewing angles of 160-170° for both LCD and DLP displays. The viewable picture at these extreme angles is quite impressive for both technologies. The picture on the LCD displays remained consistent throughout all viewing angles. This was not the case with the DLP TVs. Viewing a DLP set from various angles will impact the overall color accuracy of the image. There is a considerable shift in the tints when changing vertical positions. You will notice this if you shift positions (i.e., stand up or sit down) while watching your DLP unit." -- lot's of reviews and first hand reports say that viewing angle on a RP is still less than on a good LCD, and not anywhere near that of a plasma.

The black levels are much better than they used to be on a newer quality LCD. I have a 58" plasma and a 60" LCD and the black levels are better on the plasma, but not nearly as big a difference as I saw a few years ago.

Again, as an owner of said TV's I can say, that problem is not what you make it out to be.

[Nuke61]

waldojim, on 22 January 2011 - 08:50 PM, said:

Again, as an owner of said TV's I can say, that problem is not what you make it out to be.

How did I make it out to be? I'm not saying it's a horrible problem, just that it's one of the drawbacks when compared to LCD or Plasma. It also has advantages that you've mentioned, but smaller viewing angle, particularly vertical, is one of the disadvantages. It may or may not mean anything to the particular buyer. I know that there are disadvantages to plasma and LCD too, that's why I have one of each. The LCD is in the brightly lit room and the plasma is in the room where we can control the light, at least to some degree.

This post has been edited by Nuke61: 23 January 2011 - 06:40 AM

[waldojim]

Nuke61, on 23 January 2011 - 06:25 AM, said:

waldojim, on 22 January 2011 - 08:50 PM, said:

Again, as an owner of said TV's I can say, that problem is not what you make it out to be.

How did I make it out to be? I'm not saying it's a horrible problem, just that it's one of the drawbacks when compared to LCD or Plasma. It also has advantages that you've mentioned, but smaller viewing angle, particularly vertical, is one of the disadvantages. It may or may not mean anything to the particular buyer. I know that there are disadvantages to plasma and LCD too, that's why I have one of each. The LCD is in the brightly lit room and the plasma is in the room where we can control the light, at least to some degree.

The only limit to the viewing angle was vertical... but I don't watch TV standing up. Or play games standing up either. as for extreme horizontal angles... they are extreme. Who is realistically going to sit 175degrees off center of the TV and try to watch that? Anything over ~120 drives me nuts. I took the time to weight advantages and disadvantages of each technology, and then took the time to consider which ones are realistic disadvantages vs realistic ones. Viewing angle? Non-issue. Plasma Burn in? Huge issue. I play a lot of games that leave up static portions of an image. Sure plasmas have ways to removing the burn in a bit, but only by burning the rest of the screen. LCD color, contrast, and lag? Also a big issue for me. I want an image as close to accurate as possible, and without ghosting. 3D? Yep, I wanted a 3d-tv for the next set, and I wanted one that is not dependent on specific glasses. I also wanted a set that doesn't cause everything else in the house to "flicker" like Sony, Panasonic, and Samsung sets do.

Are there limitations to DLP? Yes. Are they limitations that actually are a problem, or just hyped up problems? You decide. Are there more advantages than disadvantages for someone like me? Yep. Take your pick, but while you watch TV on the (relatively) little plasma space heater, I will continue to enjoy my 65" Home Theater quality picture.

[Nuke61]

waldojim, on 23 January 2011 - 01:38 PM, said:

Take your pick, but while you watch TV on the (relatively) little plasma space heater, I will continue to enjoy my 65" Home Theater quality picture.

Yeah, touting the picture while talking about gaming and burn-in being a big issue.

[waldojim]

Nuke61, on 23 January 2011 - 04:14 PM, said:

waldojim, on 23 January 2011 - 01:38 PM, said:

Take your pick, but while you watch TV on the (relatively) little plasma space heater, I will continue to enjoy my 65" Home Theater quality picture.

Yeah, touting the picture while talking about gaming and burn-in being a big issue.

