|
||||||||
Samsung LE26R73BD HD Ready Digital TV |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 143
|
Samsung LE26R73BD HD Ready Digital TV
Anyone got this tv and using a sky hd box on it......Samsung LE26R73BD HD Ready Digital TV
Wondered how good it was???? http://www.currys.co.uk/martprd/stor...m=null&tm=null thanks in advance. Steve |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,649
|
There is an entire thread on this TV:
http://forum.digitalspy.co.uk/board/...d.php?t=361148 Ive got the 32" model and havent got sky HD, but its a great TV. Some advice: to get the most out of HD you need the 32" model, frankly you cannot tell the difference between HD and SD on a 26". In terms of intrusiveness to a room, a 32" LCD is about the same as a 28" CRT anyway. (Also according to the thread the sound on the 26" version is poor as it only has 5W speakers.) -Chris |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 22
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntlhellworld
There is an entire thread on this TV:
http://forum.digitalspy.co.uk/board/...d.php?t=361148 Ive got the 32" model and havent got sky HD, but its a great TV. Some advice: to get the most out of HD you need the 32" model, frankly you cannot tell the difference between HD and SD on a 26". In terms of intrusiveness to a room, a 32" LCD is about the same as a 28" CRT anyway. (Also according to the thread the sound on the 26" version is poor as it only has 5W speakers.) -Chris |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 143
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacks13
That's complete nonsense. Some people get the 26inch because anything bigger and the screen will be too big for the room they watch the TV in like a bedroom for example. Yes the speakers are 5W in the 26inch instead of 10W in the 32inch and above but that is the only difference and you can connect it to a quality sound system anyway. 10W speakers themselves are hardly ideal and you'd be better hooking the 32inch and above up to a sound system also. What you say about not being able to tell the difference between HD and non HD in the 26inch is absolutely untrue. The LCD is totally identical to that in the 32inch other than it the contrast ratio is 3000:1 instead of 5000:1 which is easily still HD compatible and the 6inches from each corner smaller.
thanks jacks13,looks like you know your stuff,cant see how you wouldnt be able to tell the diff between sc and hd on this tv,if that was the case it wouldnt say HD READY! |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 22
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by stonecoldsaa
thanks jacks13,looks like you know your stuff,cant see how you wouldnt be able to tell the diff between sc and hd on this tv,if that was the case it wouldnt say HD READY!
To say what this guy said, that you cannot notice the difference between HD and non HD on the 26inch is total nonsense. It's really irritating when people come out and make wild statements without the slitest clue what they are talking about. The resolution on the Samsung R73/74 26inch LCD and indeed the R71 23inch is the same high 1366 x 768 resolution found on all the Samsung R7 series screen sizes and the only difference between the 32inch and above and the 23 and 26inch displays is the contrast ratio is 5000:1 instead of 3000:1 which makes for a hardly noticeable improved graduation between black to white. That's it. The LE26R73BD is terrific value. The older LE26R51BD model got 5 stars in computer shopper magazine back in February and a best buy award and was retailing for £700 in dixons back then. The new LE26R73BD is now available in dixons and curry's for an excellent value £639 and if you quote in either store the £40 discount dixons are offering online if you spend over £500 and you will be able to walk away with one in store for an amazing £599. This makes this TV not only a stunningly beautiful and quality piece of kit but a real bargain too. Good luck on getting your Sky HD. One day terrestrial digital (freeview) will be HD too and it will be the standard but this won't happen for a few years yet until after analog is discontinued. Kind regards, Chris Last edited by jacks13 : 05-06-2006 at 19:35. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,649
|
Errr. 26" LCD, dont go near with a bargepole.
There is really no point in buying a R7 26" as there is no difference between the new 26" R7 and the old samsung 26" other than the hidden speakers and improved image enhancement (which if youve any brains youl have disabled anyway). It has the same resolution and contrast ratio, so save yourself £200 and buy the old one. Quote:
Originally Posted by jacks13
To say what this guy said, that you cannot notice the difference between HD and non HD on the 26inch is total nonsense. It's really irritating when people come out and make wild statements without the slitest clue what they are talking about.
LOL. Im going to ignore that (and try to be as non-abusive as possible in my response). Firstly, That was not a wild statement. It was based on a fu*k load of research I did on this TV and HDTVs in general before buying the 32" version (well it was more of a eventual realisation that 26" lcds suck and are no replacement for a trusty 28" CRT Secondly, Unless you have amazing eyesight. You simply cannot see the difference between SD and HD on a 26" TV at a typical living room viewing distance. Resolution doesnt even come into it, because by the time you go to sit down in your sofa you cannot see the difference. Even standing two feet from the 26" high definition TVs in stores, it barely looks better than SD at all. Infact I went into loads of stores around my area looking at the TVs (before retreating as they were all total crap). Quote:
Originally Posted by jacks13
The resolution on the Samsung R73/74 26inch LCD and indeed the R71 23inch is the same high 1366 x 768 resolution found on all the Samsung R7 series screen sizes
Go on. Take a guess. I dare ya ![]() Its 3.4 feet. Now, I dont know or care what you do in your own home with your TV, but when im watching my TV, I certainly dont sit 3.4 feet from it Quote:
Originally Posted by jacks13
the only difference between the 32inch and above and the 23 and 26inch displays is the contrast ratio is 5000:1 instead of 3000:1 which makes for a hardly noticeable improved graduation between black to white. That's it
-Chris |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 22
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntlhellworld
There is really no point in buying a R7 26" as there is no difference between the new 26" R7 and the old samsung 26" other than the hidden speakers and improved image enhancement (which if youve any brains youl have disabled anyway). It has the same resolution and contrast ratio, so save yourself £200 and buy the old one.I dont have the slightest clue what im talking about?
