#1 Edited by Celtic_34 (1220 posts) -

Had a Panasonic 32 in 720p/1080i tv all last gen no problems. Really nice tv with low input lag. Online games were super smooth and everything. I've since brough both these TV's home and not sure which one to go with. One is pretty standard 39" 1080p 60 hz. Capable of the fake 120hz with motion on. The other one is 1080p 40 inch 120hz(240 cmr) with 3d enabled. I'm not sure I need 3d or 120hz. I messed around with it and it's nice to have the smoothing features though but seemed to have more problems with that tv too. possibly more input lag and the ps4 doing funky stuff at times. The picture did seem smoother though but could be my imagination. I am a nitpicker when it comes to ghosting and framerates. I hate that stuff but trying to keep it below $500. The 6030 is $499. The 5000 series is $369 so a pretty good price difference. $150 and the 5000 just doesn't have any bells and whistles.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/samsung-39-class-38-5-8-diag--led-1080p-60hz-hdtv/8812414.p?id=1218901331219&skuId=8812414&st=categoryid$abcat0101001&cp=1&lp=1

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/samsung-40-class-40-diag--led-1080p-120hz-3d-hdtv/8340069.p?id=1218873350743&skuId=8340069&st=categoryid$abcat0101001&cp=1&lp=4

These are the two best tvs I can find in my price range. Panasonic also has a 120 hz smart tv for $449 and sharp has a 42 inch 120hz tv for $429 without 3d or smart. I don't have any interest in a smart tv though and have read the Panasonic tv has issues with ghosting anyways. Done a lot of research. I just can't decide. The Samsung 5000 series seems to be the best for input lag and picture etc but it's 60hz. Just barebones.

#2 Edited by jasean79 (2338 posts) -

Still deciding, huh?

Well, judging from your post, chances are you're going from an older LCD/Plasma to a new LED, correct? So, that right there will be a noticeable improvement. Personally, I like LG televisions. While they're not among your choices, I say go with the one that fits your budget best. I don't know much about 60 hz versus 120 hz, and that was never a factor in my buying decision. I always look at picture quality, price, size, and brand. Amazon is very helpful in the decision process because you get a nice mix of subjective/objective reviews there, moreso than Best Buy where someone will give it 5 stars across the board and write, "Love this TV - looks great. Buy it!!"

#3 Edited by Celtic_34 (1220 posts) -

The main thing that is keeping me from making a decision is the price and whether the extra hertz makes any difference as far as smoothness when it comes to gameplay. I've messed around with the clearmotion features on both TV's and had them here. I can't really see them head to head though. I've read the more expensive tv actually has more problems with input lag as well. Both have really good picture quality. I just hate lag or any sort of ghosting and am not going to spend a ton for a plasma either. I think with led TV's you are going to have some ghosting or judder effect regardless. I don't know if 120 hz makes any difference at all.

From my testing what I can determine is both tvs are exactly the same. The cheaper one has less problems, less feautures to mess around with. The other tv is nice because it actually has those features to mess around with though. This one doesn't. It's pretty cut and dry. If i'm getting som elag in a game the other tv I can at least change some settings and mess around. This one I can't really. It does have led motion which supposedly bumps it up to 120 hertz but it's fake to my knowledge. I turn it on. It just makes the screen darker. Seems like a total gimmick. The other tv actually had some motion/smoothing stuff tha tmade a noticeable difference. Whether it was good or not that's another story.

#4 Edited by BattleSpectre (5954 posts) -

Samsung are the best in the business in my opinion. I have people's jaws drop when they see my Samsung 200Hz 60" LED in motion.

#5 Edited by Celtic_34 (1220 posts) -

yeah both tvs picture quality is nearly identical and looks great. Really nice tvs. I just don't know if $150 is worth it for the extra hz or 3d. They are nearly identical tvs otherwise.

#6 Edited by jasean79 (2338 posts) -

yeah both tvs picture quality is nearly identical and looks great. Really nice tvs. I just don't know if $150 is worth it for the extra hz or 3d. They are nearly identical tvs otherwise.

I would say if you don't foresee ever needing the 3D or Smart features, then go with the cheaper. Technology is ever changing anyways, so in 5 years 4k will be more prevalent and TVs of today will be outdated.

#7 Edited by Jimmy_Russell (481 posts) -

I would never do gaming on a TV, that's really weak man. Go for the best money can buy, get the BenQ XL series monitor with a 7.1 surround sound headset.

#8 Posted by GTR12 (9075 posts) -

I would never do gaming on a TV, that's really weak man. Go for the best money can buy, get the BenQ XL series monitor with a 7.1 surround sound headset.

Don't listen to this guy TC ^^

Did you happen to calibrate the TV's for your living room or did you just leave it at default?

