 "Extremely efficient purchase" | 2009-11-21 |
| - Reviewed By User: A1ZITVZ6N01FCU |
I spent nearly 3 months (almost daily) researching HDTVs before purchasing this TV; at first the technologies available, then brands and products individually, and finally resalers.
With many reviews from various online sources (zdnet, amazon, etc...) I determined that I first needed to get a plasma. Why? #1: I prefer quality over anything else (deeper blacks, more vivid coloring and detail, and more accurate motion display). #2: A friend of mine has a $1800 LCD of which I get motion blur sickness when watching (everyone's eyes are less or more sensitive to motion capture technology). #3: The lack of contrast/brightness compared to LCD doesn't affect me since I don't watch it while sitting outside in broad daylight or in an atrium full of windows. #4: "Burn-ins" is a completely null argument. LCDs get burn-ins just as much as plasmas do; I've seen it first hand. And burn-in prevention (pixel shifting which isn't really noticable, among other things) helps prevent it. Either way, if you're watching TV or playing a video game that has stationary menus or display frames for more than 4 hours, you need to get out more IMHO.
I then determined that Pioneer had the leading quality, but was also discontinuing their plasma product lines and were extremely expensive. Samsung and Panasonic were pretty much tied in second for quality, but Panasonic was pricier for roughly the same quality.
After this I found that the media content displayed on a 42" won't be as noticable in 1080p as opposed to 720p, and 42" happens to be the right size for a mediocre budget and viewing distance. Another note is HD channels from all content providers are actually only up to 720p now. Blu-ray discs (1080p) are still expensive to purchase and higher layering technologies are coming, which will drive those costs down later on.
Surprisingly though, while playing 1080p content from my computer connected via DVI-HDMI cabling, I can still see a difference compared to 720p content, even though the native resolution on this TV is only 1024x768. As a side note, playing any content via a computer with a good graphics card yields much better quality compared to most DVD players, tuning boxes, or other converting devices since you first have options to change resolution and refresh rate at your finger tips, and second the hardware and software used to display the content is much more capable.
Over-all, the only problem I had with the TV was the low native resolution. For the price and quality, I couldn't really complain. But since I've been using it, I've learned even that wasn't a downside.
In anything I purchase I always buy at the bottom of the curve just before things jump to expensive, but are still tried and tested quality products. |
| |
| "Very Satisfied" | 2009-11-16 |
| - Reviewed By User: AKJ36TO6PV48X |
I've had the Samsung 42B450 for about a week and I'm very satisfied. I compared this TV to the Panasonic P42S1 with 1080 resolution.
After watching them both for about 30 mins at Sears I thought the Samsung had the best picture.
I researched the TV and read all the reviews and so far the TV looks great. I watch a lot of sports and football games look great.
If you get an LCD be sure it has the 120Hz but that will cost you about $200.00 more for the same size TV compared to the Samsung 450. |
| |
| "nothing more to say...just buy it" | 2009-11-02 |
| - Reviewed By ckn@duke.edu |
There's nothing to say that hasn't already been said. I researched a ton as well, went into Best Buy and looked at a bunch of TVs side by side, settled on this Samsung, and have never looked back. I've had it for about two months now and have zero complaints. HD broadcasts look amazing, Xbox360 games look even better, and shows filmed in true HD (like Planet Earth) will blow your mind. DVD's played from the Xbox through an HDMI input look shockingly good. I wish that the third HDMI input was on the back instead of the side, but that's a minor quibble. Everyone who sees the TV -- on or off -- thinks I paid WAY more than $670 for it.
Probably the only TV that I have seen that bests this one in picture is the $4500 Pioneer Kuro Elite, and I've seen my fair share. Sports are particularly great, little to no pixellation or motion blur. And just as everyone else says, don't let the 720p deter you. It just means that you're not paying top dollar for a technology that makes almost no difference at this size (if any). I sit about 10 feet away from this TV in a La-z-boy and am in heaven every minute. You just can't go wrong. |
| |
| "BETTER picture than the Panasonic TC-P42S1!" | 2009-10-30 |
| - Reviewed By jtk7 |
| It seems almost pointless to add my 2 cents to all the positive reviews for this Samsung, so I will be brief. I have owned several HDTV's both LCD and plasma. Panasonic, LG, Olevia, JVC, Sony and Samsung. LCD TV's have their advantages (no glare & less power consumption) however plasma TV rendering of colors & contrast simply outmatch any LCD I've seen. In my opinion, these are the most important factors in picture quality. All of my LCD's including the LG 120hz I owned had comic book colors and severe ghosting / image blurring. It was very annoying, so much so that I finally sold them all! Regarding the Panasonic S1 Series 1080p 42" Plasma. Although the Panasonic had a good picture, this Samsung has an overall BETTER picture with more features. Yes, the Samsung is 720p (and thus should provide a less detailed picture) but even when viewing 1080p blu ray movies, its picture is superior. At a viewing distance of 10ft, my eyes simply cannot see any measurable loss in image detail when compared to the 1080p Panasonic. However, where this Samsung really excels is in its more fluid, clean images with more realistic but brilliant colors. NO background noise, NO problem with red & greens, (both of which the Panasonic suffers) a better ability to handle SD broadcast AND a brilliant & accurate HD picture. Also, unlike the Panasonic, this Samsung has a VGA input, analog audio output jacks and a far more intuitive program menu. More importantly the Samsung has a wider range of picture controls including gamma, white level, flesh level, film mode, 3 levels of dark or dynamic contrast and various other settings which cannot be adjusted on the Panasonic. There is much more that goes into a TV than numbers on a paper. Specs often tell very little about picture quality. Just look at the low end brands with their high specs and abysmal picture quality...you don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure this out! The panel and picture processing are vital to achieve quality images. All I can say is that with proper set up, this Samsung's picture quality is stunning...and for less than $600 its a steal. |
| |
| "Superb quality at a great price" | 2009-10-28 |
| - Reviewed By zwoel |
I researched the heck out of my first flat screen TV and after reading all the glowing reviews of this set, I bought it. I have to say, this TV has absolutely superb image quality, even in bright light. Nice, rich, deep blacks that plasma's are known for, accurate and vibrant colors, etc. Don't worry about it being 720P - no one is broadcasting in 1080P anyway! The HD quality is stunning - it looks like you're seeing things in person. Incredible clarity. The high refresh rate allows me to watch sports with absolutely no streaking that some LCD TV's have with lower refresh rates.
Amazon's fast and free delivery was also very easy. The shipper called, set up a date and time, then came in and set it up for me. It could not have been any smoother or easier.
This gets my highest recommendation. |
| |
| "Happy Samsung Fan" | 2009-10-11 |
| - Reviewed By User: A2515ICMQ5K4FK |
| I bought this based on the reviews - turned out to be a good decision - great picture and plenty of inputs - you need them if you have Roku, blu ray, vcr, and a dvd player. Only negative would be the sound - satisfactory but certainly could be better. Don't think you can beat it for what you get for the price! |
| |
Expedited Available
