• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

37" 1080p HDTV for $592 shipped. (update: Not 1080P)

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
$649.99 now. :( Great price though if anyone jumped on it.

EDIT: Add to cart and $60 dollar coupon will be applied. Thanks inkfx!
 
Last edited:
Wait for the 50" Samsung DLP on Black Friday at Circuit City. LCDs are generally crap, especially $600 no-name brands.
 

Attachments

  • DLP samsung.JPG
    DLP samsung.JPG
    60 KB · Views: 336
I have LCD's.(2) 4CRT's one projector DLP which i went a few days amking sure i compared against all of the above/

My true unadulterated opinion is that my .24 dot pitch 21 " hitachi STILL straight PWNS all of the above.
For seconds Iwould take mu DLP projector but it does have a few issues
AND ALL DLPS ARE PROJECTORS like it or not.
whether its front or rear projector is teh ONLY option.
Dont get me wrong my projector ROX but compared to my hitachi its NOTHING


The LCD's PFFF whatever
their BRIGHT ill give em that LCD's in my opinion have always and STILL have HORRIBLE dot pitch
at least eh spead is getting up there but thats with stepping down from 65 Million color to 262k (dithered) to fake out 62 to 65
IDK in my opinion LCD's are BARELY getting t owhere CRT's were 4 to 5 years ago.
this is just my 2cents take it for what its worht.
Most new gamers think CRT's are gayness but most never saw good ones
 
Found a NICE HDTV for $592.00 shipped at Overstock.com Specs say it goes to 1080p also.

http://www.overstock.com/Electronic...CPqWkHwkNyo-MrmNvW1JHSgCuMAMyQtfcw&cid=124105

Watch out with this display. It says " full 1080p input compatibility", not that it's a 1080p display. In other words, it can accept a 1080p input signal and scale it down to the panel's native resolution of 1366 x 768.

This is not a 1080p display.

http://www.shop.dealshop.com/product.sc?productId=144&sourceCode=froogle
 
Corbec, so DLP's are light years ahead of LCD's? That I did not know.

Yes. And CRTs are ahead of DLPs, unless you go for a $50k DLP projector. LCDs have awful black levels, a fixed resolution, bad fleshtones, and are expensive. You sacrifice so much just so that your TV is 2 inches thick.

Screenshots from a CRT projector are below. You won't get color reproduction like that on any DLP or LCD.
 

Attachments

  • 1.jpg
    1.jpg
    106.4 KB · Views: 283
  • 11.jpg
    11.jpg
    97.1 KB · Views: 283
My dad has an X2gen 22" LCD monitor for his computer. Microcenter carries the brand. The picture on his X2gen is really quite nice, and it's given him a year of service with no trouble at all. I've been thinking about buying one for myself.

This TV is not 1080p as was pointed out, it's really a 720p panel that will downscale 1080i and 1080p inputs. But it's still a good deal getting a 37" 720p LCD for less than six-hundy shipped.

Wait for the 50" Samsung DLP on Black Friday at Circuit City. LCDs are generally crap, especially $600 no-name brands.

LCDs are crap? Uh, no. There are always crappy quality TVs no matter what the type, so not every LCD is a good one. But to generalize the technology like this is so wrong. DLP > LCD is not a fact. It's a subjective evaluation, an awesome picture can be obtained with either. Both have their pro's and cons.

Personally, I think LCD is superior because they take up less space and I don't see rainbows while watching one. But for other people, DLP is a better choice because they come in larger sizes and are less expensive on the large end of the TV spectrum.

Corbec, so DLP's are light years ahead of LCD's? That I did not know.

