Samsung 40" LNT4071F 1080p 120Hz for $1,769 Shipped

[ICXRa]

I have been looking at getting a LCD for sometime now and had basically decided on the 40" 61 or 65 series until this came along.

Back in the the summer I went in to look at the AQUOS D62's and was sorry to see them not look like I had hoped. I'm sure they were just out of the box with no settings dialed in or worse yet somebody clueless had fooled with them but the color just overall seemed more flat and less vivid. Not a bad picture by any means but didn't stand up to the XBR2's and 3's or the Sammy's I was looking at. Never got to see a Sharp D92 series yet.

The banding thing really is what pushed me away from the Sharp and with Sony the flashlighting and from reading AVSForum these problems are still there for a fair amount of customers...granted most of them are probably looking to close.

I gotta take a trip and see this model in person. Thanks for the heads up OP on this deal!

 

[mcmilljb]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: mcmilljb

Originally posted by: SickBeast
I'll just chime in that I also have a 46" Sharp LCD HDTV (1080P).

According to Consumer Reports, it's the best 46" HDTV on the market.

According to my eyes, it has more vivid color and deeper blacks than anything I've seen on a Samsung screen.

I also have no issues with banding.

To say that the 120hz sets make the 60hz sets look bad is silly. Movies are filmed at 24FPS. Why do we need something that updates 120 times per second?

For $1750 you could probably find a 1080P 50" Plasma or LCD.

First off 24Hz * 5 = 120Hz. This eliminates the need for 3:2 pull down since it's basically able to do 24fps natively (although refreshing each frame 5 times is overkill to achieve this). Which 46" Sharp are you talking about? Unless it's a high end 82 or 92, you are not really comparing similar models to the 71 series. The model I compared to the 71 is a LC-42D64U. The LC-42D64U is Sharp's best 42" LCD. The model I presented is a 40". When I compare the model I mention and the LC-42D64U, the Samsung looks better and lot of people agree. If you want to compare a 46" 71 series to a Sharp 46", just tell me which one you want to compare. Do not just chime "I also have a 46" Sharp and Consumer Reports says it's the best." If Consumer Reports tell you that Sony is selling the best dog sh*t in the world, it's still smelly dog sh*t! I feel like you are taking this personal. Do not do that. If you want my original post to reflect it in more detail of what I was viewing, I sure well adjust. Just remember, at the end of the day you have to look at the TV when you get home so make sure the TV you buy looks good to you and not CR(They aren't the ones watching YOUR TV!).

P.S.
If you like Samsung, buy Samsung!
If you like Sharp, buy Sharp!
But I do not give a d*mn which one you own/buy! IT'S YOUR TV!

I'm talking about the Sharp 46D64U, and it *is* a valid comparison seeing as the panel in it is pretty much identical to the panel in the 42D64U (albeit bigger).

I'm also not taking this personally. I don't understand your hostile tone; I was simply stating my opinion. If you don't agree with Consumer Reports, perhaps you should read the Cnet review where they said it had the best black level they've ever seen aside from a plasma.

I agree that the Samsungs are good screens. When I bought my set a few months ago, a 42" Samsung was around $1600-$1700. The 46" Sharp was $2200 and to me had a considerably better picture. The Samsung looked washed out in comparison, to my eyes anyway.

Well then you have not seen the 71 series by Samsung. It may have been out when you purchased your Sharp, but it was not $1600-1700, and you will not find it in that price range at any B&M. If you go to BB now, you can find it at $2200 or around that price point. I disagree about a good comparison because comparing a 40" and 46" in store might be skewed because you're going to be closer to the screens which will reveal some graininess of a bigger model. Also Samsung's have a glossy screen which if has bad lighting, can make its black look bad(Cnet says it's better to watch it in the dark to avoid it any way). I do not like Consumer Reports because they do not review all models available, and they review models which at wrong price points. They go by original msrp which is way off from what TV's sell. Well Cnet has not reviewed the 71 series yet, but looking for similar models to it, they all scored higher than your Sharp. These reviews might be good for picking a few to research, but they are not the people watching YOUR TV.

P.S. Cnet did a 120Hz review, and they skipped the Samsung model. They said there was not much difference, but I doubt they hooked up a HD DVD Player capable of doing 1080p24 for testing.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: mcmilljb

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: mcmilljb

Originally posted by: SickBeast
I'll just chime in that I also have a 46" Sharp LCD HDTV (1080P).

According to Consumer Reports, it's the best 46" HDTV on the market.

According to my eyes, it has more vivid color and deeper blacks than anything I've seen on a Samsung screen.

