Demo of Sharp 32L465M..an eye opener....Sony, Samsung pale in front of it

[nicenicenicee]

before i bought my panasonic, i happened to see sharp, it was amazing, I asked the guy if he can demo me with set top box (which i am going to see mostly), but he didn't had any.

So i assumed it was because of the quality of content. But i must say i saw it from quite close and it was amazing. better than sony,panny....
toshiba was also impressive.

 

[royalanalog]

For me my Sony 55 HX925 is the best

SONY fan, the model under discussion here is an entry level 32" one and not a high end 55" display

 

[Dirac]

I have not personally seen sharp but looking at the posts, it appears that they should be very good. But people also want a good service backup safety feeling. I dont know how Sharp fares here.
There was mention about Sony buying panels from Sharp.
It is like buying good leather to make a shoe. There ends it. We know that a good shoe is not just about only good leather!

Look at it this way. As popular brands compete with each other, they tend to be more innovative, reduce issues, understand what durability really means(popular brands have more customer feedback).

32 inch and 60 inch are at the extreme ends of the popular sizes. The real game is at 42-50 inch. The people who go for them are more demanding about PQ and other things. This is because beyond 40 inch any small defect in Picture processing gets magnified that an average user can easily grasp which TV is better. I dont know how Sharp is faring in this segment.

 

[riteshmadhok]

SONY fan, the model under discussion here is an entry level 32" one and not a high end 55" display

Thnx for reminding but still I say Sony is Sony in terms of quality,finish and video output.

 

[lake1988]

I have not personally seen sharp but looking at the posts, it appears that they should be very good. But people also want a good service backup safety feeling. I dont know how Sharp fares here.
There was mention about Sony buying panels from Sharp.
It is like buying good leather to make a shoe. There ends it. We know that a good shoe is not just about only good leather!

Look at it this way. As popular brands compete with each other, they tend to be more innovative, reduce issues, understand what durability really means(popular brands have more customer feedback).

32 inch and 60 inch are at the extreme ends of the popular sizes. The real game is at 42-50 inch. The people who go for them are more demanding about PQ and other things. This is because beyond 40 inch any small defect in Picture processing gets magnified that an average user can easily grasp which TV is better. I dont know how Sharp is faring in this segment.

Pointed out correctly...
There are hundreds of components in a HDTV...
And someone doesn't need to be a fan of a particular company to praise it's product..it's generated from customer's positive feedback only.

 

[royalanalog]

Thnx for reminding but still I say Sony is Sony in terms of quality,finish and video output.

I own a Sony TV but am not impressed with its picture quality. Unlike in the previous century's Trinitron CRT era, today Sony LCDs produce images with unnaturally high brightness and contrast (but superb color reproduction).

Go through any standard review website and you'll understand that Sony is not the best TV anymore (on performance basis). They always make TVs with a certain 'type' of picture settings which which impresses its mesmerised customers but not me.

 

[lake1988]

Probably brightness, backlight and contrast settings won't work on that tv....

 

[prosenjit]

although i am a plasma fan(even the lowest ends)
still i must say after little settings change
sony tvs are best among all lcd and led tested with hi res material
please excuse the angle of view(LG/PANA LCD)...that does not matter to me...
but normally people like super bright very vivid stuffs(the demo videos like people wearing brihgt clothes shopping brigt vegetables at exotic places) during demos..
so maybe sony failed to them...

 

[prosenjit]

with a certain 'type' of picture setting

why try pre set types....why not try manual override

 

[royalanalog]

why try pre set types....why not try manual override

I meant that the picture itself appears with boosted contrast and brightness(in every mode like Standard, Custom etc.) on my Sony CRT. However sharpness is superb and no complains about it. When connecting to the DVD Player, I have to set the picture to Custom mode and tone down the contrast a LOT to get a near-natural picture. Setting to Vivid mode literally transforms my TV into a light bulb hyeah:

 

[royalanalog]

although i am a plasma fan(even the lowest ends)
still i must say after little settings change
sony tvs are best among all lcd and led tested with hi res material
please excuse the angle of view(LG/PANA LCD)...that does not matter to me...
but normally people like super bright very vivid stuffs(the demo videos like people wearing brihgt clothes shopping brigt vegetables at exotic places) during demos..
so maybe sony failed to them...

I disagree with these opinions.

First of all, most professional review websites, for instance CNET USA have reviewed and always testify that Plasma TVs outrun LCDs in almost all of their tests. Plasma TVs were discontinued by all companies except LG, Samsung & Panasonic only because they're expensive to manufacture than the LCD ones.

