Monitor as TV

[tomayresss]

Just found out that the house I'll be living in next year has a weak freeview signal, and so as I won't have access to the main aerial this poses a problem.

I have decided therefore that it would be a more cost effective option to get a monitor for watching movies (with HDMI port) instead of spending money on a TV. Will the monitors be as good screens as the televisions for movies etc?

Can anyone recommend any manufacturers/ranges that would be suitable?

Thanks

 

[lobby]

Im no expert on monitor screens, but i do believe that the quality difference has narrowed so much now it's hard to justify spending the extra money.If i was looking at anything under 60" then i would opt for a lcd or plasma, over 60" projector.For example some 65" screens could cost well over £10k and you could get a pretty tasty hc setup for that.i guess you will be feeding the screen with Sky and would expect a Plasma or Lcd without a tuner to be cheaper, but it doesn,t work out that way.Sky sports and news channels use monitors but cost will not be a factor for them.Anyway Samsung, Nec make very good screens, what size are you looking at ?.Try this link

http://www.wedgwood-group.com/30_and_above_lcd_desktop.htm

 

[kinda]

Hello,

I think you may be able to get something suitable cheaper than a TV but may need to be careful, and focus on ones that are a TV without tuner, rather than being aimed as computer monitors or dual computer monitor / TVs.

I know someone who got a large Fujitsu monitor very cheap on eBay, as the monitor tag put people off. But as a supplement to a projector for casual viewing I was considering a monitor TV hybrid. After a lot of investigation while it offered 1080P, it was needless fior a TV at the 22" - 26" size I was looking at and it missed out on things like 1080P24, virtual surround sound, and good media playback facilities. Also, the particular one was 23" but not much cheaper than the 26" I went for.

 

[tomayresss]

I was under the impression that for about 26" a monitor would be much cheaper than a tv, but now I'm not so sure...

 

[professorhat]

Probably not - 26" is pretty big for a monitor, thus not much demand for one, thus fairly expensive to produce since it won't be mass produced on the same scale as smaller monitors and will cost more as a result. On the other hand, 26" for a TV is a fairly common desired size, thus more demand, thus it'll be mass produced on a greater scale and the economies of this bring prices down.

 

[tomayresss]

Thinking of going for a 24" as that would considerably reduce the cost.

Anyone had any experience with HD playback on BenQ or Dell monitors?