#9 Posted by DSTYR_OF_WORLDS (9 posts) -

I love my 32" Vizio M-Class. the 120 Hz is great for the detail, and it doubles as a sweet PC Monitor.

#10 Edited by DJ_Headshot (6178 posts) -

In your price range the Vizio Ei Series looks like a good good for gaming. Its barebones as it lacks 3D and 120hz does nothing according to CNET but has good image quality for a lower end lcd and low input lag this is what really matters for gaming not 120hz or 3D although those can be nice. I'd go for the 48" version you can get one refurbished right now for around $500. The extra screen real estate will be worth it over the samsungs 44% more screen space vs the 40" Samsung and 51.48% more then the 39".

#11 Edited by PS4hasNOgames (1244 posts) -

Samsung are the best in the business in my opinion. I have people's jaws drop when they see my Samsung 200Hz 60" LED in motion.

wrong. I have samsung and I have sony....sony looks MUCH nicer than my samsung, both are LED....and by the way 240 hz actually gives more lag than 120, I had to switch my settings from 240 to 120 because the lag was horrible.

I would say don't go any lower than 40 inch, it really makes a difference, and if you can afford a sony get it, if not then samsung and and sharp are good too.

#12 Edited by BattleSpectre (5954 posts) -

@ps4hasnogames said:

@BattleSpectre said:

Samsung are the best in the business in my opinion. I have people's jaws drop when they see my Samsung 200Hz 60" LED in motion.

wrong. I have samsung and I have sony....sony looks MUCH nicer than my samsung, both are LED....and by the way 240 hz actually gives more lag than 120, I had to switch my settings from 240 to 120 because the lag was horrible.

I would say don't go any lower than 40 inch, it really makes a difference, and if you can afford a sony get it, if not then samsung and and sharp are good too.

What do you mean wrong? There is no right or wrong answer the truth of the fact is when I was at the store looking at which TV to buy, I was looking at my Samsung and the equivalent of what Sony has to offer and the Samsung blew it away in both picture quality and smoothness.

The Sony TV was kind of ghosting whereas the Samsung TV was smooth as silk in motion compared to it. Say what you will but I'd like to see a Sony TV produce the picture quality mine does in both games and movies, especially the way I've calibrated it.

The only downside to LED technology is ghosting which is inevitable, so of course a decent Plasma would smash both our TV's out of the park ;)

#13 Edited by PS4hasNOgames (1244 posts) -

@ps4hasnogames said:

@BattleSpectre said:

Samsung are the best in the business in my opinion. I have people's jaws drop when they see my Samsung 200Hz 60" LED in motion.

wrong. I have samsung and I have sony....sony looks MUCH nicer than my samsung, both are LED....and by the way 240 hz actually gives more lag than 120, I had to switch my settings from 240 to 120 because the lag was horrible.

I would say don't go any lower than 40 inch, it really makes a difference, and if you can afford a sony get it, if not then samsung and and sharp are good too.

What do you mean wrong? There is no right or wrong answer the truth of the fact is when I was at the store looking at which TV to buy, I was looking at my Samsung and the equivalent of what Sony has to offer and the Samsung blew it away in both picture quality and smoothness.

The Sony TV was kind of ghosting whereas the Samsung TV was smooth as silk in motion compared to it. Say what you will but I'd like to see a Sony TV produce the picture quality mine does in both games and movies, especially the way I've calibrated it.

The only downside to LED technology is ghosting which is inevitable, so of course a decent Plasma would smash both our TV's out of the park ;)

complete bullshit. my ps4 looks a lot better on my sony than on my samsung. just because the store had their settings fiddled with doesn't mean shit.

#14 Edited by BattleSpectre (5954 posts) -

@ps4hasnogames said:

@BattleSpectre said:

@ps4hasnogames said:

@BattleSpectre said:

Samsung are the best in the business in my opinion. I have people's jaws drop when they see my Samsung 200Hz 60" LED in motion.

wrong. I have samsung and I have sony....sony looks MUCH nicer than my samsung, both are LED....and by the way 240 hz actually gives more lag than 120, I had to switch my settings from 240 to 120 because the lag was horrible.

I would say don't go any lower than 40 inch, it really makes a difference, and if you can afford a sony get it, if not then samsung and and sharp are good too.

What do you mean wrong? There is no right or wrong answer the truth of the fact is when I was at the store looking at which TV to buy, I was looking at my Samsung and the equivalent of what Sony has to offer and the Samsung blew it away in both picture quality and smoothness.

The Sony TV was kind of ghosting whereas the Samsung TV was smooth as silk in motion compared to it. Say what you will but I'd like to see a Sony TV produce the picture quality mine does in both games and movies, especially the way I've calibrated it.