You didn't know it because it's not true :beer:

I have LCD's.(2) 4CRT's one projector DLP which i went a few days amking sure i compared against all of the above/

My true unadulterated opinion is that my .24 dot pitch 21 " hitachi STILL straight PWNS all of the above.
For seconds Iwould take mu DLP projector but it does have a few issues
AND ALL DLPS ARE PROJECTORS like it or not.
whether its front or rear projector is teh ONLY option.
Dont get me wrong my projector ROX but compared to my hitachi its NOTHING

The LCD's PFFF whatever
their BRIGHT ill give em that LCD's in my opinion have always and STILL have HORRIBLE dot pitch
at least eh spead is getting up there but thats with stepping down from 65 Million color to 262k (dithered) to fake out 62 to 65
IDK in my opinion LCD's are BARELY getting t owhere CRT's were 4 to 5 years ago.
this is just my 2cents take it for what its worht.
Most new gamers think CRT's are gayness but most never saw good ones

CRTs are a dead technology. The only place you find them anymore is the entry level TV segment, and that's only because they still enjoy a pretty large price advantage over competitors like LCD. When 20" LCDs get close to $100, you'll see CRT go bye-bye just like they did in the monitor market.

I'd have to say based on that, your opinion is in the minority. If CRTs were better they would not have died out like dinosaurs.
 
Yes. And CRTs are ahead of DLPs, unless you go for a $50k DLP projector. LCDs have awful black levels, a fixed resolution, bad fleshtones, and are expensive. You sacrifice so much just so that your TV is 2 inches thick.

Screenshots from a CRT projector are below. You won't get color reproduction like that on any DLP or LCD.

This is trude, of course, but CRT projectors are impractical for most folks in the home. And not that I think Wikipedia is the end-all, be-all of home theater info, but here's a quick rundown of the plusses and minuses of a CRT projector:
  • Advantages:
    • Long CRT life, typically that of a normal television picture tube.
    • Can achieve good to very good colour resolution, brightness and picture size.
    • Once set-up, minimal maintenance is required, unlike projectors that use lamps.
    • Superior black level - black is actually black and not dark grey.
    • As with CRT monitors, the image resolution and the refresh rate are not fixed but variable within some limits. Interlaced material can be played directly, without need for imperfect deinterlacing mechanisms.
  • Disadvantages:
    • Tends to be bulky and heavy (and non-portable) due to the CRTs.
    • Low maximum brightness levels - the room has to be completely dark and eyes of viewers coming from a daylight environment have to adapt to the darkness for a minute or two before image details can be seen.
    • Suffers from uneven colour mixing, since it is done by projecting the individual lines (made on the CRTs) onto the screen. The result is that the picture optimised for the central area of the screen tends to split into the individual colours towards the edges. Sophisticated circuitry is required to compensate for this.
    • Focusing is not even, again due to the way the image is projected and requires sophisticated circuitry to compensate.
    • Requires more time to set up and adjust for a good overall image.
    • Costlier than other types of projectors due to the complex circuitry required to control and synchronise the three CRTs to achieve optimum picture quality. (Although it is easier to get good deals on used equipment than with other types of projectors)
 
Yes. And CRTs are ahead of DLPs, unless you go for a $50k DLP projector. LCDs have awful black levels, a fixed resolution, bad fleshtones, and are expensive. You sacrifice so much just so that your TV is 2 inches thick.

Screenshots from a CRT projector are below. You won't get color reproduction like that on any DLP or LCD.

On color reproduction, I call BS. Plasma, LCD and DLP can all reproduce colors that compete with CRT. The only color that CRTs do better than LCDs by any significant margin is black.

There's a reason CRTs are going the way of the dodo bird. If they were so much better as you claim, they would not be on the brink of completely vanishing from the market.
 
On color reproduction, I call BS. Plasma, LCD and DLP can all reproduce colors that compete with CRT. The only color that CRTs do better than LCDs by any significant margin is black.

There's a reason CRTs are going the way of the dodo bird. If they were so much better as you claim, they would not be on the brink of completely vanishing from the market.

Actually the only reason CRTs aren't as popular is because any TV over like 30" is going to weigh a ton! They are they best and there is no dening that. You need to do a bit more research when you reply to topics.
 
On color reproduction, I call BS. Plasma, LCD and DLP can all reproduce colors that compete with CRT. The only color that CRTs do better than LCDs by any significant margin is black.

There's a reason CRTs are going the way of the dodo bird. If they were so much better as you claim, they would not be on the brink of completely vanishing from the market.

