Does size matter?

[admin_exported]

Hi, so in short, does size matter? That is when it comes to choosing a flatscreen TV! I have been looking at buying a new flatscreen TV for the past few weeks or so now. I am after a TV that can offer my a great HD experience, especially one that can get the best output from my PS3, but also a TV that has a great picture for regular digital TV output. I have of course read a number of reviews and forum topics. With a budget of under £1000, ideally more towards the £800 mark i was pretty sure i was going to purchase the new Samsung LE40A656. I have seen this TV in action in several shops, showing several different outputs (blueray, sky HD, freeview, etc) and i have been pretty happy with what i have seen. However, on a recent trip to Richer Sounds i noticed that i could get a 50” plasma for the same price, in particular the Samsung PS50A476. I am aware that size is more relevant to the viewing distance, but with a viewing distance of around 3.5m, i was thinking both would be fine. After reading several reviews on the internet relating to 50” plasmas, i noticed that the Samsung PS50P96FD seemed to get some glowing reports, especially for the price. Sadly, this is slightly out or my budget range. But to conclude, does size matter when it comes to budget TV’s? Would be better to go for a smaller TV that may offer more? Or if i were to go down the 50” route, should i bite the bullet and pay the extra?

Any thoughts, opinions or ideas would be greatly appreciated.

James

 

[Anonymous]

Really a matter of personal taste. Yes there are guides on viewing distances but basically I am of the view that the bigger the better particularly for HD or good quality video. Basically, the big paradigm shift is about to happen and is already happening right now. 20 years ago 28" was huge now 32" is now the average and that is quickly moving up to 42" then 50". The next generation (10g LCD manufacturers whose capacity comes on stream in 2010) are looking at 65" - the management of one of the LCD companies that I met 1 on 1 with (I am a portfolio manager) thinks that in 10-20 years time 65" will be the average size. To me that is not inconceivable. Provided all you watch is HD (which is clearly not the case right now), then 65" can comfortably be viewed at 3.5m which I think is close to the average distance of a couch from the TV.

But again, its hard for me to tell you what size you should get - in the end its clearly up to your personal preference.

 

[Clare Newsome]

All very well, but with budget sets the bigger you get the more visible flaws can be. If it were my money, i'd rather have a better-quality, slightly smaller set than a cheap-and-nasty big beast.

But for £800 you don't have to compromise too much. I'd strongly suggest a look at Panasonic's 42in plasmas - you can get the TH42PZ80 for that kind of money, which is remarkable for a big-brand Full HD set of that size.

 

[Anonymous]

Catenaccio:
Really a matter of personal taste. Yes there are guides on viewing distances but basically I am of the view that the bigger the better particularly for HD or good quality video. Basically, the big paradigm shift is about to happen and is already happening right now. 20 years ago 28" was huge now 32" is now the average and that is quickly moving up to 42" then 50". The next generation (10g LCD manufacturers whose capacity comes on stream in 2010) are looking at 65" - the management of one of the LCD companies that I met 1 on 1 with (I am a portfolio manager) thinks that in 10-20 years time 65" will be the average size. To me that is not inconceivable. Provided all you watch is HD (which is clearly not the case right now), then 65" can comfortably be viewed at 3.5m which I think is close to the average distance of a couch from the TV.

But again, its hard for me to tell you what size you should get - in the end its clearly up to your personal preference.

I think your correct in some aspects there. Surely there must be a limit to size though, maybe not in technology, but personal preference. I would expect that in 10-20 years, size may not be the issue, but what technology you use. We have already seen OLED TV's come out in the last couple of years and whats to say there will be such a thing as a TV in 10 - 20 years time, well in the way we would describe a TV these days. But that is another debate for another day.

Back to the topic in hand. Thank you both for your help, i think more thought is needed. But i think a smaller screen with better quality may be the way the go. However, i have just come across the Samsung PS50Q97HDX [/b]and the Samsung [/b]PS50A558S1F [/b]which are both very nice TV's. Hmmmmmm, there seems to a theme to my TV choosing here. So will i go for the bigger screen and maybe take the risk on loosing some picture quality. Well im a bloke, so i guess everything comes down to size at some point.........