The only downside to LED technology is ghosting which is inevitable, so of course a decent Plasma would smash both our TV's out of the park ;)

complete bullshit. my ps4 looks a lot better on my sony than on my samsung. just because the store had their settings fiddled with doesn't mean shit.

Haha no need to get mad, maybe you haven't adjusted your settings on your Samsung TV? Because there's no way in hell the equivalent Sony TV compared to mine looks better, I've seen them side by side like I've said. Also my TV was ranked the best for gaming in 2013.

http://www.displaylag.com/introducing-2013s-best-hdtvs-for-gaming-part-1/

"With the F7100′s 240hz panel, fast paced gaming will be noticeably clearer than other HDTVs in its class".

That's actually the 55" 2013 model. I've got the new 2014 F7100 60" and it's a beast ;)

#15 Posted by Geminon (1095 posts) -

@ps4hasnogames said:

@BattleSpectre said:

Samsung are the best in the business in my opinion. I have people's jaws drop when they see my Samsung 200Hz 60" LED in motion.

wrong. I have samsung and I have sony....sony looks MUCH nicer than my samsung, both are LED....and by the way 240 hz actually gives more lag than 120, I had to switch my settings from 240 to 120 because the lag was horrible.

I would say don't go any lower than 40 inch, it really makes a difference, and if you can afford a sony get it, if not then samsung and and sharp are good too.

What do you mean wrong? There is no right or wrong answer the truth of the fact is when I was at the store looking at which TV to buy, I was looking at my Samsung and the equivalent of what Sony has to offer and the Samsung blew it away in both picture quality and smoothness.

The Sony TV was kind of ghosting whereas the Samsung TV was smooth as silk in motion compared to it. Say what you will but I'd like to see a Sony TV produce the picture quality mine does in both games and movies, especially the way I've calibrated it.

The only downside to LED technology is ghosting which is inevitable, so of course a decent Plasma would smash both our TV's out of the park ;)

sony put out the best looking LED TV to date in 2013, the W900A. it is not something you can argue. pretty much every AV website game it the best in class award last year. it doesnt matter what looked better in the store, that is the best LED TV money could buy in 2013. seeing as 2014 models will start coming out in 2-3 months, we will see what this year looks like soon.

#16 Edited by BattleSpectre (5954 posts) -

@Geminon said:

@BattleSpectre said:

@ps4hasnogames said:

@BattleSpectre said:

Samsung are the best in the business in my opinion. I have people's jaws drop when they see my Samsung 200Hz 60" LED in motion.

wrong. I have samsung and I have sony....sony looks MUCH nicer than my samsung, both are LED....and by the way 240 hz actually gives more lag than 120, I had to switch my settings from 240 to 120 because the lag was horrible.

I would say don't go any lower than 40 inch, it really makes a difference, and if you can afford a sony get it, if not then samsung and and sharp are good too.

What do you mean wrong? There is no right or wrong answer the truth of the fact is when I was at the store looking at which TV to buy, I was looking at my Samsung and the equivalent of what Sony has to offer and the Samsung blew it away in both picture quality and smoothness.

The Sony TV was kind of ghosting whereas the Samsung TV was smooth as silk in motion compared to it. Say what you will but I'd like to see a Sony TV produce the picture quality mine does in both games and movies, especially the way I've calibrated it.

The only downside to LED technology is ghosting which is inevitable, so of course a decent Plasma would smash both our TV's out of the park ;)

sony put out the best looking LED TV to date in 2013, the W900A. it is not something you can argue. pretty much every AV website game it the best in class award last year. it doesnt matter what looked better in the store, that is the best LED TV money could buy in 2013. seeing as 2014 models will start coming out in 2-3 months, we will see what this year looks like soon.

I've got a link above you saying the Samsung 7100 was the best TV of 2013, I suggest you read it.

#17 Posted by Geminon (1095 posts) -

@ps4hasnogames said:

@BattleSpectre said:

@ps4hasnogames said:

@BattleSpectre said:

Samsung are the best in the business in my opinion. I have people's jaws drop when they see my Samsung 200Hz 60" LED in motion.

wrong. I have samsung and I have sony....sony looks MUCH nicer than my samsung, both are LED....and by the way 240 hz actually gives more lag than 120, I had to switch my settings from 240 to 120 because the lag was horrible.

I would say don't go any lower than 40 inch, it really makes a difference, and if you can afford a sony get it, if not then samsung and and sharp are good too.

What do you mean wrong? There is no right or wrong answer the truth of the fact is when I was at the store looking at which TV to buy, I was looking at my Samsung and the equivalent of what Sony has to offer and the Samsung blew it away in both picture quality and smoothness.

The Sony TV was kind of ghosting whereas the Samsung TV was smooth as silk in motion compared to it. Say what you will but I'd like to see a Sony TV produce the picture quality mine does in both games and movies, especially the way I've calibrated it.