You're confusing Direct-View televisions with CRT. 30" TVs are NOT CRT. 55" RPTV sets ARE CRT. The reasons CRTs are going the way of the dodo bird are because:
1. R&D into CRT technology ceased 10 years ago. Just now we are getting to the point where digital technology equals CRT. I can't even imagine where we would be today if R&D continued into CRT.
2. Most CRTs, both front and rear projection sets are over 10 years old.
3. People are too incompetent to setup and maintain a CRT.
4. There is 0 marketing going into CRTs because LCDs, DLPs, and plasmas are way more profitable since they apply more to the general population.

I have seen $3000 LCDs and they are so crappy I wouldn't even accept one if I got it for free. Just terrible fleshtones, awful black levels, and artifacts due to the fixed resolution, and this is after 2 hours of me going through the setup and service menus. DLPs are much better in these areas, and the only downside is size. The bottom line is if you want a good picture, it's going to take up space - deal with it.

Disadvantages:
Tends to be bulky and heavy (and non-portable) due to the CRT
Agreed
Low maximum brightness levels - the room has to be completely dark and eyes of viewers coming from a daylight environment have to adapt to the darkness for a minute or two before image details can be seen.
In my opinion the room should be dark when watching movies anyways. And there's always the possibility of stacking 2 CRT projectors on top of each other, although this is costly and complicated.
Suffers from uneven colour mixing, since it is done by projecting the individual lines (made on the CRTs) onto the screen. The result is that the picture optimised for the central area of the screen tends to split into the individual colours towards the edges. Sophisticated circuitry is required to compensate for this.
I'll assume this is talking about misconvergence. On any CRT built after 1993 or 1994, there are more than enough controls to get perfect convergence.
Focusing is not even, again due to the way the image is projected and requires sophisticated circuitry to compensate.
Again, on any CRT built after 1993 or 1994, there is circuitry that can compensate for this and also mechanical adjustments to the lense system (scheimpflug).
Requires more time to set up and adjust for a good overall image.
Agreed
Costlier than other types of projectors due to the complex circuitry required to control and synchronise the three CRTs to achieve optimum picture quality. (Although it is easier to get good deals on used equipment than with other types of projectors)
No way. The only way to get CRT projectors now days is used, and they are ridiculously cheap. $1500 easily gets you a mid-range CRT projector with at least 7000 hours left on the tubes. $500 gets you a nice entry level set that does 720p and 1080i.
 
Last edited:
Actually the only reason CRTs aren't as popular is because any TV over like 30" is going to weigh a ton! They are they best and there is no dening that. You need to do a bit more research when you reply to topics.

You need to do more research. CRTs are not only losing in the direct-view market (where the 30"+ sets are very heavy) but they are also dying in the projection segment as well where they are still heavy, but so is the competition. CRTs are not best, based on sales trends it looks like they are worst. Personally I'd take CRT over DLP, but LCD and Plasma are superior IMO.

You're confusing Direct-View televisions with CRT. 30" TVs are NOT CRT. 55" RPTV sets ARE CRT.

Direct-View TVs are absolutely, positively CRTs. They operate under exactly the same principle. The only difference is that the final image is viewed directly rather than magnified and projected.

The reasons CRTs are going the way of the dodo bird are because:
1. R&D into CRT technology ceased 10 years ago. Just now we are getting to the point where digital technology equals CRT. I can't even imagine where we would be today if R&D continued into CRT.
2. Most CRTs, both front and rear projection sets are over 10 years old.
3. People are too incompetent to setup and maintain a CRT.
4. There is 0 marketing going into CRTs because LCDs, DLPs, and plasmas are way more profitable since they apply more to the general population.

