Samsung LE46M87BDX vs LE46F86BDX...

[admin_exported]

Hi,

All new to this but I have tried to seach for this in the archives so not to repeat someone elses question...

I have pretty much narrowed it down to the two Samsung 46" LCD TVs based on reviews I can find on the internet and price. Both come recommended from What HIFI, but which is better?
The 'F' costs more so I presume that has extra features, so far I can work out that is 25000:1 over 15:000:1 on the 'M' and 100Hz.

Anything else? Are these two things worth the extra money, it will be used for PS3, Sky HD and normal DVD's but usually normal cable TV I suspect.

All help much appreciated, and finally whats the reliability like? Is an extended 5 yr warrenty worth paying extra for?

Many thanks
Simon

 

[Anonymous]

buy the 'm', its cheaper and the screen on the F seems to always have a slightly cloudy green tint to it which can only be removed by fiddling with the brightness and contrast ratios to the point where the detail in the blacks is lost, Samsungs are very reliable, i probably wouldn't bother with an extended warranty however sevenoaks include one in their price

 

[Anonymous]

Andy,

Are you sure the 'F' has 2 HDMI? the specification indicates 3 (2 - back, 1 side).

http://www.samsung.com/uk/consumer/subtype/subtype.do?group=television&type=television&subtype=tftlcd

Personally, I have decided to go for the F series as it has faster response rate and as you indicated, better contrast ratio.

Would have love to buy the LE52F96 LED LCD tho 😛.

 

[VoodooDoctor]

It has 3 HDMI sockets.

 

[Andy Clough]

Apologies, you're right, our database was wrong: the 'F' has 3 HDMI inputs (2 back, 1 on the side).

 

[Anonymous]

[quote user="eden188"]
Personally, I have decided to go for the F series as it has faster response rate and as you indicated, better contrast ratio.

[/quote]

so what??

100Hz is a pointless feature, okay yes, it refreshes faster but in action (bear in mind that a BD/HD disc at 24fps recycles at 72Hz) it makes no sense. And in reality (the world we live in) the difference between 15000 and 26000 different shades of grey isn't a lot. Everyone keeps on banging on about contrast ratios this and HDMI 1.3a that and its all a load of bovine manure. Go into a shop, look at the tv's, single out the ones with the features you need:HDMI's, digital tuner, PIP, HDD whatever, decide which ones you like to design of the frame on, decide which ones the picture looks best on and there you go, you've chosen your new tv, easy as that!!! Woopdy-doo!! and not a contrast ratio in sight. I can throw contrast ratios of different sets at you all day and do you know what? they don't matter!!! what matters is when you look at your tv and theres a person on a beach, you think your looking at a person on a beach and that's why only idiots and cheepskates buy their tv's and hi-fi equipment on-line (yes i did just say that) instead of in a shop comparing picture to picture you're comparing technical specifications (which can be caressed shall we say?) which in reality (i think i've already explained this point) mean Jack Schmitt.

Rant over, buy the m, unless you prefer the styling of the F or intead to listen to your tv through your tv speakers, whereby the F also has an advantage because there are better speakers (including a couple of mini-subs) inside the chasis (which i might add no-one who read through the specs noticed!).

 

[Zubkabera]

I have another factor to consider how do both compare in SD content display I recently watch M87 at friends house and wasn't too impress with freeview SD picture. As you can imagine most of the tv contents are still in SD so it is off utmost important which one perform best in displaying SD material.

Or Sony's are even better ? just a thought

 

[Anonymous]

there are too many factors for me to give you a definate answer on the subject of freeview, aerial type/position, weather, wires used, location etc etc. what i can tell you is that it looks damn good given the right feed and from what i've seen in sd it is pretty average supplied with freeview, that said, being average is not neccessarily a bad thing. and i will never buy a sony, because i know when i buy a sony, a good majority of the money i just spent went on sony convincing me i should buy the thing in the first place.

I haven't seen the Tosh or pana equivalents but ill be assuming they'll compare pretty evenly, read my above post

 

[Anonymous]

BigJ,

I'm not quite sure why you are ranting about something that I would personally go for. I am not forcing Simon to choose the F series, it's just my personally choice.

Secondly, I mentioned response rate, as in the time it takes to refresh each pixel, nothing to do with the 100hz, ie. the frame per second, these are 2 separate things altogether. The response rate for pixel indicates how quickly each pixel can be turned on or off - a low response rate (e.g. 5ms) provides a smoother movement of objects on screen. Having a slow response time will give you a 'ghost' trail commonly seen in older TFT. What I wanted to point out to Simon was something he may need to consider, he might not even spot the difference of 8ms (M series) and 6ms (F series), so this might not affect his choice. As I said, it is only my personal opinion.

If anyone could explain this more technically, please feel free to correct me. But having a go at me for making a suggestion of the fact is just a little bit OTT.

 

[Anonymous]

my comments were not directed at you personally and as you pointed it out, yes, i did mis-read what you'd written

but it was not the subject which i had addressed in my little rant, it was about how everyone is obsessed with numbers, something for which the industry (in general) is to blame for. Like i said, buying a tv is about whether you are satisfied with the picture and the design of the set, people who sit there comparing figures on the net for months on end are either (imho)

1. Beardy

2. Needlessly Obsessive

3. Making up for something they're lacking

4. Looking to impress other beardy/obsessive/lacking people

 

[Anonymous]

LOL! NW, BigJ, just a bit of misunderstanding.

It is quite correct tho that there are people who would buy their TV based on what they have 'read' and not seen. That is plain silly.

Knowing the pros and cons helps narrow down the choices and hopefully, helps protect your investment (obviously that will never be the case), but you're quite rightly pointed out, you need to see the TV and make a judgement for yourself.

Anyway, this is not the subject of this thread. Hopefully, Simon finds the right TV with other helps 🙂.

 

[Anonymous]

Hi Guys,

1st of all I'd like to thank you all for your help and thoughts, it hasnt made my decision easier as technically the only way to decide like you say is to view the TVs side by side with the same program running.

As the majority of the time the TV will be coming through a Virgin HD box but not necessarily HD programmes I need to check the quality of a normal broadcast. I get the impression putting a Full HD DVD into it will look awesome but that isnt going to happen all the time. Hollyoaks and the Rugby both still have to look clear too!!

So taking your advice I shall go and find somewhere I can view them both, on stand by mode the F is prettier in my opinion... So we shall see! 🙂

Again Cheers
Simon

 

[Mr.H]

This is not correct. In fact, the "F" has a Freeview tuner that actually works properly, unlike the "M" version which has "juddering" issues with its Freeview tuner. (originally in response to a post by Andy Clough stating that the "F" doesn't have Freeview; I had quoted Andy's message but he's removed that bit. What is it with What HiFi staff editing posts, not explaining they have done so, and leaving a non-sensical post in their wake?)