The only downside to LED technology is ghosting which is inevitable, so of course a decent Plasma would smash both our TV's out of the park ;)

complete bullshit. my ps4 looks a lot better on my sony than on my samsung. just because the store had their settings fiddled with doesn't mean shit.

Haha no need to get mad, maybe you haven't adjusted your settings on your Samsung TV? Because there's no way in hell the equivalent Sony TV compared to mine looks better, I've seen them side by side like I've said. Also my TV was ranked the best for gaming in 2013.

http://www.displaylag.com/introducing-2013s-best-hdtvs-for-gaming-part-1/

"With the F7100′s 240hz panel, fast paced gaming will be noticeably clearer than other HDTVs in its class".

That's actually the 55" 2013 model. I've got the new 2014 F7100 60" and it's a beast ;)

the panel for the 60" F7100 is made by sharp... and is inferior to the samsung made 55". so gratz on that.... *rolls eyes*

#18 Edited by BattleSpectre (5954 posts) -

@Geminon said:

@BattleSpectre said:

@ps4hasnogames said:

@BattleSpectre said:

@ps4hasnogames said:

@BattleSpectre said:

Samsung are the best in the business in my opinion. I have people's jaws drop when they see my Samsung 200Hz 60" LED in motion.

wrong. I have samsung and I have sony....sony looks MUCH nicer than my samsung, both are LED....and by the way 240 hz actually gives more lag than 120, I had to switch my settings from 240 to 120 because the lag was horrible.

I would say don't go any lower than 40 inch, it really makes a difference, and if you can afford a sony get it, if not then samsung and and sharp are good too.

What do you mean wrong? There is no right or wrong answer the truth of the fact is when I was at the store looking at which TV to buy, I was looking at my Samsung and the equivalent of what Sony has to offer and the Samsung blew it away in both picture quality and smoothness.

The Sony TV was kind of ghosting whereas the Samsung TV was smooth as silk in motion compared to it. Say what you will but I'd like to see a Sony TV produce the picture quality mine does in both games and movies, especially the way I've calibrated it.

The only downside to LED technology is ghosting which is inevitable, so of course a decent Plasma would smash both our TV's out of the park ;)

complete bullshit. my ps4 looks a lot better on my sony than on my samsung. just because the store had their settings fiddled with doesn't mean shit.

Haha no need to get mad, maybe you haven't adjusted your settings on your Samsung TV? Because there's no way in hell the equivalent Sony TV compared to mine looks better, I've seen them side by side like I've said. Also my TV was ranked the best for gaming in 2013.

http://www.displaylag.com/introducing-2013s-best-hdtvs-for-gaming-part-1/

"With the F7100′s 240hz panel, fast paced gaming will be noticeably clearer than other HDTVs in its class".

That's actually the 55" 2013 model. I've got the new 2014 F7100 60" and it's a beast ;)

the panel for the 60" F7100 is made by sharp... and is inferior to the samsung made 55". so gratz on that.... *rolls eyes*

Inferior in what way? I did hear about the 60" version panel being made by Sharp but damn, was that actually true bro? It's still a great TV in my opinion and I do like Sony TV's too they're awesome.

All right Damn it!! just let me think in my own imaginary world that my TV is the best Argh!!! Let me have that at least...

haha

#19 Edited by Geminon (1095 posts) -

@Geminon said:

@BattleSpectre said:

@ps4hasnogames said:

@BattleSpectre said:

@ps4hasnogames said:

@BattleSpectre said:

Samsung are the best in the business in my opinion. I have people's jaws drop when they see my Samsung 200Hz 60" LED in motion.

wrong. I have samsung and I have sony....sony looks MUCH nicer than my samsung, both are LED....and by the way 240 hz actually gives more lag than 120, I had to switch my settings from 240 to 120 because the lag was horrible.

I would say don't go any lower than 40 inch, it really makes a difference, and if you can afford a sony get it, if not then samsung and and sharp are good too.

What do you mean wrong? There is no right or wrong answer the truth of the fact is when I was at the store looking at which TV to buy, I was looking at my Samsung and the equivalent of what Sony has to offer and the Samsung blew it away in both picture quality and smoothness.

The Sony TV was kind of ghosting whereas the Samsung TV was smooth as silk in motion compared to it. Say what you will but I'd like to see a Sony TV produce the picture quality mine does in both games and movies, especially the way I've calibrated it.

The only downside to LED technology is ghosting which is inevitable, so of course a decent Plasma would smash both our TV's out of the park ;)

complete bullshit. my ps4 looks a lot better on my sony than on my samsung. just because the store had their settings fiddled with doesn't mean shit.

