Just before WHF review the TV properly I thought I would share my view on the 52" version (HX903) , which is now commanding a space in the corner of the living room.
I have now compared this television with my previous purchase (short lived, due to the failing 3d imagery), the Philips 46 pfl9705.
The Sony wins!
I guess that was fairly predictable given the hassle and stress in acquiring my second TV in as many months and to ensure my marriage remains in tact and free from further television trauma. Yes I would still have preferred a projector (JVC DLA-3X) but the wife can only be accommodating to a point.
So, why the Sony over the Philips? Having collected all the various negative points from various forums and review sites, that seem to befall any television in today's market: in Sony's case - the reflective glass screen, the slightly flawed SD imaging, the expensive price tag on the 52 HX903 (although there are now some pretty good offers available if you're prepared to go on the waiting list), the slight crosstalk and ghosting on the 3D, the slightly weak upscalling ability of 2D to 3D, the hint of backlighting issues when seeing a bright light running across a black screen - for all these little quirks, I still say that Sony do a pretty good job of providing a high quality HD TV. For me, none of these idiosyncrasies in any way detract from the viewing experience, which is extremely positive overall.
I can quite happily watch HD sky or Blu-ray without feeling the need to play around with settings (unlike with the Philips) to achieve a more consistent picture.
Yes, agreed, the Philips did a more convincing job with SD but it was so temperamental overall with its settings that although the picture was brilliant when it was brilliant, these occasions seemed too infrequent for my liking.
The best news of all is that I have now 'sold the concept' of 3D as an alternative viewing experience to my wife, who (as a previous doubting Thomas) has had a taster of 3D Blu-ray and was 'blown away' by it. Not sure if either of us could watch a 2 hour feature film in 3D quite yet though - I look forward to the general release of Avatar in 3D to see if it can be done.
So, I am refusing to read my WHF review this weekend which may or may not agree with my verdict, because finally I am happy with my new TV.
(At least until next year's range of 3D tv's become available!)
I have now compared this television with my previous purchase (short lived, due to the failing 3d imagery), the Philips 46 pfl9705.
The Sony wins!
I guess that was fairly predictable given the hassle and stress in acquiring my second TV in as many months and to ensure my marriage remains in tact and free from further television trauma. Yes I would still have preferred a projector (JVC DLA-3X) but the wife can only be accommodating to a point.
So, why the Sony over the Philips? Having collected all the various negative points from various forums and review sites, that seem to befall any television in today's market: in Sony's case - the reflective glass screen, the slightly flawed SD imaging, the expensive price tag on the 52 HX903 (although there are now some pretty good offers available if you're prepared to go on the waiting list), the slight crosstalk and ghosting on the 3D, the slightly weak upscalling ability of 2D to 3D, the hint of backlighting issues when seeing a bright light running across a black screen - for all these little quirks, I still say that Sony do a pretty good job of providing a high quality HD TV. For me, none of these idiosyncrasies in any way detract from the viewing experience, which is extremely positive overall.
I can quite happily watch HD sky or Blu-ray without feeling the need to play around with settings (unlike with the Philips) to achieve a more consistent picture.
Yes, agreed, the Philips did a more convincing job with SD but it was so temperamental overall with its settings that although the picture was brilliant when it was brilliant, these occasions seemed too infrequent for my liking.
The best news of all is that I have now 'sold the concept' of 3D as an alternative viewing experience to my wife, who (as a previous doubting Thomas) has had a taster of 3D Blu-ray and was 'blown away' by it. Not sure if either of us could watch a 2 hour feature film in 3D quite yet though - I look forward to the general release of Avatar in 3D to see if it can be done.
So, I am refusing to read my WHF review this weekend which may or may not agree with my verdict, because finally I am happy with my new TV.
(At least until next year's range of 3D tv's become available!)
it seems like the more money you spend the more likely you're to get a flawed product... only wish now is that i could fit a bigger tv in the room.. but i cant so have to put up with what i have..
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram