Which TV should I get?

Neither. Watch for this TV at Frys/ My bro in law just got it for 699.

http://www.frys.com/product/6179469?site=sr:SEARCH:MAIN_RSLT_PG

 

this will answer your other questions
http://tinyurl.com/2cudax7

 

yes butterfingers this is a MUCH better deal. only thing i think costco has a better warrenty. i would assume frys has a normal type of warrenty though.

 

http://www.costco.com/Browse/Product.aspx?Prodid=11534760&whse=BC&Ne=4000000&eCat=BC|79|2341&N=4001381&Mo=2&No=0&Nr=P_CatalogName:BC&cat=3314&Ns=P_Price|1||P_SignDesc1&lang=en-US&Sp=C&hierPath=79*2341*87250*&topnav=

 

Explanation of HZ from BestBuy

Screen Refresh Rate This refers to how many times per second a TV screen image is completely reconstructed. A TV with a 60Hz refresh rate means that the picture will be completely rebuilt 60 times in one second. Why is this important? Generally, the more the screen is refreshed, the smoother the images will appear.

 

Just used google for this sorry lol.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090509065242AAtrXR8

 

Just get tv reviews from cnet.com. Usually helps me to decide. Just search for it under reviews. Cuz you don't want to get a crap tv, especially if your going to spend your hard earned money..

 

You need to know that Vizio is an "off-brand." Sony, Samsung, or Sharp are all better, as are companies like Panasonic. I've seen the Sony model in a Costco store. Except for being an LCD instead of an LED, it has a great feature set, with the latest Sony technology. The one thing that bugged me a little, besides it being the "soon to be obsolete, IMO, but still groovy" LCD, was that it had a reflective screen, instead of a "matte" screen. Unless you don't have a lot of windows in your room, etc., or have good curtains, you'll see quite a lot of reflections on the screen, like the old plasma displays had. Sony says it's to produce better "blacks," and maybe it does. The picture is excellent. Myself? I have a lot of windows and prefer a matte screen, which seems to absord light, rather than reflect it.

Don't buy the Vizio.

PS: the Samsung at Fry's mentioned above was on sale at the Austin store for a couple of days for $600 bucks. My SO wouldn't let me buy it! That was a fantastic deal.

 

Get the Sony in this case. You want LED, but not really edge LED.

There are edge LED's and full array LED's. The edge LED's position a certain amount of LED's in the 4 corners of the tv and those distribute light to the whole screen. This causes a lot of uneven lighting even in the high end Samsung models. I'm not sure how great it'll be on a value Vizio.

However, Vizio and all other brands make the full array LED's as well. These line up LED's in an array throughout the whole screen. The tv's are then able to control different zones throughout the screen to brighten up some LED's while leaving some completely off. This gives off an amazing contrast ratio in scenes where some of the screen needs to be dark while the other needs to be bright.

Regardless, the Sony mentioned here is a traditional LCD, and I believe it'll give you a more even picture than the Vizio edge LED. You may get better blacks on the Vizio but they are going to be inconsistent. Hope that helps.

 

We got a 55" Samsung edge lit LED for our bedroom. Its ultra thin, and with our thin profile bracket it sits right up on the wall.

One of the reasons we went for the very thing screen was the fact that you walk into the room looking right at the edge of the TV (the door is next to the wall that the TV sits on).

This has enabled us to not see that bracket/wires and thick TV on the wall.

Our model is the 6300 and the picture is absolutely stunning, yet A00man is correct. You can see some uneven lighting on very dark scenes from time to time. Its not that noticeable, but it would bother me if this was my movie watcing/media room set.

For the bedroom or a family room its perfect.

 

Do you have any opinions on the "AllShare" feature that allows users to stream content from networked PC's?

 

Do you look at a lot of scrolling stock quotes and the like at the bottom of your display? If you don't, I doubt that you would notice much of a difference.

 

I completely disagree with this. If you ever watch a show that has the camera pan, your eyes will freak out in an unpleasant way if your TV is 60 Hz.

Truthfully, I wouldn't recommend anything below 240 Hz. The 120 Hz is barely acceptable, but quickly becoming obsolete.

 

You can't go wrong with either. You aren't going to be able to tell a lick of difference between the 120 and 240. I'm curious if this Samsung or the Sony model allow you to adjust dejudder and blur separately... Regardless, you will be happy with either tv.

 

I'd never recommend 60 HZ, but I disagree with you, Drox! For the casual user of an HD display, 120 HZ is going to be just fine. They've sold millions of the things and people are enjoying them everywhere. I'd prefer the "latest" in technology myself, but not everyone who is not "an early adopter" is willing to pay a premium to get it. It's why I suggested the Sony he listed. While it's not an LED, it has Sony's latest display engine and, yes, is 240 HZ.

 

Black Friday less than four months away. It might be worth waiting.

 

Respectfully, you're forgetting one very important fact: I'm right, and you're wrong.

See, I have a nice 52" Samsung which is 120 Hz. and for most shows (and ticker text) it's smooth, but every now and then the image jitters when it pans. If I disable the 120 Hz, it goes down to 60 Hz and it REALLY looks jittery.

so... in summary..

60 Hz - completely unacceptable
120 Hz - acceptable, but not recommended (soon to be obsolete)
240 Hz - recommended

 

I have the Sony 60" LED(240Hz) and it's pretty amazing buy damn it's expensive but I got a good deal on it. Great viewing angles. But if you are on a budget. I would recommend you go with the Panasonic Viera TC-P50G25 (plasma). Best tv you're going to get with that price. You will not regret it.