Haha no need to get mad, maybe you haven't adjusted your settings on your Samsung TV? Because there's no way in hell the equivalent Sony TV compared to mine looks better, I've seen them side by side like I've said. Also my TV was ranked the best for gaming in 2013.

http://www.displaylag.com/introducing-2013s-best-hdtvs-for-gaming-part-1/

"With the F7100′s 240hz panel, fast paced gaming will be noticeably clearer than other HDTVs in its class".

That's actually the 55" 2013 model. I've got the new 2014 F7100 60" and it's a beast ;)

the panel for the 60" F7100 is made by sharp... and is inferior to the samsung made 55". so gratz on that.... *rolls eyes*

Inferior in what way? I did hear about the 60" version panel being made by Sharp but damn, was that actually true bro? It's still a great TV in my opinion and I do like Sony TV's too they're awesome.

All right Damn it!! just let me think in my own imaginary world that my TV is the best Argh!!! Let me have that at least...

haha

AVS forums made a huge stink about it when it was discovered. the black levels and color accuracy are pretty far off from the 55".

i almost bought the F7100 last year, but i wanted the 60" and just couldnt bring myself to do it after i found out about the sharp manufacturing. hopefully this year will be the year.

#20 Posted by sukraj (21909 posts) -

The only TV's I buy are Samsung I have never bought a sony tv.

#21 Posted by _Judas_ (664 posts) -

We bought a pretty expensive Sony TV last august, I believe, as our Samsung had gotten some pretty ugly screen "tears". The old tv had gotten a faint, red, claw-like tint on the screen. My girlfriend states that she thinks the Sony tv has a good "communication" with my Sony Playstations (both 3 and 4). By a good communication, she means that the image quality appears better while using any of my PS-consoles. Also the smooth screen sync. "motion flow" she believes works better when connected to a Sony system. We use my Sony consoles for everything now: playing dvds, blu-rays, netflix, YouTube and so on. I would actually suggest a Sony tv. If you play sport games I would highly recommend a screen with "motion flow" or some kind of smoothing tech.

#22 Posted by GTR12 (9075 posts) -

20 posts and no one has mentioned that the TV's at retail stores have their brightness and sharpness turned way up to appear better...

Retail stores also market and purposely put high-end TV's next to crappy ones, also no-one calibrates their TV's, buy a $10 BD disk from Amazon and try it, you get much better visuals that way.

#23 Edited by BattleSpectre (5954 posts) -
@Geminon said:

AVS forums made a huge stink about it when it was discovered. the black levels and color accuracy are pretty far off from the 55".

i almost bought the F7100 last year, but i wanted the 60" and just couldnt bring myself to do it after i found out about the sharp manufacturing. hopefully this year will be the year.

Thanks for the update, but "pretty far off"? I understand that the 55" might have a better build quality because it was designed by Samsung, but by you making it sound like there's such a big difference in picture quality is definitely wrong on your part I must say.

Like I've said I have the 60" and so far I am amazed by it's smoothness and picture quality in games and everything else even in darker games. If the 55" is so MUCH better like you say It is, I'll go out and buy it tomorrow lol. I doubt there's such a big difference but please prove me wrong on this one.

Do you have any videos comparing the two or anything you might have seen on a forum proving this? I'm really interested to know how big, If at all the 55" difference is over the 60". Cheers. Like I said I actually own the 60" version I'm not assuming things or going by what people said on a forum...

#24 Posted by Geminon (1095 posts) -

@Geminon said:

AVS forums made a huge stink about it when it was discovered. the black levels and color accuracy are pretty far off from the 55".

i almost bought the F7100 last year, but i wanted the 60" and just couldnt bring myself to do it after i found out about the sharp manufacturing. hopefully this year will be the year.

Thanks for the update, but "pretty far off"? I understand that the 55" might have a better build quality because it was designed by Samsung, but by you making it sound like there's such a big difference in picture quality is definitely wrong on your part I must say.

Like I've said I have the 60" and so far I am amazed by it's smoothness and picture quality in games and everything else even in darker games. If the 55" is so MUCH better like you say It is, I'll go out and buy it tomorrow lol. I doubt there's such a big difference but please prove me wrong on this one.

Do you have any videos comparing the two or anything you might have seen on a forum proving this? I'm really interested to know how big, If at all the 55" difference is over the 60". Cheers. Like I said I actually own the 60" version I'm not assuming things or going by what people said on a forum...

the difference in black level is like .015 compaired to .002.... that is like the difference between normal LCD black levels and almost plasma black levels. also, the 60" apparently has significantly more clouding and edge bleed than the 55". just what i have read on AVS forums. AVS isnt just some schmuck forum. it is like... the absolutely best place to find information on A/V equipment.