LOL. Im going to ignore that (and try to be as non-abusive as possible in my response). Firstly, That was not a wild statement. It was based on a fu*k load of research I did on this TV and HDTVs in general before buying the 32" version (well it was more of a eventual realisation that 26" lcds suck and are no replacement for a trusty 28" CRT Secondly, Unless you have amazing eyesight. You simply cannot see the difference between SD and HD on a 26" TV at a typical living room viewing distance. Resolution doesnt even come into it, because by the time you go to sit down in your sofa you cannot see the difference. Even standing two feet from the 26" high definition TVs in stores, it barely looks better than SD at all. Infact I went into loads of stores around my area looking at the TVs (before retreating as they were all total crap).The maximum reccomended viewing distance for a 32" 16:9 TV is 9.1 feet. Do you know what it is for a 26" HDTV (Fully resolved 1080i; 1920 x 1080) ? Go on. Take a guess. I dare ya ![]() Its 3.4 feet. Now, I dont know or care what you do in your own home with your TV, but when im watching my TV, I certainly dont sit 3.4 feet from it -Chris Last edited by jacks13 : 06-06-2006 at 02:27. |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 408
|
There's only one way to sort this out........FIGHT !
(Copyright Harry Hill) |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: North London
Posts: 9,314
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacks13
LOL Believe what you want you clown! You're talking rubbish and obviously must have poor eyes! The 26inch isn't intended to be used at typical living room viewing distance!
If it is for an averagely sized front room, then the 32" is much the better option, and the Samsung R7 series is the best on the market at that price range. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 22
|
Buy the LE26R73BD - it's quality and fantastic value
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blake Connolly
The thing is, I think both of you are saying the same thing. 26" HD ready LCDs make a good bedroom set to go with your X-Box or a fancy PC monitor, but are not worth getting for your main living room set, which I think is what the OP is asking about, unless you sit virtually right in front of the screen.
If it is for an averagely sized front room, then the 32" is much the better option, and the Samsung R7 series is the best on the market at that price range.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 22
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntlhellworld
The maximum reccomended viewing distance for a 32" 16:9 TV is 9.1 feet. Do you know what it is for a 26" HDTV (Fully resolved 1080i; 1920 x 1080) ?
Go on. Take a guess. I dare ya ![]() Its 3.4 feet. -Chris Yet more ridiculous and wild claims this time on the difference between a 26inch and a 32inch's recommended minimum and maximum viewing distances! It's a minimum of 3.3ft on the 26inch compared to a minimum of 4.05ft on the 32inch you fool!!! I pity your ignorance and blatant stupidity. Crawl back under your stone you sad individual, your misguided and wild and false opinions are an embaressment to this site. To all you guys who are interested in purchasing a 26inch LCD HDReady please ignore this lunatic and here's a guide including recommended optimum viewing distances and picking the right screen size for your room: http://www.cnet.com/4520-7874_1-5108580-2.html |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 143
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacks13
3.4ft compared to 9.1ft!!!! LOL
Yet more ridiculous and wild claims this time on the difference between a 26inch and a 32inch's recommended minimum and maximum viewing distances! It's a minimum of 3.3ft on the 26inch compared to a minimum of 4.05ft on the 32inch you fool!!! I pity your ignorance and blatant stupidity. Crawl back under your stone you sad individual, your misguided and wild and false opinions are an embaressment to this site. To all you guys who are interested in purchasing a 26inch LCD HDReady please ignore this lunatic and here's a guide including recommended optimum viewing distances and picking the right screen size for your room: http://www.cnet.com/4520-7874_1-5108580-2.html Hi AGAIN jACKS13 Thanks for all your info,having rung up Sky Hd and spoke to a technical support person i asked him about not being able to see a difference between a sd and hd signal on a 26 inch screen and he said he had never heard that before,he said you will see a NOTICABLE difference,he said they dont recommend anything smaller than a 26 inch but a 26 is perfectly alright for a small size living room which i have got and i am sitting about 6 ft from the screen,he said i wont be disappointed.So there you go,you are perfectly right with what you have said and owning both yourself then you should know! So to all you doubters...GO AWAY! ![]() thanks again Jacks13. cheers steve |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,649
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacks13
3.4ft compared to 9.1ft!!!! LOL
It's a minimum of 3.3ft on the 26inch compared to a minimum of 4.05ft on the 32inch you fool!!! Then, you complemented your stupidity by referring me to a CNET article. An article which if you had read, (rather than just glanced at to prove how I am so obviously wrong in your own small opinion), actually backs up what I have been saying: "Generally, 30-inch and smaller sets are great for bedrooms or guest rooms but too small for the main living room" (or perhaps you did read it, but just choose to ignore that one line because it undermines all of what you have said.) As for my facts, if you Google slightly further than the first CNET article that comes up, you will find they are all perfectly correct: http://www.myhometheater.homestead.c...alculator.html Quote:
Originally Posted by jacks13
I pity your ignorance and blatant stupidity. Crawl back under your stone you sad individual, your misguided and wild and false opinions are an embaressment to this site.
