46" VS 52" (Quality Difference?) I've been looking at putting in a new Home theatre System. I've been looking at the Sharp Aquos LC52D85U 52-Inch 1080p 120Hz LCD HDTV. I've noticed I could save nearly $400 bumping down to a 46" Sharp that seems to be the same tv, only smaller. I would rather go big, and get the 52" but does going bigger mean just stretching the picture and sacrificing Quality? 46" VS 52" (Quality Difference?) I've been looking at putting in a new Home theatre System. I've been looking at the Sharp Aquos LC52D85U 52-Inch 1080p 120Hz LCD HDTV. I've... » Read More 46" VS 52" (Quality Difference?) I've been looking at putting in a new Home theatre System. I've been looking at the Sharp Aquos LC52D85U 52-Inch 1080p 120Hz LCD HDTV. I've noticed I could save nearly $400 bumping down to a 46" Sharp that seems to be the same tv, only smaller. I would rather go big, and get the 52" but does going bigger mean just stretching the picture and sacrificing Quality? « Show Less
238308
Since both have the same resolution/pixel count, the 46" TV should theoretically have a more dense group of pixels than a larger 52" TV. BUT, under normal viewing distances, you will notice the size difference much much more than the pixel spacing. If your viewing distance is 8 feet or less, the 46" may be a good option, but beyond 8 feet, I think you will be much happier with the 52".
238309
When I purchased, I stood back from a 50 and a 52. It was amazing to me how much larger the 52 seemed from a distance of 10-12 feet. I went with the 52.
1647950
I was wondering the same thing. Im gonna call sammy to find out. It seems like such a huge discrepancy to be in this many places. There is more than a small difference between 50,000:1 and 15:000:1. If you find out please let me know ***EDIT*** After calling Sammy's CS they informed me that it was infact a 15,000:1 ratio'd tv. Not bad, but nowhere near the 50,000:1 that has been advertised all over the net. Thanks **EDIT #2** This TV is great. I love it. I would go into detail about the performance and quality, but its one of those things that you really need to see in a display next to a lesser tv. I have this 32 incher right next to a Sharp Aquos 32gp1u and it out shines in almost every way except for the ease of adjusting the picture. Apart from the minor menu quibble this tv is as close to perfect as you are going to find in a 32 inch model. Hands down and without a doubt worth the money if you want a quality 32 flat panel tv with lots of inputs.
354922
Go for size and 120hz. I have a friend who has 60hz and her TV is 6 inches bigger then mine, but she likes mine WAY MORE (i have a ln46a650, she has a sharp). Go for 120hz and size, you will not be disapointed ;)
1348881
I literally just ordered a KDL-W3000 52 inch television 1 hour ago. I did 3 months of research and although I am not sure how I'll fell when I get the television, I can say that I went for the w3000. I looked at some seocnd tier brands first, but quickly moved on to the main brands.... settling in on the Sharp D64 or a Toshiba 167 or the Sony W3000. Of course the Sony was the most expensive of the brands I was looking at. As far as picture and blur: I can not even tell you if I could see any difference between the w3000 and the XBR, so I went for the XBR. I did see one scene in a movie where I saw a slight amount of motion blur, so I am sure it exists.. the quesiton is, "how bad does the blur appear to you and what is it worth for you to minimize the blur" ? For me... the answer was in my order.. I went with the W3000. The price was $2309 no tax, no delivery fee.
390352
I would say yes. I was in the exact same position just a short month ago and before that 2 years ago. My 1st purchase of an LCD was between a 37" and a 40". I went with the 40 and was very happy I did. When our 40" went into the bedroom and we were looking for a TV room replacement it was between the 46" and the 52". So we were looking at 6 more inches or a whole foot. You may not initially notice a big difference in the store because there are so many sets side by side, but when you get it home you'll really see how nice a large screen looks. (if you have the space) Now that we have a 52" I feel like a 60" would be just fine at my home. I ended up with a Samsung LN52A630. Its a very nice set with the 120HZ process rate and I got a very good deal on it. If I had not gotten a deal on the set and had to choose between a 46" with the 120HZ and a 52" without it,,, I'd go with the 52". I think you'll really like seeing a BIG impressive picture. Good luck.
387725
Make sure you look at the 4665 in person before buying. The picture is better than any other HDTV (imho), but the glass surface is HIGHLY reflective. If you have any lights in the area (or windows) it may be very distracting. I went with the 4661 at $1,600.