I also have no issues with banding.

To say that the 120hz sets make the 60hz sets look bad is silly. Movies are filmed at 24FPS. Why do we need something that updates 120 times per second?

For $1750 you could probably find a 1080P 50" Plasma or LCD.

First off 24Hz * 5 = 120Hz. This eliminates the need for 3:2 pull down since it's basically able to do 24fps natively (although refreshing each frame 5 times is overkill to achieve this). Which 46" Sharp are you talking about? Unless it's a high end 82 or 92, you are not really comparing similar models to the 71 series. The model I compared to the 71 is a LC-42D64U. The LC-42D64U is Sharp's best 42" LCD. The model I presented is a 40". When I compare the model I mention and the LC-42D64U, the Samsung looks better and lot of people agree. If you want to compare a 46" 71 series to a Sharp 46", just tell me which one you want to compare. Do not just chime "I also have a 46" Sharp and Consumer Reports says it's the best." If Consumer Reports tell you that Sony is selling the best dog sh*t in the world, it's still smelly dog sh*t! I feel like you are taking this personal. Do not do that. If you want my original post to reflect it in more detail of what I was viewing, I sure well adjust. Just remember, at the end of the day you have to look at the TV when you get home so make sure the TV you buy looks good to you and not CR(They aren't the ones watching YOUR TV!).

P.S.
If you like Samsung, buy Samsung!
If you like Sharp, buy Sharp!
But I do not give a d*mn which one you own/buy! IT'S YOUR TV!

I'm talking about the Sharp 46D64U, and it *is* a valid comparison seeing as the panel in it is pretty much identical to the panel in the 42D64U (albeit bigger).

I'm also not taking this personally. I don't understand your hostile tone; I was simply stating my opinion. If you don't agree with Consumer Reports, perhaps you should read the Cnet review where they said it had the best black level they've ever seen aside from a plasma.

I agree that the Samsungs are good screens. When I bought my set a few months ago, a 42" Samsung was around $1600-$1700. The 46" Sharp was $2200 and to me had a considerably better picture. The Samsung looked washed out in comparison, to my eyes anyway.

Well then you have not seen the 71 series by Samsung. It may have been out when you purchased your Sharp, but it was not $1600-1700, and you will not find it in that price range at any B&M. If you go to BB now, you can find it at $2200 or around that price point. I disagree about a good comparison because comparing a 40" and 46" in store might be skewed because you're going to be closer to the screens which will reveal some graininess of a bigger model. Also Samsung's have a glossy screen which if has bad lighting, can make its black look bad(Cnet says it's better to watch it in the dark to avoid it any way). I do not like Consumer Reports because they do not review all models available, and they review models which at wrong price points. They go by original msrp which is way off from what TV's sell. Well Cnet has not reviewed the 71 series yet, but looking for similar models to it, they all scored higher than your Sharp. These reviews might be good for picking a few to research, but they are not the people watching YOUR TV.

P.S. Cnet did a 120Hz review, and they skipped the Samsung model. They said there was not much difference, but I doubt they hooked up a HD DVD Player capable of doing 1080p24 for testing.

CNET also had a defective set for the Sharp 46D64U. If you read their comments, they reduced the score greatly because they had green and pink lines running through the image.

Consumer reports does their quality rankings independantly from their value ratings...I really don't think they're as bad as you make them out to be.

The only 120hz TV I've seen was a Toshiba. I saw it side-by-side an identical 60hz Toshiba, and it was a little nicer...the image was sharper; I'm not sure if that has anything to do with 120hz. 😕

You seem to be fixated on the fact that I own the Sharp TV. Yes it is mine. Yes I like it. Sure I suppose it could make me a little biased. I'm just here to chime in with my experience with the set and to share with some people the fact that I put in a fair bit of research before purchasing and found it to be the best value of all the 46" sets out there right now. :light:

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: ICXRa
I have been looking at getting a LCD for sometime now and had basically decided on the 40" 61 or 65 series until this came along.

Back in the the summer I went in to look at the AQUOS D62's and was sorry to see them not look like I had hoped. I'm sure they were just out of the box with no settings dialed in or worse yet somebody clueless had fooled with them but the color just overall seemed more flat and less vivid. Not a bad picture by any means but didn't stand up to the XBR2's and 3's or the Sammy's I was looking at. Never got to see a Sharp D92 series yet.

The banding thing really is what pushed me away from the Sharp and with Sony the flashlighting and from reading AVSForum these problems are still there for a fair amount of customers...granted most of them are probably looking to close.

I gotta take a trip and see this model in person. Thanks for the heads up OP on this deal!

