• RME Gear & Apparel

Anyone had any experience with VIZIO tv's?

jeepinkeller

jeepinkeller

Registered User
Location
Provo
Ive been looking for an lcd tv and found this Vizio brand at costco. They have a 42" lcd there for 1299, which is a killer price for an lcd of that size. Picture seems really good and reviews I have read online seem good. Havent heard much about that brand though, anyone here have any input?
 
Last edited:
Cody

Cody

Random Quote Generator
Supporting Member
Location
Gastown
we picked up their plasmas to compete with costco. the first one we pulled out was defective, and the second had screen burn in less than a week.
 
jeepinkeller

jeepinkeller

Registered User
Location
Provo
Ya ill do some lookin online. One of the reasons I was looking at costco is just because I love their kickass return policy. And while im on the subject, is plasma better than lcd or is just a matter or personal opinion?
 
waynehartwig

waynehartwig

www.jeeperman.com
Location
Mead, WA
jeepinkeller said:
Ya ill do some lookin online. One of the reasons I was looking at costco is just because I love their kickass return policy. And while im on the subject, is plasma better than lcd or is just a matter or personal opinion?
Click to expand...

Plasma's do better with contrast, much like a CRT, than LCD's do. However, high end LCD's have high contrast ratios. So if you end up with a LCD with 10,000:1 you're in good shape! Even if it's 7,000:1 or more... But 3,000:1 and you'll wish you didn't buy it.

Plasmas have a shorter life than LCD's. Plasma's also have screen burn, where LCD's don't. If you are using it for TV or movies only, then the plasma might work well for you. But if you intend on playing video games, then you need the LCD. However, LCD's are usually slower and can have ghosting or image problems because it can't draw/refresh fast enough. But again, high end and you won't have the problem. 8ms or less is a good fast speed for a LCD....

Also look at the screen resolutions... Some 40" TV's ony have 768 pixels, while the 32" do as well. Meaning, more pixelation to achieve the larger screen. 1080 is more appropriate for a 40" TV.

So... If you find a LCD with 10,000:1 contrast ratio and 8ms or faster screen, then you will have a nice LCD TV! Check out the 96 series Samsung LCD's.....A 40" is about $2,000.

Here is my reccomendation....
http://www.crutchfield.com/S-MeVfaTcNHt4/cgi-bin/ProdView.asp?g=146350&I=305LNS4096

Free shipping and in home setup as well....
 
jeepinkeller

jeepinkeller

Registered User
Location
Provo
waynehartwig said:
Plasma's do better with contrast, much like a CRT, than LCD's do. However, high end LCD's have high contrast ratios. So if you end up with a LCD with 10,000:1 you're in good shape! Even if it's 7,000:1 or more... But 3,000:1 and you'll wish you didn't buy it.

Plasmas have a shorter life than LCD's. Plasma's also have screen burn, where LCD's don't. If you are using it for TV or movies only, then the plasma might work well for you. But if you intend on playing video games, then you need the LCD. However, LCD's are usually slower and can have ghosting or image problems because it can't draw/refresh fast enough. But again, high end and you won't have the problem. 8ms or less is a good fast speed for a LCD....

Also look at the screen resolutions... Some 40" TV's ony have 768 pixels, while the 32" do as well. Meaning, more pixelation to achieve the larger screen. 1080 is more appropriate for a 40" TV.

So... If you find a LCD with 10,000:1 contrast ratio and 8ms or faster screen, then you will have a nice LCD TV! Check out the 96 series Samsung LCD's.....A 40" is about $2,000.

Here is my reccomendation....
http://www.crutchfield.com/S-MeVfaTcNHt4/cgi-bin/ProdView.asp?g=146350&I=305LNS4096

Free shipping and in home setup as well....
Click to expand...

thats some good info right there, thanks man!
 
spencurai

spencurai

Vanilla Gorilla
Location
WVC,UT
I don't work in an electronics store but this plasma is the only one I have ever seen personally with serious issues. It was a pioneer and it is probably still hanging in the American Eagle in the LAyton Hills Mall. Note the yellow crap in the picture...these were the only pixels working in that area.

Picture001.jpg


I bought a plasma despite being a critic of the technology because I paid 1100$ for my 42" samsung brand new 13 months ago. It still works so I am cool with it.
 
waynehartwig

waynehartwig

www.jeeperman.com
Location
Mead, WA
Greg said:
The Panasonic plasma we bought has a life of 60,000 hrs. That equals out to 27 years at 6 hrs a day. :eek: I think the tv will be far outdated before it ever expires. :D
Click to expand...

Most plasmas have a 50,000 hour life while LCD's are 60,000. But that is a failure life. IE 50-60K hours until the unit FAILS. Screens changing colors, burnin, etc. aren't factored in there. Which makes the LCD more reliable. But you are right, most people keep a TV for about 5 years. I doubt either set will have any problems in the 5 years you have it - or even 10 years.

LCD's also have a much purer color. Meaning a blue is actually blue, yellow is yellow, etc. Where plasmas and CRT's vary by manufacture. LCD's are a digital image, where plasmas and CRT's are mechanical. LCD's are also uneffected by heat/cold, where plasmas and CRT's are. LCD's just don't do shading very well, where the others do.

There are a lot of pros and cons to all three: CRT, LCD and plasma. The nice thing about it though, is the pros and cons can be avoided for the most part if you buy the correct TV for your viewing style. Doing so will also garuntee you will keep the TV longer.

I personally have a Toshiba 36HF12 (36"), CRT HD TV. This TV cost me $2,000 in 2003 (you can pick up a refurbed one for $200 now). It is a 16:9, 1080p, flat screen and it weighs in at over 200 lbs. But the quality, picture, etc. are outstanding! Point is, I've been looking at upgrading (making $60k on a house after only 2 years strats this type of thinking) to a LCD or plasma TV. But then I go sit back in front of my TV, and I'm not sure I want to replace it! Make sense?
 
Greg

Greg

I run a tight ship... wreck
Admin
Location
Grand Junction, CO
waynehartwig said:
Most plasmas have a 50,000 hour life while LCD's are 60,000. But that is a failure life. IE 50-60K hours until the unit FAILS. Screens changing colors, burnin, etc. aren't factored in there. Which makes the LCD more reliable. But you are right, most people keep a TV for about 5 years. I doubt either set will have any problems in the 5 years you have it - or even 10 years.
Click to expand...

The Panasonic plasma 60,000 hr rating is the point when the screen will be 1/2 the original brightness, not total failure.
 
Cody

Cody

Random Quote Generator
Supporting Member
Location
Gastown
Greg said:
The Panasonic plasma we bought has a life of 60,000 hrs. That equals out to 27 years at 6 hrs a day. :eek: I think the tv will be far outdated before it ever expires. :D
Click to expand...

if it last 60k hours then you'll be the first and only plasma that made it that far.

I have 3 plasmas in my back room that I'm trying to white wash to get rid of screen burn, 1 that has a purple top left corner and 1 that doesn't even turn on. The average repare cost for a plasma is over 800 bucks.

Who's to say how many customer units have similar problems. These are just display units and they don't get used very hard.

Plasma will be only a distant memory in 12-18 months anyway.

They still have great color and the larger panels can be had for much less than a larger quality LCD, but they are just too heavy, thick, inefficient, and problematic to survive in the face of better, cheaper, more reliable technologies.

Look up OLED (organice LED) and laser tv if you want to see whats next

Cody

oh yeah, and 40-60k is a half life rating and I believe it's before they are to 70% of original brightness.
 
waynehartwig

waynehartwig

www.jeeperman.com
Location
Mead, WA
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top