816550
Good question. One thing you might want to consider is what I just found out yesterday... a salesman showed me what happens when you watch a standard def. digital broadcast on a top-of-the-line Sony LCD with 120hz compared with the Samsung 40A650. Wow, what a difference! Nobody ever mentions what standard def. looks like on these 1080p LCD sets. The Sony was terrible, the Samsung was fine. It's the pixelation of edges during movement problem. I guess the 120hz motion control only works in HD mode on most sets (that's what the saleman said), while Samsung's works in standard mode, too. So, go to a store that will show you what the picture looks like on the 46A550 in standard def mode. I would also want to compare the contrast ratio between the 2 sets, as the 40A650's is pretty hard to beat.
2032324
Thanks for your input I was wondering why this is so, I was worried whether there was a reason like the 42" was manufactured some place different and perhaps had less quality, or it was something like you're saying, they just have more 42" TVs and need to sell them. Hopefully it's the latter.
1936860
Just purchased the 26" 450 during last days of Circuit City closing so got price close to Walmart price of the 330. Had compared the 330 for months to the same size Vizio that only costed $357, and wife could not tell the difference between all three of them, other than the Vizio was about $150 less. I really don't think there is a perception difference between 330 and 450. We use in the bed room and speakers are fine, unless you need a high powered surround sound effect.
187897
i can't speak for the 46", as my TV is the 22"...that being said, you are correct, my set actually has a 60hz refresh, not the 120 that is hinted at in the "marketing" material...this is technical malarkey for "sort-of"...well it's not...for a little set in the kitchen where we use ours no big deal at all...we watch all sorts of stuff on it, including Blu-Ray movies...for a "main" set where you are watching a lot of "action-stuff" like sports this would be a consideration...blurring as an example...Samsung makes a great product, however my personal recommendation for something that large i.e., would be a Sony...they do cost more, and the picture is worth it...and the re-fresh will more likely be an actual 240hz or better depending on the model...good-luck...jo'c
1642793
The television set of this make and model which I bought and reviewed was 40 inches - as a matter of fact, the whole box it came in wasn't even 60 inches, lol. However, I must say that I do not know for sure if Sharp makes another size tv set with this same exact model code, but I doubt it, since it would cause a lot of confusion and irritation if people were searching for one size and another size kept popping up under the same model...it's possible that the the other place you mentioned just made a simple typographical error.
1186631
For what it's worth, I went to sharp website to check this out as I was also confused. It apparently IS 1080P. Here's the link: http://www.sharpusa.com/ForHome/HomeEntertainment/LCDTV/Models/LC32LE551U.aspx
508403
The only reason I can see is that Samsung discontinued this t.v, and with the overall design is not as space efficient as any of Samsungs other dlp televisions. I have this one and also a 720p set by samsung which I bought in 10-2006. Just to let you know, Samsung also has on sale a 50" DLP 720p set for $899. I bought this one, and gave the 720p set to my parents, and to be honest with you I didnt notice a difference at all. If youre just breaking into the HD world, Id suggest getting one of the HLT models from samsung that is on sale now on amazon. You wont notice a difference, save yourself hundreds, and will less likely have problems with the set, as I and many others have with this particular model.
1262698
That's good to know Bridger. I have this one (Samsung plasma PN50B450) as well and the manual states that brightness and contrast should be reduced to prevent burn in while play video games. Also appreciate the first hundred hour rule-mixing tv with games.Thanks. The only thing I'm worried about is my kids walking away from a video game and a screen just sitting there. But hey, for the price you could buy another one and not spend what you can for a 1080p lcd 52 inch. I know that defeats the purpose but isn't that why you would be interesed in this tv anyways? for the price?
1671231
Run away from this tv, if you're looking for a quality picture. I kept it 2 weeks and sold it. My 60" Samsung (About 2 years old) has a much, much better picture. If you'll accept a poor quality picture for a low price, than its fine. But, if a quality picture is worth an extra couple hundred...than buy a Samsung. I had Sharp send out a technician, and he even said you won't get a Samsung picture on a Sharp tv. Don't be fooled by 4K, no matter what you read. My advice, stay away from 4K for a couple more years, and save awhile longer until you can get a Samsung. The difference is night and day. If you buy the Sharp, you'll remember what I said for years. Good Luck.
1876986
Currently on a 52". Volume is volume. I don't see a why the size tv matters. It can get loud and it is clear. Enhances experience with any tv because TV speakers suck
2272683
After MUCH watching of this and other 46" and 52" LCDs, IMHO this is the perfect viewing distance for a 46". Others say a 52" is even fine at this distance, but I find that periodically I see things at 10 feet that I don't at 12, so I like 12' for a 52". YMMV