In any store only vivid images capture the users' attention. Owing to this, LCD TVs gain attention and hence have more sales than Plasmas. Plasmas give the true and natural shades that is best to be watched in a dark room and hence aren't preferred by many.

Sony maybe good for watching HD material but like I already mentioned, the images have unnaturally high contrast and brightness : Sony TVs aren't natural and mild but highly bright and vivid. I feel it is owing to this reason that this brand's TVs are *always* preferred by their large fan followers

 

[shanmune]

I disagree with these opinions.

First of all, most professional review websites, for instance CNET USA have reviewed and always testify that Plasma TVs outrun LCDs in almost all of their tests. Plasma TVs were discontinued by all companies except LG, Samsung & Panasonic only because they're expensive to manufacture than the LCD ones.

In any store only vivid images capture the users' attention. Owing to this, LCD TVs gain attention and hence have more sales than Plasmas. Plasmas give the true and natural shades that is best to be watched in a dark room and hence aren't preferred by many.

Sony maybe good for watching HD material but like I already mentioned, the images have unnaturally high contrast and brightness : Sony TVs aren't natural and mild but highly bright and vivid. I feel it is owing to this reason that this brand's TVs are *always* preferred by their large fan followers

Just a correction. I think prosenjit has only pointed that Sony is better when it comes to LCD/LED and he didn't compare Sony LEDs with Plasmas.

Coming to the subject - yes, you are partially correct that Sony TVs are *always* preferred by their large fan followers. There have been also cases where people blindly suggest Sony. So this is only one half of the truth. The other half of the truth is that Sony makes one of the best LEDs as well. So just because there is a blind following for Sony, it doesn't mean that Sony is not making excellent sets. In fact, you are not alleging that Sony LEDs are bad, but you are putting your perspective that SOny LEDs do not look good in your eyes.

So again I am stressing on the point - Whether a TV looks good or bad depends entirely on the individual's eyes. Of course, there will be always some comparison between different brands, but it all boils down to an individual preference.

If you ask me what I felt through my own eyes is that I never felt any significant difference in the PQ between various brands when it comes to 32 inch screens. In fact I didn't see much difference between the Sony EX models and the Samsung models. Of course, HX850 was some thing I found appealing in my eyes, but not other Sony models like EX series or NX series. Again, this is what as I have seen in my own eyes. So you pick what looks good in your eyes. If some one never believed in this theory (theory of going by the judgement made by your eyes), this thread is a great example where one person had a liking for the PQ of one particualr brand, but some one else didn't like the same.

 

[adder]

I disagree with these opinions.

First of all, most professional review websites, for instance CNET USA have reviewed and always testify that Plasma TVs outrun LCDs in almost all of their tests. Plasma TVs were discontinued by all companies except LG, Samsung & Panasonic only because they're expensive to manufacture than the LCD ones.

In any store only vivid images capture the users' attention. Owing to this, LCD TVs gain attention and hence have more sales than Plasmas. Plasmas give the true and natural shades that is best to be watched in a dark room and hence aren't preferred by many.

Sony maybe good for watching HD material but like I already mentioned, the images have unnaturally high contrast and brightness : Sony TVs aren't natural and mild but highly bright and vivid. I feel it is owing to this reason that this brand's TVs are *always* preferred by their large fan followers

Off late most reviews mention the fact that for a bright living room condition a plasma isn't the best choice.If one has a living room with low ambient light by all means consider the cheaper plasma.

Plasma are not expensive to manufacture ,infact i even read that samsung lcd tv business is not making money and its there plasma division thats making profits.It is for that reason they have not abandoned plasma.
Most lcd panel makers are making losses due to fierce competition and some resort to even price fixing.

Every tv whether its a Sony/Samsung or a even Micromax/VU tvs they all can be adjusted to optimum levels.Which can give the users a pleasing viewing experience.No one who knows a thing or two about picture calibration would ever run their tvs in showroom settings.

The fact that you mention they are unaturally bright means that you base your assumption just by looking at showroom settings or factory defaults.

Sharp consumer tvs while good certainly not in the same picture quality league of Sony or Samsung.Their UV2A tech didn't meet the expectation of their launch Hype.Infact Sony used their panels just for 1 year and stopped using Sharp panels completely,they even withdrew their partnership and took back the investments made.

Sharps UV2A panels simply can't match the contrast levels,viewing angles of SPVA and even some AMVA/SMVA panels are starting to look better then Sharp UV2A.Some might say that the Elite is the best lcd out there but one forgets that the Elite costs a awful lot of money and was designed with the sole agenda of being the best ,it has the highest amount of local dimming zones and picture processing developed to be the best out there.