#25 Posted by BattleSpectre (5954 posts) -

@Geminon said:

@BattleSpectre said:
@Geminon said:

AVS forums made a huge stink about it when it was discovered. the black levels and color accuracy are pretty far off from the 55".

i almost bought the F7100 last year, but i wanted the 60" and just couldnt bring myself to do it after i found out about the sharp manufacturing. hopefully this year will be the year.

Thanks for the update, but "pretty far off"? I understand that the 55" might have a better build quality because it was designed by Samsung, but by you making it sound like there's such a big difference in picture quality is definitely wrong on your part I must say.

Like I've said I have the 60" and so far I am amazed by it's smoothness and picture quality in games and everything else even in darker games. If the 55" is so MUCH better like you say It is, I'll go out and buy it tomorrow lol. I doubt there's such a big difference but please prove me wrong on this one.

Do you have any videos comparing the two or anything you might have seen on a forum proving this? I'm really interested to know how big, If at all the 55" difference is over the 60". Cheers. Like I said I actually own the 60" version I'm not assuming things or going by what people said on a forum...

the difference in black level is like .015 compaired to .002.... that is like the difference between normal LCD black levels and almost plasma black levels. also, the 60" apparently has significantly more clouding and edge bleed than the 55". just what i have read on AVS forums. AVS isnt just some schmuck forum. it is like... the absolutely best place to find information on A/V equipment.

Nah I respect you bro, and I know AVS is the best site in the world to get answers for anything A/V related so all good. *thumbs up*

#26 Posted by jasean79 (2338 posts) -

@GTR12 said:

20 posts and no one has mentioned that the TV's at retail stores have their brightness and sharpness turned way up to appear better...

Retail stores also market and purposely put high-end TV's next to crappy ones, also no-one calibrates their TV's, buy a $10 BD disk from Amazon and try it, you get much better visuals that way.

This is true, and probably why Vizio TV's sell as well as they do. In comparison to other name brands, they just don't compare.

That's why I go to Amazon for reviews. Reviewers will actually list in their comments the ideal settings for their TV's. While, not everyone is perfect, it at least gives you a starting point and you can adjust from there. Most people are clueless to calibrating their TV and will just select "movie" setting and be done with it.

#27 Edited by Celtic_34 (1220 posts) -

Ended up exchanging for this one. I've tried all 3. Trying to get the best gaming experience with limited motion blur.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/panasonic-39-class-38-1-2-diag--led-1080p-120hz-smart-hdtv/3730052.p?id=1219093275246&skuId=3730052&st=TC-39AS530U&cp=1&lp=1

It's a smart tv which I don't need at all but price wise it was in between and native 120hz. Compared to the Samsung's I think I like it better. Nice picture. Samsung has a weird purple tinge to them and you can actually see the lights blinking. The 6030 also had some input lag. This seems good. no input lag. crisp picture and the least motion blur I've seen. the only drawback is I don't need the smart stuff and there is no option to even turn on game mode or anything or mess with the smoothing features. It just defaults that way with it off when plugging in the ps4. Picture is smooth though. Not as harsh on the eyes as the Samsung and seems more natural. I honestly felt the Samsung TV's picture was ugly. Eye popping candy maybe but the 60hz model ghosted quite a bit. The 120hz had the bes tmotion controls but had some input lag. This one seems to be a good go between.

I basically sat there at best buy all day comparing. The difference between 60hz and 120 is very slight if there is any but all I can tell is the 120hz seems to be more stable and run faster especially when panning. Still some motion blur but it's reduced.

I like this one the best. For a smaller 40 inch or below tv it seems like the best one for picture quality and lag. The Samsung tvs led lights the way they blink I don't know what it is. I would go to bed seeing that poop. It didn't seem healthy either. I didn't like them. This one seems more natural. The Panasonic seems to have better build quality too. I guess preference but I can't see anything overly wrong with this picture. The samsungs I could. Something just seemed off with them.

Panasonic wins again. Out of all TV's under 40 inches they are the only tv that offer native 120hz refresh rate outside of Samsung. 240 clear motion rate or whatever which is fake and interpolation and processing. Sony has some nice tvs too with low input lag but they are all 60hz. All the other ones are 120hz faked but 60hz panels. Samsung's are nice too but something about them and their build quality is weird. Really easy to set up and nice features and controls though. This TV has the best picture and quality and that's what it comes down to.

#28 Posted by MethodManFTW (25519 posts) -

I could understand this wrong, but no games on consoles run at over 60fps so getting a tv for gaming with over 60hz is relatively pointless, right?

I like my 120hz monitor with my pc because i can actually play games at 120fps.

#29 Edited by Celtic_34 (1220 posts) -

@MethodManFTW said:

I could understand this wrong, but no games on consoles run at over 60fps so getting a tv for gaming with over 60hz is relatively pointless, right?

I like my 120hz monitor with my pc because i can actually play games at 120fps.

