92" Mits DLP coming!

[Captain Kirk]

Originally Posted by Hillside Trece

Interesting analysis; I too found the images on the 70" Sharp at a local BB to be pretty eye-catching, but I happen to like the look of LCD at any rate. With the Mitsubishis, it's a weird thing...depending on where I've seen them set up and displayed, the picture quality is either atrocious or good -- but never ridiculously great. That's why I was so concerned about purchasing one of these because I have a rear projection set now, and while my Sony SXRD is nice, I am wondering if one of the Mitsubishis -- more than likely the smallest 72 or 73", whatever it is -- would yield a great improvement in viewing experience save for the massively larger screen...

I had the SXRD in my bedroom until I upgraded it recently. I had it during the same time as ownership of the 72" DLP and I honestly didn't think the DLP yielded a better picture quality. It's more a size vs cost thing. I don't think the Sharp 70" had came out yet when I bought the DLP. With the right settings, the DLP is nice, especially on HD, but it just doesn't have the pop LED/LCD types do. The DLP won't have the same problems as the Sharp, since there won't be backlight bleeding or dead pixels, etc. But you have mirror failure possibilities and lamp failures, but all of those can be fixed easily.

[Hillside Trece]

Originally Posted by Serendipity

I had the SXRD in my bedroom until I upgraded it recently. I had it during the same time as ownership of the 72" DLP and I honestly didn't think the DLP yielded a better picture quality. It's more a size vs cost thing. I don't think the Sharp 70" had came out yet when I bought the DLP. With the right settings, the DLP is nice, especially on HD, but it just doesn't have the pop LED/LCD types do. The DLP won't have the same problems as the Sharp, since there won't be backlight bleeding or dead pixels, etc. But you have mirror failure possibilities and lamp failures, but all of those can be fixed easily.

I see...

This is the most interesting aspect of your reply above, in terms of how it relates to my decision dilemma:

With the right settings, the DLP is nice, especially on HD, but it just doesn't have the pop LED/LCD types do.

That's exactly what I've been suspecting all along, and why I may just forget the idea of the Mitsubishi...

Do you feel there's a definite difference in eye-snapping "pop" between rear projection displays and flat screen types (LCD/plasma)?

[Mirage29]

DLP technology is awesome. There have been many studys that have proven that DLP projector is better than a LCD projector. When it comes to TV's DLP will never get the respect that plasma and LCD get simpliy becuase it's not flat. You can't hang it on the wall. That has always been DLP biggest con When HDTV first came out a DLP TV back in the days of 1080i a 65 inch would weigh over 300lbs pounds. Today you can get a 82 inch for just little over 100 pounds but it's still not good enough for most people they want a TV that they can hang on the wall. It has already been proven when it comes to 3D. DLP tv's are by far the best no TV in a store is going to letter better led-lcd because they are the brightest. All they do in the store is turn up the brightness contrast all the way which makes a TV look really good with all those bright light but in a room at night it doesn't look good at all. The new mits TV allow have a natural, bright even brighter setting so you can switch from a daytime to nighttime setting.

[ZIPPO]

http://www.videomount.com/pages/DLP-Mounts/DLP-2/139
199.jpg

[Mirage29]

This is great news for DLP fans such as myself DLP biggest con is no longer. Thanks a lot for posting this. To bad they didn't have something like this when HDTV's first came out DLP would have done a whole better than plasma. Back at the same time I don't see how you could have made a mount for TV that weigh over 300 pounds and was hidious looking in the back

DLP pride

[Hillside Trece]

Originally Posted by Mirage29

DLP technology is awesome. There have been many studys that have proven that DLP projector is better than a LCD projector. When it comes to TV's DLP will never get the respect that plasma and LCD get simpliy becuase it's not flat. You can't hang it on the wall. That has always been DLP biggest con When HDTV first came out a DLP TV back in the days of 1080i a 65 inch would weigh over 300lbs pounds. Today you can get a 82 inch for just little over 100 pounds but it's still not good enough for most people they want a TV that they can hang on the wall. It has already been proven when it comes to 3D. DLP tv's are by far the best no TV in a store is going to letter better led-lcd because they are the brightest. All they do in the store is turn up the brightness contrast all the way which makes a TV look really good with all those bright light but in a room at night it doesn't look good at all. The new mits TV allow have a natural, bright even brighter setting so you can switch from a daytime to nighttime setting.

A couple of things here:

I agree completely that this mass obsession over having the thinnest screen in the world to hang on the wall with regard to TV sets is plain asinine already -- I own a 50" Sony SXRD rear projection set and wouldn't trade its sheer solidity and mass for any of the flimsy, wobbly flat panels out today that feel like pieces of cardboard when you touch them in stores, and they're on their "stands." My display just feels SO much more stable, of higher quality and tangible...on the other hand, we're looking towards an LCD or plasma next simply because we want to get something in a 65 to 70 inch size, and no one makes the rear projection screens any longer other than Mitsubishi, and their smallest screen begins at 72 or 73 inches or so. But I'm not going to be hanging this next flat screen on the wall...

Additionally -- you mentioned that stores turn up the "brightness contrast" to make these sets seem "brighter" in retail conditions, but brightness is often confused by MANY for a "bright picture." Brightness controls BLACK LEVEL, and when this is jacked up, the picture ends up looking washed out, not "bright." Contrast is the white level and is a totally different control -- this setting can affect the picture's overall "punch" and "brightness" and it may in fact be true that most stores jack this control way up (which on many sets crushes whites and makes details get lost). This theory makes sense, because most sets in their factory default picture modes bring contrast up to the maximum setting -- I know my Sony does -- suggesting to me that this was intended for a "retail setting" of some kind for retailers to use when displaying their sets...