Sharp was no 1 in USA back in around 2005 there is a good reason behind it because back then they simply had the picture quality edge but they gave the crown to Sony a few years later and which in turn gave the crown to samsung.Today sharps is well behind the koreans and other japanese companies.

 

[royalanalog]

Off late most reviews mention the fact that for a bright living room condition a plasma isn't the best choice.If one has a living room with low ambient light by all means consider the cheaper plasma.

Plasma are not expensive to manufacture ,infact i even read that samsung lcd tv business is not making money and its there plasma division thats making profits.It is for that reason they have not abandoned plasma.
Most lcd panel makers are making losses due to fierce competition and some resort to even price fixing.

In none of the professional reviews have I been hinted that the plasmas under review didn't suit ambient lighting conditions.

I mentioned that manufacturing a Plasma TV's expensive because the profit attained by its maker in making a certain no of plasma TVs is lesser than making the same no of LCD TVs. Why else did so many companies like Philips, Sony, Hitachi and NEC abandon Plasmas?

Every tv whether its a Sony/Samsung or a even Micromax/VU tvs they all can be adjusted to optimum levels.Which can give the users a pleasing viewing experience.No one who knows a thing or two about picture calibration would ever run their tvs in showroom settings.

My personal experience with sub-standard brands has been very bad. Also, the image processing incorporated by the established brands like Sony, Samsung, Panasonic and lately LG in their TVs is far batter than that of Micromax, Moser Baer or VU TVs. Only a few models of Chinese/Indian brands have stood out.

The fact that you mention they are unaturally bright means that you base your assumption just by looking at showroom settings or factory defaults.

If you read my earlier posts you'll find the explanation for my statement.

Their UV2A tech didn't meet the expectation of their launch Hype. In fact Sony used their panels just for 1 year and stopped using Sharp panels completely,they even withdrew their partnership and took back the investments made.

Sharps UV2A panels simply can't match the contrast levels,viewing angles of SPVA and even some AMVA/SMVA panels are starting to look better then Sharp UV2A.

There was a time when Sony and Samsung allied and made S-LCD panels together. But Sony later exited the alliance and started buying panels from Sharp. At that time, people said Samsung's panel technology was not upto 'Japanese standards'. You say Sony exited the alliance in just one year. Isn't that funny ???

It's clear that Sony only wants to make the best TVs in the world and would even buy panels from moon to do it. Sharp developed its own panel technology and manufactured its own panels, that had its own set of issues. Quality of the technology and panels aside, I think Sharp's original work is something more reliable and praiseworthy.

Sharp was no 1 in USA back in around 2005 there is a good reason behind it because back then they simply had the picture quality edge but they gave the crown to Sony a few years later and which in turn gave the crown to samsung.Today sharps is well behind the koreans and other japanese companies.

Sharp first invented the LCD TVs in 1988 and later manufactured them when there was no other to do it. After Sony entered the LCD market, people worldwide jumped to their TVs since they were a more 'trusted' and an 'established' global brand. However SHARP is still the largest selling LCD TV in Japan, the land of technology. They know the inventor makes the best. But on the global arena, Koreans changed the game and you know how much losses the Japanese are facing today. In a world where everything changes so rapidly, I think it makes more sense to judge a brand by what kind of products it invents and not by how much it sells in the market !

 

[royalanalog]

In fact, you are not alleging that Sony LEDs are bad, but you are putting your perspective that SOny LEDs do not look good in your eyes.

I usually don't make note of the model or series numbers/names of all TVs i come across in stores. All I wanted to say is that I've observed Bravia TVs to have excessive contrast & brightness just like in my CRT TV (since the image processing techniques used by both are the similar).

The other half of the truth is that Sony makes one of the best LEDs as well. So just because there is a blind following for Sony, it doesn't mean that Sony is not making excellent sets. In fact, you are not alleging that Sony LEDs are bad, but you are putting your perspective that SOny LEDs do not look good in your eyes.

As a SONY TV owner, I too testify that Sony TVs are very good in quality. The amount of detail that it shows in the picture (coupled with ultimate color saturation) when i watch 480p movies off my DVD Player makes me feel I'm watching HD stuff! But it has serious flaws that aren't noticed by people.

 

[adder]

In none of the professional reviews have I been hinted that the plasmas under review didn't suit ambient lighting conditions.

Read my post carefully i said in bright living room condition.

I mentioned that manufacturing a Plasma TV's expensive because the profit attained by its maker in making a certain no of plasma TVs is lesser than making the same no of LCD TVs. Why else did so many companies like Philips, Sony, Hitachi and NEC abandon Plasmas?