Hertz is different than frames per second in that you have a game that in order to run at over that many frames needs a higher refresh rate. But a higher native refresh is going to help with motion blur and ghosting because the screen is just blinking that many more times and faster natively and capable of that. Refresh is just how many times the screen can blink. 60hz and if the tv has a slower processor is going to ghost more. I could be imagining all of this but having a 120hz native panel I can notice the difference. It just runs faster and is more stable to me. IT's the interpolation and motion processing that you can turn on that does nothing except insert frames and mess up the picture in video games. A lot of these tvs are 120 clear motion but still have a 60hz panel. Other ones the panel is actually 120hz. I could be wrong because it's all an algorithm anyways but i'm guessing the panel and hardware is different in some of these and actually blink at 120hz natively. It's like 720p vs 1080p. There is only so much the human eye can notice. hertz is even slighter than resolution but speed of processing is just as important as resolution. Neither is perfect. Picture quality and build also has something to do with it. Maybe it's just me but Panasonic and sony TV's seem to have the best build quality and best native pictures. It's preference though. Samsung I didn't like for some reason. The tint was off.

60hz I could actually see the screen blinking in certain scenarios. 120hz not so much. There is still some blur but its blinking twice as fast so you can't see it. The picture also doesn't seem to lose it's quality as often. It's just seems to be more stable of a quality picture. Maybe it's just the brand. I have no idea. My old Panasonic lcd 720p 60hz tv had very little motion blur but it was also a 32 inch tv. Vs a 40 inch Samsung 60hz it actually looked better in spots. This 120hz Panasonic is like my old tv but bigger and better resolution. limited motion blur. It's nice.

All this motion interpolation stuff like clear motion and trumotion and stuff like that is just software and processor driven stuff that just adds frames and messes up the picture. If you have a processor doing that it's takes processing power to do it. If you have a weak processor faking a refresh it's not going to be good. The native refresh rate is different. I have the motion stuff set to low for tv and off for games and im getting a stable picture with this tv. I think the native refresh rate is noticeable regardless. IT's very slight but the tv just seems to run faster.

I could be totally wrong and it could all be software driven and just companies lying about it in ways which wouldn't surprise me. It's no different than hard drives and storage algorithms. I don't know the inner workings of these TV's so much. Just know technology in general and have a degree in it. I think the panel on some of these, some of the circuitry is native 120hz though. If it says 120hz plus clearmotion or whatever, that is the native panel plus the software algorithm.

A 120 hertz panel is still going to be faster even if a game is running at 30-60 fps or whatever because it's just blinking that much faster and you aren't going to get the ghosting effect so much. It's still there but it's better. It's not like a plasma or crt which are totally different and their hertz are much higher as far as its refreshing but it's better.

#30 Posted by DJ_Headshot (6178 posts) -

@Geminon said:

@BattleSpectre said:
@Geminon said:

AVS forums made a huge stink about it when it was discovered. the black levels and color accuracy are pretty far off from the 55".

i almost bought the F7100 last year, but i wanted the 60" and just couldnt bring myself to do it after i found out about the sharp manufacturing. hopefully this year will be the year.

Thanks for the update, but "pretty far off"? I understand that the 55" might have a better build quality because it was designed by Samsung, but by you making it sound like there's such a big difference in picture quality is definitely wrong on your part I must say.

Like I've said I have the 60" and so far I am amazed by it's smoothness and picture quality in games and everything else even in darker games. If the 55" is so MUCH better like you say It is, I'll go out and buy it tomorrow lol. I doubt there's such a big difference but please prove me wrong on this one.

Do you have any videos comparing the two or anything you might have seen on a forum proving this? I'm really interested to know how big, If at all the 55" difference is over the 60". Cheers. Like I said I actually own the 60" version I'm not assuming things or going by what people said on a forum...

the difference in black level is like .015 compaired to .002.... that is like the difference between normal LCD black levels and almost plasma black levels. also, the 60" apparently has significantly more clouding and edge bleed than the 55". just what i have read on AVS forums. AVS isnt just some schmuck forum. it is like... the absolutely best place to find information on A/V equipment.

Damn how does Samsung fuck that up so badly and then they go and sell it as there largest, best, and most expensive model while unsuspecting consumers actually pay more for a worse T.V.

#31 Edited by Celtic_34 (1220 posts) -

That's half the issue with these tvs is they are all the same. they are just selling you features like smart tv and 3d which I don't need and charging more. IT's all software driven stuff. Same with this interpolation stuff. I just care about the actual hardware and quality of it. I think I got the right tv. Something was off with those samsungs. All of them are sort of similar though. The technology is the same. An LED TV is an LED tv. It's more about build quality and the hardware in it. Some brands are better than others. The Samsung picture to me was weird.

