Ian
Site Administrator
Registered: 28th Aug 99
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
http://www.richersounds.com/showproduct.php?cda=showproduct&pid=PANA-TH42PWD7
They've got a few similar price looking a bit cheap
http://www.richersounds.com/clearancebargains.php?cda=clearancebargains3®ion=03&category=PLASMATV&pg=
I'm not too bothered about getting the latest stuff, can't complain at the price/size. Got speakers on the stereo, just need a freeview box or something.
|
Andrew
Member
Registered: 5th May 04
Location: Skoda Octavia Estate, Ford Puma
User status: Offline
|
I'd save a couple of hundren more and get a 32" LCD HD with digital TV built in.
But that looks decent for the price and Panasonic is good stuff.
|
abdus
Member
Registered: 23rd Feb 06
User status: Offline
|
yes, cheap 
|
Brett
Premium Member
Registered: 16th Dec 02
Location: Manchester
User status: Offline
|
That look neat as! 
|
Dom
Member
Registered: 13th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
There good screens, bright colours, brilliant constrasts - bro tried the D7 (about a year ago when it was around £1600 or so) and playing anything like bad boys/top gun/star wars looked fantastic, however the anti-aliasing isn't that good on the D7s (only really started to improving on the 8/9s) - so anything like toy story, finding nemo etc looked brilliant but had edges which are noticeable.
Also note that the D7s and the likes have insertable boards that have your connections and as standard i think you only get composite and one scart input. Other boards are available (component, BNC, VGA etc) but rough price is anything from 80-150 per board.
And the screen isn't HD ready.
Its a good screen but compared to todays stuff its a bit dated. If your price band is around £800 then you might want to look into getting a samsung 32" or so. Otherwise save a bit more and head for something like the newish X60s or Pioneers (around the 1200-1600).
edit - if youre wanting to have a look at one make sure you get them to feed a decent source to it and that it isnt being fed to a few screens as the picture has a noticeable drop in quality. And take some films you know inside out (plenty more bits about this doing a search in here)
[Edited on 30-06-2006 by Dom]
|
dave17
Member
Registered: 3rd Sep 02
Location: Greater London
User status: Offline
|
Pixel Resolution 852 x 480
a pc input would look horrible
|
Dom
Member
Registered: 13th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by dave17
Pixel Resolution 852 x 480
a pc input would look horrible
how would it!? would look as good as 852x480 (just run a custom res, i do here)  would look the same as your 1024x756.....just smaller desktop.......
and anyways, it sounds like ian wants it just for DVD/TV action so it will be find for general TV and DVD play back - less pixels, but will probably look better than running a PAL signal than a 1024x756+ screen as its closeure to the original res of the input, so less upscaling (which lowers picture quality).....
|
Ian
Site Administrator
Registered: 28th Aug 99
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
Yeah just for TV/DVD etc.
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
I'm not up to date on plasmas so can't comment on that particular tv.
I would go and have a look in the shop though.
That really is the best way to do it.
As dom said with a film etc you know.
If the picture looks good to you buy it.
From looking at tv's with other people what looks good seems to be subjective and it isn't always what has technically the best picture.
|
dave17
Member
Registered: 3rd Sep 02
Location: Greater London
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dom
quote:
Originally posted by dave17
Pixel Resolution 852 x 480
a pc input would look horrible
how would it!? would look as good as 852x480 (just run a custom res, i do here) would look the same as your 1024x756.....just smaller desktop.......
and anyways, it sounds like ian wants it just for DVD/TV action so it will be find for general TV and DVD play back - less pixels, but will probably look better than running a PAL signal than a 1024x756+ screen as its closeure to the original res of the input, so less upscaling (which lowers picture quality).....
ok so what i meant was it would be a smaller desktop, everything would look huge.
and i run 1366x768 btw 
|
