If the price difference between a 60" and 65" TV is $200, which one would you get?

[Qacer]

I'm looking at a Mitsubishi DLP TV. For the same model, the 65" version is about $200 more. Is an extra 5" of viewing space worth $200?

I never owned a TV bigger than 26". I'm thinking of finally upgrading this year. My taste for video is not very particular. As long as the video is good and there are no annoying artifacts, then I'm a happy man.

 

[SpunkyJones]

Whats $200 over the life of the TV? Get the bigger one and be happy, don't believe people who say size doesn't matter.

 

[geno]

a 5" difference for only $200? Yeah, go for the 65", especially considering the exponentially rising cost per diagonal inch as you get to the larger TV's. If space is no issue and the TV won't be dominating the room, go 65" fo sho.

 

[BassBomb]

65" if all else is the same

 

[nerp]

You seem like the kind of guy whose life would be changed forever by an additional five inches. I say go for it.

 

[Qacer]

Since I never owned a bigger TV, I am not able to picture the difference. I actually took out a measuring tape and started looking at the size implications. Size-wise, it seemed like a minute difference, but again, I don't have first hand experience.

I'm counting on the other ATOTers who had big size TVs for years --- and drive Ferraris.

 

[sdifox]

you have to understand 5" is diagonal.

 

[shortylickens]

Thats a relatively good deal. Go for it. Normally at that scale an extra 5 inches is more than 200 bucks.

 

[yhelothar]

60" considering DLPs are worthless now and $200 is 1/4th of the cost at $800 for the 60".

so 25% more money for 8% more TV.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

82" ftw.

 

[geno]

60" considering DLPs are worthless now

:hmm:

so 25% more money for 8% more TV.

That's not correct because you're only taking the diagonal measurement into account, not the area gained. It's closer to 17-18% more viewing area.

And lastly, where are you seeing 60" Mitsu DLPs for $600? Best I can find on pricegrabber is around $900

 

[BurnItDwn]

The most important factor is the distance from the seating area to the screen.

Ideally, the distance between your eyes and the screen will be less than 1.5x the diagonal screen size.

5-7 feet viewing distance .... 60 inches is perfect
6-8 feet viewing distance .... 65 inches is perfect

Any more distance between you and the screen, and you might want to reconsider the layout of the room, or consider an even bigger screen size.

 

[YOyoYOhowsDAjello]

Yes, you need to factor in seating distance to decide if this is a good idea or not.

For most people's proposed setups, 65 inches would be better.

If you want to see a visual of the difference...
http://www.tvcalculator.com/

 

[sdifox]

Using the calc Yoyo posted.

1537.39 sq. in.
vs
1804.69 sq. in.

(1804.69 - 1537.39) / 1537.39 = 0.173866098


so 17% upgrade in display area

 

[sdifox]

The most important factor is the distance from the seating area to the screen.

Ideally, the distance between your eyes and the screen will be less than 1.5x the diagonal screen size.

5-7 feet viewing distance .... 60 inches is perfect
6-8 feet viewing distance .... 65 inches is perfect

Any more distance between you and the screen, and you might want to reconsider the layout of the room, or consider an even bigger screen size.

I am at 10ft shooting 100" :biggrin:
Image Dimensions: 87.18" x 48.98"
Image area: 4270.08 sq. in.

I thought that 1.5x is for 4:3?

 

[AbAbber2k]

65"

 

[iversonyin]

I'll use the $200 toward PS3 or a blu-ray player.

 

[sdifox]

Since I never owned a bigger TV, I am not able to picture the difference. I actually took out a measuring tape and started looking at the size implications. Size-wise, it seemed like a minute difference, but again, I don't have first hand experience.

I'm counting on the other ATOTers who had big size TVs for years --- and drive Ferraris.

no Ferrari... MB E350 4 Matic good enough?

I don't call my 47" in the living room big screen so I don't really have big size TV... I do have a 1080p projector shooting 100" though :biggrin:

What are your viewing habits in terms of lighting condition? Placement is important too. Chances are the 60" and the 65" will share the same lamp so theoretically the 60" can be brighter than the 65" but usually you don't push the bulb anyway.

 

[sdifox]

I'll use the $200 toward PS3 or a blu-ray player.

http://www.amazon.com/Infamous-Killz...9338391&sr=8-1

120gb with Infamous and killzone 2, plus 10 amazon dollars... all for 299.99, today only

 

[yhelothar]

:hmm:



That's not correct because you're only taking the diagonal measurement into account, not the area gained. It's closer to 17-18% more viewing area.

And lastly, where are you seeing 60" Mitsu DLPs for $600? Best I can find on pricegrabber is around $900

Good catch. So 25% more money for 17% more screen. Not nearly as bad.

And I was seeing 60" mitsu DLPs for $800. Best i can find on froogle.

Anyways, if you're willing to spend over a grand on a TV, I just saw a 52" Sony Bravia 1080P in hot deals forums for $1300 with bluray player.

 

[BurnItDwn]

I am at 10ft shooting 100" :biggrin:
Image Dimensions: 87.18" x 48.98"
Image area: 4270.08 sq. in.

I thought that 1.5x is for 4:3?

You're right.

My post is more or less an estimate.

On a 4:3 screen, 1.5:1 is about 30deg viewing angle
On a 16:9 screen, 1.5:1 is about 32.4deg viewing angle

THX recomends a 36 deg viewing angle, which is actually about 1.33:1 (with "max" viewing angle being 26 deg)

Anyhow, all these recommendations and "ideal" are pretty much just recommendations for movie theater type viewing. The OP should get what the OP wants

 

[CoinOperatedBoy]

DLP? Why?

 

[Imdmn04]

Why are you buying something that is going obsolete?

 

[BurnItDwn]

To the people who think DLP is going obselete or useless .....

Black Levels / Contrast is quite good on a CRT DLP. Much better than LCDS, and noticably better than Plasma.

A 65inch DLP costs less than most 50 inch plasma's/LCDs.

DLP does have some shortcomings, but it's got some benefits too.

LCDs and Plasmas offer better brightness usually, but if it's in a light controlled environment, a DLP might have bett

 

[yhelothar]

To the people who think DLP is going obselete or useless .....

Black Levels / Contrast is quite good on a CRT DLP. Much better than LCDS, and noticably better than Plasma.

A 65inch DLP costs less than most 50 inch plasma's/LCDs.

DLP does have some shortcomings, but it's got some benefits too.

LCDs and Plasmas offer better brightness usually, but if it's in a light controlled environment, a DLP might have bett

And any prices saved by going DLP would be offset by the cost of replacing the bulb every 2-3yrs.
I also somehow doubt that the mitsu 65" DLP would have better blacks and contrast levels than a 52" Sony Bravia.