Samsung is the largest manufacturer and rated the best right now too. It has more to do with pricing and business politics than anything though. Sony and Panasonic know how to make a good tv I would guess and have their algorithms they use that are trademarked. The Samsung TV's were nice don't get me wrong. It's more marketing and preference though. I wasn't overly impressed with their tvs.

don't belive the hype. most people want to rate what they buy the best. It's just the nature of some people. If companies can get people buying they are going to rate their product high regardless of what they are buying sometimes. I bought their tv I wanted to like it. Their tvs weren't that great to me. I just tried to test in my price range and size of tv I wanted and get the best one.

#32 Posted by MethodManFTW (25519 posts) -

@Celtic_34: Thanks for the info. I have a 50" Element that is probably terrible but it is recently manufactured and manufactured in the US so I figured I'd give it a shot. The overscan issues when using it as a second screen for my PC are annoying but other than that it seems like a good TV to me, but it probably technically blows. I've never messed much with the color settings on TV, I didn't even know about calibration blu-rays.. I should probably get one.

#33 Edited by Celtic_34 (1220 posts) -

Some of these tvs with the interpolation turned on look like vsync is on or somethng. It's weird. The samsung tvs you could actually see the tv and leds blinking in a grid whenever there was motion on the screen. I didnt like it. i would go to bed after watching and could see that stuff in my sleep lol. Didn't seem too healthy.

The panasonic looks like a tv should to me. It just seems mroe natural. The sonys they had hooked up to the ps4 at best buy also looked good.

#34 Edited by GTR12 (9075 posts) -

@MethodManFTW:

They are like $10 on Amazon, its really a no-brainer to have one, everyone has a unique set of circumstances and someone giving you a default setting wont work for your TV/house/lighting/eyesight

#35 Posted by Jimmy_Russell (481 posts) -

@GTR12 said:

@jimmy_russell said:

I would never do gaming on a TV, that's really weak man. Go for the best money can buy, get the BenQ XL series monitor with a 7.1 surround sound headset.

Don't listen to this guy TC ^^

Eh? Why not? Gaming monitors that are designed by professional gamers are sturdy. Just because you're using sub par gaming hardware doesn't mean you shouldn't have nice peripherals. Not to mention, you can use that monitor on your gaming PC once you finish building it.

#36 Posted by GTR12 (9075 posts) -

@GTR12 said:

@jimmy_russell said:

I would never do gaming on a TV, that's really weak man. Go for the best money can buy, get the BenQ XL series monitor with a 7.1 surround sound headset.

Don't listen to this guy TC ^^

Eh? Why not? Gaming monitors that are designed by professional gamers are sturdy. Just because you're using sub par gaming hardware doesn't mean you shouldn't have nice peripherals. Not to mention, you can use that monitor on your gaming PC once you finish building it.

LOL, since your new I'll tell you what I have, but you should note I wasn't even talking about the monitor, a "7.1 headset" is useless, you'd be much better of with a mixamp and headphones and a clip-on mic.

I have a Kuro and a BenQ FP241W, yes its old, but read reviews.

#37 Posted by Jimmy_Russell (481 posts) -
@GTR12 said:

@jimmy_russell said:

@GTR12 said:

@jimmy_russell said:

I would never do gaming on a TV, that's really weak man. Go for the best money can buy, get the BenQ XL series monitor with a 7.1 surround sound headset.

Don't listen to this guy TC ^^

Eh? Why not? Gaming monitors that are designed by professional gamers are sturdy. Just because you're using sub par gaming hardware doesn't mean you shouldn't have nice peripherals. Not to mention, you can use that monitor on your gaming PC once you finish building it.

LOL, since your new I'll tell you what I have, but you should note I wasn't even talking about the monitor, a "7.1 headset" is useless, you'd be much better of with a mixamp and headphones and a clip-on mic.

I have a Kuro and a BenQ FP241W, yes its old, but read reviews.

Budget hardware is not good. Get the best money can buy, don't be cheap.

#38 Edited by GTR12 (9075 posts) -

@jimmy_russell:

Ah another troll GS has, you know nothing as well, try again next time, you might get better.

#39 Edited by Gelugon_baat (19377 posts) -

Budget hardware is not good. Get the best money can buy, don't be cheap.

If you are going to say that, then do make some recommendations.

Or perhaps you like making one-off remarks like that?

#40 Edited by littlestreakier (2895 posts) -

IMO I REALLY don't like LCD, LED, etc. TVs. I always recommended plasma TVs to my friends. But it looks like consumers have killed plasma. Samsung is currently the only company still producing plasmas.

If you can still find them I'd recommend getting a Panasonic plasma or search eBay/Craig's List for a 9G pioneer. I heard great things about the Samsung plasma that's available in stores also.

Note: If you look at the yearly TV shoot outs for the past 4-5 years all of the top TVs are plasmas.