Hey, my TV has to survive multiple purposes. I can only watch the same movies so many times. How often do you find yourself watching Lord of the Rings? Me, not often, but when I do, I want the best picture I can get. Not the burn in from my last 8 hours of COD.

[Nuke61]

waldojim, on 23 January 2011 - 04:53 PM, said:

Hey, my TV has to survive multiple purposes.

I understand, I just thought it was kind of funny

This post has been edited by Nuke61: 23 January 2011 - 05:15 PM

[waldojim]

Nuke61, on 23 January 2011 - 05:12 PM, said:

waldojim, on 23 January 2011 - 04:53 PM, said:

Hey, my TV has to survive multiple purposes.

I understand, I just thought it was kind of funny

Yea in a way it is... but that goes further to the point though of what I was saying. These days, TV's are used for game systems as much as anything else. Burn it IS an issue in many homes. So the question really becomes, is LCD quality Good Enough ™? For the Good Enough ™ generation (and yes I am having fun with this), that answer is sure. Mostly because LCD is Super SLIM! But, for the money, I will keep my DLP. Show me an LCD panel at 65", with 3d, the color depth, and contrast of a DLP for less than $1,000. (hell, try to find one under $3,000!)

This post has been edited by waldojim: 23 January 2011 - 06:07 PM

[zing]

I saw the 82 inch, it looked bright and amazing in the TV show room when compared to other TV's. Of course there were LCD's who's max brightness where higher than this one, but people who watch them turn down LCD's brightness from max anyway. This TV was as bright as the LCD's provided the LCD was not maxed out. The big screen experience made the LCD's in the show room look like toys. I'll be going back to look some more and thinking about getting the 73 or 82 inch over their LCD's to put in a big room. I've never seen the 92 inch though. I've also heard the 3D is awesome on these big sets many times.

I saw the 82 inch, it looked bright and amazing in the TV show room when compared to other TV's. Of course there were LCD's who's max brightness where higher than this one, but people who watch them turn down LCD's brightness from max anyway. This TV was as bright as the LCD's provided the LCD was not maxed out. The big screen experience made the LCD's in the show room look like toys. I'll be going back to look some more and thinking about getting the 73 or 82 inch over their LCD's to put in a big room. I've never seen the 92 inch though. I've also heard the 3D is awesome on these big sets many times.

I saw the 82 inch, it looked bright and amazing in the TV show room when compared to other TV's. Of course there were LCD's who's max brightness where higher than this one, but people who watch them turn down LCD's brightness from max anyway. This TV was as bright as the LCD's provided the LCD was not maxed out. The big screen experience made the LCD's in the show room look like toys. I'll be going back to look some more and thinking about getting the 73 or 82 inch over their LCD's to put in a big room. I've never seen the 92 inch though. I've also heard the 3D is awesome on these big sets many times.

[bey4life]

Thank you Mitsubibhi!I have the 73'73733 series we love this set and can't wait to pick up the new 92" set.PS3,Roku,and Apple tv works and looks great.

[bey4life]

Thank you Mitsubibhi!I have the 73'73733 series we love this set and can't wait to pick up the new 92" set.PS3,Roku,and Apple tv works and looks great.

Thank you Mitsubibhi!I have the 73'73733 series we love this set and can't wait to pick up the new 92" set.PS3,Roku,and Apple tv works and looks great.

[AlexJensen]

I saw this TV in person at American TV and it is amazing. The size of the unit is "massive." I currently own a 65" Mitsubishi HDTV that I purchased in 2000 and it is still kicking. The only TV that I would consider as an alternative is the Sharp Elite 70". The 3d on the Mitsubishi is a lot better from what I have seen, and you can find these 92's for $4,000 nowadays.

[AlexJensen]

I saw this TV in person at American TV and it is amazing. The size of the unit is "massive." I currently own a 65" Mitsubishi HDTV that I purchased in 2000 and it is still kicking. The only TV that I would consider as an alternative is the Sharp Elite 70". The 3d on the Mitsubishi is a lot better from what I have seen, and you can find these 92's for $4,000 nowadays.