What is the dfference between Sony KDL 32M3000 and KDL 32S3000? Can anyone enlightn me as to the differece between the Sony M &amp; S Series?
997731
Hey there! I'm in the same predicament also? I just purchased the 32m3000 series for the "cheap" price of $649 when it was available at other non competitor retailers for $550-575. (I wanted the 4 year protection plan the cheaper guys didn't offer). It's a gift for father so it's not opened yet. The only thing the store assistant said was that one model's from 2007 and the other is 2008. He didn't want to lie to me about tech knowledge he didn't know about.
393230
One big difference is the D3000 doesn't shoot video. Is it worth paying $150 more to be able to shoot video? Only you can answer that. Also, look at the megapixels. The D3000 is 10.2 megapixels, whereas the D3100 is 14.2. Do you plan to print posters from your shots? If all you're ever going to need is 4x6s and maybe the occasional 8.5x11 then you'll never miss the extra pixels. In fact, unless you tell it to shoot smaller pictures, you'll actually eat up space on your memory card faster with the D3100. If you aren't advanced enough to know about the other differences between the two, I'd save money and go with the D3000. If you really want to be able to shoot video with your camera, then the D3100 is a no-brainer.
660619
Looking at the specifications for the D4 would indicate that there is little difference between the two camera except for the additional ISO speed of the S model. While I have not had any experience with the D4, I can say that the D4S has significant advantages over the D3S but doesn't seem to have the same advantages over the D4 in the way that the D3S had over the D3. Thus, upgrading to the D4S from the D4 appears to be a very subjective decision.
687697
You cannot use contrast ratios to compare between brands. They are a manufacture defined value, so each brand's numbers are not equivalent. The Sony looks about equivalent to me, but everywhere I looked the equivalent Samsung is cheaper for the same (and usually by my eye better) picture quality. Add on top of that the better aesthetic value of the Samsung sets and the choice, frankly, is obvious.
1908157
I was down to the same two. I found the sony for the same price as the samsung and went for it. I think I made the right choice of the two. I only have Comcast Digital due to them not offering HD in my area. I think the picture is great with DVD's and good if not very good with SD Cable. Some of the reviews I saw did not like the sound but I think it sounds very good without external speakers. My only complaint is the blur on fast moving sporting events. I hope it improves when I get HD but I can live with it. If I had the money I would have went for the 120 MHZ on the sony xbr or samsung 4071 but could not swallow a $2000 nut for a TV. I don't think you can wrong, when I have a good signal the picture looks great. I have only had the TV for 3 weeks but find myself watching a PBS show on birds flying around for hours. I looked for 6 months before I bought the KDL-40V3000, my wife asked me what I was going to do with all my free time. I told her I was going to watch it! FYI: I bought it at Circuit City for $1299 on sale and received an additional 10% off discount from the entertainment book. Good Luck
1514948
hi, i have a similar size room, tried 26, 32 , and 37 inch. 32 is best. one thing not talked about often is, there's also a minimum viewing distance for these tvs, esp. 720p. any closer, you see the pixels, any noise in the image, etc. with a hq tv like samsung, sony, sharp, my experiments indicate for a 32" around 5 feet is about as close as i'd want to go. anything else, i'd have to go to 1080p (the sharp 32" aquos 1080p model is great up to 3 feet, but more $$). btw, right now you can pick up a samsung LN-T3242H at circuit city for $720 if you're a AAA member (you need to go to www.aaa.com/circuitcity to get a coupon code). this model is a level down from the 3253H but i picked one up yesterday and so far it seems pretty good to me. you can read about both models on amazon. good luck.
2235088
I was just debating the SX20 vs SX30, so I was really glad to find this discussion. I assumed the 30 would be an improvement, but it sounds from this discussion and many customer reviews that 20 is a better choice for image quality.
816380
Picture is FAR more amazing on the M-Series. Light bleed is a lot worse though ... The E-Series had bad dirty screen effect and a few more uniformity issues. I have had both and I would NEVER return this 70" M-Series for the basic 70" E-Series again. And even if your not a 3D fan ... You Will Be after watching the M-Series!!!
219018
Thanks for the comments. I actually bought D3000 and am pretty satisfied with it too.
118264
I enjoy them both. At present the Sony MDRZX300/BLK is slightly more expensive than the Panasonic RPDJS400W DJ, though not by much. I haven't used my Panasonic as much as the Sony; my general impression is that the Sony's audio quality may be a cut above. The "feel factor"--comfort in wearing headphones--is so subjective that any comment might mislead. I find the size and design of the Sony more convenient for storage: with their earpieces swiveled inwards, you can store them flat. The Panasonic are bulkier.
1298992
I am very happy with the k3. It works well with the light I get inside. It was a good upgrade from the 5d mark II and 7d I had. I hope to buy another one soon. I thought about the k50 or k5IIs but there's no need to go back to a lesser brand when the new one is only $1000 right now. Unless you like the color of the k50. The k3 has everything that they both have plus more.
1289824
Laurence, I've been doing a lot of research on these various Sony models (S,V,W, etc) and it appears that the S models do not have 120 hz refresh - only 60 hz - may be reason why they are the least expensive of all the models. Also, this 24p compatibility apparently only functions with Blu Ray players! Interesting. jm
2024050
I have both. Very little difference. Both are excellent for a point and shoot!
722141
Frank, thanks a million for your comparison review of the SR100 vs SR300. I am dissapointed in the low light video's of my SR100 and thought the SR300 would be better as the low light lux specs are better. After reading your review of the low indoor video quality of the SR300 I will stay with my SR100. I shoot mostly indoors so the quality of indoor video's are important to me. Dean M.
15295
You did not note the complete first model number. I'm assuming you mean the Sony KDL-40S5100. This is the same as the KDL-40SL150. Only difference is that the second number is unique to Costco (and perhaps, other warehouse stores like BJ's and Sam's if they carry it).
1249153
I don't think there is a difference. Panasonic web site shows the ZS30 and ZS30K names on the same page.
2044462
If you want a good technical review of both, check out Rtings.com. They reviewed the LN5700 last year and will have their review up of the LB6300 tomorrow. The review of the LB5800 series is already up and there are noticeable differences between that series and the LN5700 in terms of motion blur, uniformity, and bright room performance. All are important elements in terms of picture quality, and grey uniformity is particularly important if you want to minimize the "dirty screen effect" inherent to many LCD panel TVs (of course this can vary within the same model unit as well). If the review is similar for the LB6300 series as it is for the LB5800 series, I also think the LB6300 series is the easy choice unless your biggest concern is how it performs in a bright or sunlit room. Hope this helps.