The Sharp does require calibration...by default the backlight is set way too high, and the color is set too low and too warm. I find that the colors almost look like they're 'popping' right off the screen...they're definately not flat once the set is calibrated.

How much were the Sonys/Samsungs compared to the Sharp? When I was buying, the Samsung was $500 more and the Sonys were even more expensive (maybe $700-800).

 

[SickBeast]

OP: Just as a comment - no doubt this is a good price on this particular set.

Out of curiousity, what is the color gamut of this set? I know the Sharp is around 75%. For people who don't know, 100% color gamut means that the set can display all of the colors that the human eye can see...so far no TV has reached that level yet AFAIK.

I'm asking because the specs say "wide color gamut backlight".

 

[ICXRa]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: ICXRa
I have been looking at getting a LCD for sometime now and had basically decided on the 40" 61 or 65 series until this came along.

Back in the the summer I went in to look at the AQUOS D62's and was sorry to see them not look like I had hoped. I'm sure they were just out of the box with no settings dialed in or worse yet somebody clueless had fooled with them but the color just overall seemed more flat and less vivid. Not a bad picture by any means but didn't stand up to the XBR2's and 3's or the Sammy's I was looking at. Never got to see a Sharp D92 series yet.

The banding thing really is what pushed me away from the Sharp and with Sony the flashlighting and from reading AVSForum these problems are still there for a fair amount of customers...granted most of them are probably looking to close.

I gotta take a trip and see this model in person. Thanks for the heads up OP on this deal!

The Sharp does require calibration...by default the backlight is set way too high, and the color is set too low and too warm. I find that the colors almost look like they're 'popping' right off the screen...they're definately not flat once the set is calibrated.

How much were the Sonys/Samsungs compared to the Sharp? When I was buying, the Samsung was $500 more and the Sonys were even more expensive (maybe $700-800).

When I was first looking at them I didn't even consider the Sammy's as I went in looking for the D62 model Sharps. The XBR2 on display looked amazing but it had Sony's loop feed running through it so they made sure it did while all the brands were getting the same showroom feed. The XBR2 was around $2300 at this time and the Sharp D62 was around $1500. Later I went back on Labor Day and saw the Sammy 61 on sale for $1399 but it is usually $1800. This was at Sears BTW as I am looking to use some gift cards I have.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: ICXRa
When I was first looking at them I didn't even consider the Sammy's as I went in looking for the D62 model Sharps. The XBR2 on display looked amazing but it had Sony's loop feed running through it so they made sure it did while all the brands were getting the same showroom feed. The XBR2 was around $2300 at this time and the Sharp D62 was around $1500. Later I went back on Labor Day and saw the Sammy 61 on sale for $1399 but it is usually $1800. This was at Sears BTW as I am looking to use some gift cards I have.

Well, just to let you know, the only 'buyer's remorse' I've had so far have been:

1. A 46" 1080P Samsung refurb for $1300 at a local computer shop.

2. There's a 50" 1080P Panasonic plasma at Costco now for $2000.

Good luck. 🙂

 

[pmoa]

Wow great deal. i was jsut surfing Amazon.com and the LNT5271F is 2917.80 shipped! :shocked: That is the best price I have seen on this set. Also, the only difference in this television and teh LNT5281F is that the 81F is LED backlit at 50,000:1 dynamic. I am wondering if I should pull the trigger on this set!

 

[Onund]

Originally posted by: pmoa
Wow great deal. i was jsut surfing Amazon.com and the LNT5271F is 2917.80 shipped! :shocked: That is the best price I have seen on this set. Also, the only difference in this television and teh LNT5281F is that the 81F is LED backlit at 50,000:1 dynamic. I am wondering if I should pull the trigger on this set!

On amazon it sometimes dips to just over $2700. Just put it in your cart and check back every day or so. I've seen it go between $2700 and $3500 3 times in one day. Hmm... I never really checked on the shipping but every other time it was free.

I bought the 5271 at Fry's just over a week ago. I jsut couldn't bring myself to buying this online. I wanted instant gratification and the ability to return to the store if needed, which I will because of marks on the bezel and screen. I just need help loading this ah heck back into the car, it's huge.

Originally posted by: blanketyblank
btw since you seem to pretty knowledgable about sammy's what's the difference between the 71 series and the 69 series? They both seem to have almost identical specs and both do 120 hz.

71 series is glossy screen with 25000:1 dynamic contrast ratio
69 series is matted screen with 20000:1 dynamic contrast ratio

less CR going to a matted screen but less potential glare. Also, the 69 series does not come in 52"