First of all companies like Sony,philips never made plasmas panels they where just rebadged OEM panels from other companies with probably their own image processing ,Sony only sold public display panels.
Companies like Sony went the lcd way because they saw lcd as a better option as said by one of the officials in Sony display division in a digital versus interview a few years back.

As far as Hitachi its now mainly a appliance maker it has very limited sales in tvs let alone in the already small plasma sales.

My personal experience with sub-standard brands has been very bad. Also, the image processing incorporated by the established brands like Sony, Samsung, Panasonic and lately LG in their TVs is far batter than that of Micromax, Moser Baer or VU TVs. Only a few models of Chinese/Indian brands have stood out.

Its true that their image processing can't match the first tier brands but there picture settings can be adjusted for more pleasing results then factory defaults.

If you read my earlier posts you'll find the explanation for my statement.

Well i know you were a while back unhappy with your Sony Wega CRT ,i had also replied a while back i also wasn't impressed with that thailand made WEGA CRT which i also owned now in storage.
But LCDs are superior to those CRTs in every way,i just can't stand the picture quality in those CRT tvs after seeing the previous years CRT Tvs and lcds from 2006 to present lcd.
Don't be mistaken about crt tvs from older days or prior to 2004 which were good.

There was a time when Sony and Samsung allied and made S-LCD panels together. But Sony later exited the alliance and started buying panels from Sharp. At that time, people said Samsung's panel technology was not upto 'Japanese standards'. You say Sony exited the alliance in just one year. Isn't that funny ???

Sony partnered with samsung from 2004 till jan 2012 and they even today still use Samsung panels.Where as with Sony-sharp partnership lasted only from 2009 to may 2012 ,even before that Sony stopped using their panels in 2011 after which only their the 65" version had a sharp panel later even that stopped.

It's clear that Sony only wants to make the best TVs in the world and would even buy panels from moon to do it. Sharp developed its own panel technology and manufactured its own panels, that had its own set of issues. Quality of the technology and panels aside, I think Sharp's original work is something more reliable and praiseworthy.

Pioneer made the best plasma but look what happened to that company.All the japanese companies are making losses in their lcd tv business,so they have to also have bread winning affordable models.

Sony was the leader in performance in CRT days.When lcd became mainstream they still did make one of best if not the best lcd tvs around all their 2006 w2000/X2000, 2007 x3000/X350/XBR4 ,2008 X450A/xbr8 ,2011 HX925 ,2012 HX850 has got good reviews some calling it the best lcd tvs of their respective years.
Sharp also had really good or even the best lcd tvs prior to 2007 and they also launched their own Tri luminous local dimming tv in 2009 52XS1 which had superb picture with only high price as negative probably imo the best lcd of 2009 edging out the Samsung B850.

Sharp first invented the LCD TVs in 1988 and later manufactured them when there was no other to do it. After Sony entered the LCD market, people worldwide jumped to their TVs since they were a more 'trusted' and an 'established' global brand. However SHARP is still the largest selling LCD TV in Japan, the land of technology. They know the inventor makes the best. But on the global arena, Koreans changed the game and you know how much losses the Japanese are facing today. In a world where everything changes so rapidly, I think it makes more sense to judge a brand by what kind of products it invents and not by how much it sells in the market !

In japan people buy casio digital cameras more then the canon or nikon or Sony.They buy their own mobile brands which we haven't heard off.
In japan Sony is considered more of American company after having a American CEO Howard Stringer which didn't go well with the Japanese.

 

[just4kix]

Guys, what is the point? There will be performers and there will be laggards. No company can claim superiority across all segments.

 

[viper08]

Just get what you like the most and within your budget. Different people will have different opinions and that's why we have variety in the market

A very well rated gadget may not have same appeal /utility to the purchaser on his personal preferences.

Things are moving so fast nowadays especially with electronics that there will be very less time to regret and need to move on.....

 

[royalanalog]

Read my post carefully i said in bright living room condition.

Let me clarify : what I meant is that in none of the reviews did I hear from the reviewer that the PDP under review is too bad for those ambient lighting conditions. As far as my observation goes, Plasmas look a little washed out under living room conditions and not like a dark cave!

First of all companies like Sony,philips never made plasmas panels they where just rebadged OEM panels from other companies with probably their own image processing ,Sony only sold public display panels.
Companies like Sony went the lcd way because they saw lcd as a better option as said by one of the officials in Sony display division in a digital versus interview a few years back.

Do you mean to say these companies ordered other OEMs to manufacture their Plasma TVs? That's surprising as Philips was one of the very initial companies to manufacture Plasmas (remember the Philips ad way back in late 90s when a couple in bed watches TV stuck to the ceiling? ). And who'd have supplied them with the necessary panels?