1. CRT technology is over 100 years old. It's entirely possible, if not likely, that technology has run its course and reached its limits. Further research also would not necessarily overcome the problems that are causing it's extinction.
2. True, but A. this does nothing to explain why CRTs are disappearing from the market and B. High Def CRTs were/are being sold, people just don't want them
3. This is one of the faults of CRT technology.
4. There's no marketing because people don't want CRT

I have seen $3000 LCDs and they are so crappy I wouldn't even accept one if I got it for free. Just terrible fleshtones, awful black levels, and artifacts due to the fixed resolution, and this is after 2 hours of me going through the setup and service menus. DLPs are much better in these areas, and the only downside is size. The bottom line is if you want a good picture, it's going to take up space - deal with it.

Like I said earlier, there are crappy TVs of all types - LCD, DLP, CRT, Plasma... whatever. Sometimes these crappy units cost a lot of money. But you are using old, no longer applicable generalizations against LCD. A good LCD can definitely hold it's own against DLP. And you assertion that a good picture must take up space is patently false. I get an awesome picture on my plasma :beer:

In my opinion the room should be dark when watching movies anyways. And there's always the possibility of stacking 2 CRT projectors on top of each other, although this is costly and complicated.

People have to use the space available to them, not everyone has an ideal home theater with controlled lighting. And sometimes people like to watch movies during the day. The brightness issue is a large problem for CRT.

No way. The only way to get CRT projectors now days is used, and they are ridiculously cheap. $1500 easily gets you a mid-range CRT projector with at least 7000 hours left on the tubes. $500 gets you a nice entry level set that does 720p and 1080i.

Those are still high prices. You can get brand new LCD projectors for less, and it'll have a warranty. And you can still find stores that sell CRT front projectors if you look really hard, they're just not worth buying.
 
Direct-view TVs do NOT have 3 CRT tubes and are not considered CRT RPTVs. Yes, they use CRT technology, but they are not CRT televisions. And by the way, the LCD I was talking about was a $3000 brand new Samsung from around 2 weeks ago. My relatives wanted to know why the picture sucked so much even though it was the top of the line LCD. I told them simply it's because it's an LCD. They returned it and got a DLP, and they are much happier now. Further research into CRT would have made it smaller, brighter, and easier to setup. This is straight from the mouth of someone who worked at Sony's CRT projector division for 10 years. Saying CRT technology is 100 years old is like saying computer technology is 50 years old just because transistors have been around that long.
 
Last edited:
Direct-view TVs do NOT have 3 CRT tubes and are not considered CRT RPTVs. Yes, they use CRT technology, but they are not CRT televisions. And by the way, the LCD I was talking about was a $3000 brand new Samsung from around 2 weeks ago. My relatives wanted to know why the picture sucked so much even though it was the top of the line LCD. I told them simply it's because it's an LCD. They returned it and got a DLP, and they are much happier now. Further research into CRT would have made it smaller, brighter, and easier to setup. This is straight from the mouth of someone who worked at Sony's CRT projector division for 10 years. Saying CRT technology is 100 years old is like saying computer technology is 100 years old just because electricity has been around that long

CRT technology is actually over 110 years old. Computers, in their present form, are a solid 50 to 60 years old. These are indisputable facts. CRT is so old it predates the use of color film in movies and broadcasting. It's hard to imagine such a mature and highly refined technology drastically changing enough to survive the onslaught of LCD, Plasma and DLP, each with their advantages over CRT.

Also, the number of tubes is irrelevant. A direct-view CRT is still a CRT, and it still has 3 electron guns. Of course they're not considered projection TVs, as they don't project (I have seen DIY mods where people have taken small direct view TVs and turned them into projectors however). My point is simply that direct-view CRTs suffer from the same problems as their projection siblings, and soon you won't be able to buy a new CRT TV of any kind. If they were "all that" then they simply would not be going extinct.

Your obvious bias against LCD should be enough for impartial folks to realize that what you've posted is at best tainted half truths, and at worst pure garbage. LCDs that have a bad picture are poorly made / designed LCDs. Saying all LCDs suck is like me saying all CRTs suck based on one bad model. And FYI, if you relatives wanted to buy a top of the line LCD with a good picture they should have looked at a Sharp Aquos or a Sony.

I would never consider buying a DLP because of the rainbow effect. I can't even stand to watch one, I constantly see rainbows. Many people can't detect them though.
 
Back