Keeping aside, whatever the spokespersons might have said, the truth at the background is that Plasmas actually yield lesser profits to their makers and hence were ditched for LCD TVs.

But LCDs are superior to those CRTs in every way,i just can't stand the picture quality in those CRT tvs after seeing the previous years CRT Tvs and lcds from 2006 to present lcd.
Don't be mistaken about crt tvs from older days or prior to 2004 which were good.

Most CRT TVs manufactured after 2000 were no good compared to the ones before them. My Uncle owns a pre-2004 non 'Sparkling Wega' Sony CRT model and currently its performance is worse than a deteriorated '80s CRT TV of my grandma. Sony's pic-tube quality standard has fallen so much !!! However my Panasonic Tau purchased in 2003 is a superb performer and hasn't given me any problems yet.

LCDs are superior because all companies started to neglect CRTs & focus on LCDs. Like the whole AV world knows, although response time and contrast levels have been improved in LCD TVs, black levels still remain inferior to CRT ones.

Sony partnered with samsung from 2004 till jan 2012 and they even today still use Samsung panels.Where as with Sony-sharp partnership lasted only from 2009 to may 2012 ,even before that Sony stopped using their panels in 2011 after which only their the 65" version had a sharp panel later even that stopped.

I didn't mean Sony stopped buying panels from Samsung, i only meant they withdrew from the S-LCD JV. Regardless of however last Sony's alliances lasted for, what I mean to say is that the earlier Trinitron-tube manufacturer has probably lost quality ground to Samsung because Sony bought panels from Samsung / Sharp instead of making its *own* panels. You see, Sony has now joined hands with Panasonic to manufacture OLED TVs.

When lcd became mainstream they still did make one of best if not the best lcd tvs around all their 2006 w2000/X2000, 2007 x3000/X350/XBR4 ,2008 X450A/xbr8 ,2011 HX925 ,2012 HX850 has got good reviews some calling it the best lcd tvs of their respective years.

It's an established fact that BRAVIAa are great in image processing and color reproduction. My only gripe is that on close observation the image on Bravias looks artificially beautiful to me than the real image which can be found on LG, Samsung or Panasonic TVs, thereby rendering it unrealistic, atleast to my eyes.

Sharp also had really good or even the best lcd tvs prior to 2007 and they also launched their own Tri luminous local dimming tv in 2009 52XS1 which had superb picture with only high price as negative probably imo the best lcd of 2009 edging out the Samsung B850.

As far as I have read, reviews held XS1 in high regard but never stated that it did outperform Samsung (or Sony) LCDs! After all, with Sharp's 'inferior than Sony/Samsung/Panasonic' image processing, how could they be better at all?

In japan people buy casio digital cameras more then the canon or nikon or Sony.

Japanese customers have the spirit of innovation in them and I think that's why they go for Casio (again, the brand that invented the digi-cam in mid '90s) and Sharp LCD TVs.

They buy their own mobile brands which we haven't heard off.
In japan Sony is considered more of American company after having a American CEO Howard Stringer which didn't go well with the Japanese.

Japanese prefer their own brands first followed by the American ones. Yes, Japanese brands of mobiles incl Sharp were popular in the Japanese market until the iPhone wave swept the entire world in 2008. Post this, the Japanese mobile brands lost their market to Apple in their own soil! iPhone is the largest selling smartphone now in Japan. Neither do I think Japanese dislike American brands nor do I feel Sony LCDs don't sell high in Japan for the same reason

 

[lake1988]

My dad got two wega tvs- one is normal one and another is sparkling wega..both were purchased almost 8 yrs ago..and pic quality are still the same as it were 8 yrs ago.
I have seen various companies' tvs in our relatives houses...even they concluded that sony crt's pic quality are way superior than others...I won't say they are experts.

As per your understanding if sharp make best panels they are supposed to make best phones as well...if Marvell makes best video post processing chip they are supposed to make best bluray players...it's stupid to think that way.

Sony and samsung both use similar type of panel although they never publicly tell what type of panel they use..where as lg and panasonic use IPS panel...though those have higher viewing angle but lag behind in contrast ratio and black level than sony/samsung.

Natural feel of pic perception is different to all of us and we should not conclude a relative sense and judge that some tvs are poor in natural color reproduction.

I still don't get the joke of higher brightness/contrast settings of bravia..I mean there is three controls- backlight, picture, brightness in Normal pic settings..as well in advanced pic settings- black corrector, Advanced contrast enhancer, gamma, auto light emitter and clear white. We should know how to use this settings rather than just judging a tv is overly bright and produce unnatural color.
As well there are various "Scene" selection settings which also can be used to alter those options.