Sorry but im not going to get abusive no matter how much you are, because a) I don’t want to lower myself to your level, and b) that’s all forum trolls like you want. Instead, I’m going to slowly and calmly explain why and how you are wrong. Then perhaps glee at my samsung 32” R7 lcd TV for a while. Now. You either won’t, cant or are unwilling to accept that you misread my first post and have been arguing a point that I didn’t make. I suggested that you cannot see the difference at a typical viewing distance between HD and SD on a 26” TV. And I’m right. You carnt. Stop saying otherwise. You then suggested that because they are the same resolution - that the smaller one could actually give a better picture than the bigger one because the lines are closer together. While there is some truth to that, at HDTV resolution, you simply won’t see the improvement when you sit back for normal TV watching (unless like you said your using it as a PC monitor and sitting close to it) as the added detail is smaller: Think about it, do you see a better picture on those 12" portable bedroom TVs than on a 21" TV just because its smaller? I have quite good eyesight and don’t see any noticeable improvement from HD on a screen under 30” (apart from on my laptop 14.1" screen, but thats only with it at normal laptop distance, ie, on my lap. And SD freeview MPEG2 rips were just as good, you could only see the difference at a distance if you paused it). Quote:
Originally Posted by jacks13
The 26inch isn't intended to be used at typical living room viewing distance!
I have been saying that since post #2. What you want a medal ? Now, seeing as we have established that this TV is unsuitable for a typical living room viewing distance. Why have you recommended it to someone as there living room TV? Isnt its suitability as a living room TV what we have been arguing over? Quote:
Originally Posted by Blake Connolly
The thing is, I think both of you are saying the same thing. 26" HD ready LCDs make a good bedroom set to go with your X-Box or a fancy PC monitor, but are not worth getting for your main living room set, which I think is what the OP is asking about, unless you sit virtually right in front of the screen.
If it is for an averagely sized front room, then the 32" is much the better option, and the Samsung R7 series is the best on the market at that price range. Quote:
Originally Posted by stonecoldsaa
Thanks for all your info,having rung up Sky Hd and spoke to a technical support person i asked him about not being able to see a difference between a sd and hd signal on a 26 inch screen
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacks13
Obviously you know best, and myself who owns the 26inch and the 32inch testing them sat next to each other and the 5 stars, best buy awards and excellent reviews for the Samsung 26inch is all rubbish and we all know nothing
![]() -Chris Last edited by ntlhellworld : 07-06-2006 at 00:33. |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,052
|
Why cant we all just get along ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 22
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntlhellworld
The maximum reccomended viewing distance for a 32" 16:9 TV is 9.1 feet.Do you know what it is for a26" HDTV (Fully resolved 1080i; 1920 x 1080) ?
Go on. Take a guess. I dare ya ![]() Its 3.4 feet. -Chris I simply said the minimum on the 26inch is 3.3ft!! (Also noting that the minimum on the 32inch is 4.05ft) So it's blatantly obvious that the maximum distance is higher than the 3.4ft you dared me to guess at!! LOL but you're abviously too stupid to look at the comparison's of viewing distances from the link I provided so i'll post them here! hahaha Wide-screen TV-viewing distances You'll notice that we said regular televisions. Wide-screen televisions showing high-resolution DVD and HDTV look better than regular sets, allowing you to sit closer and experience a more immersive, theaterlike picture. With wide-screen sets showing DVD or HDTV, you can sit as close as 1.5 times the screen's diagonal measurement and still not notice much of a loss in quality, while sitting farther away than three times the screen size means you're likely to miss out on the immersive feel. Here's a rundown of minimum and maximum recommended viewing distances for wide-screen sets. http://www.cnet.com/4520-7874_1-5108580-2.html 26inch Minimum 3.3ft 32inch Minimum 4.05ft 26inch Maximum 6.5ft 32inch Maximum 8.0ftaprox! SO THERE IS ROUGHLY A MASSIVE 1.5FT DIFFERENCE IN RECOMMENDED MAXIMUM VIEWING DISTANCE BETWEEN THE 26INCH AND THE 32INCH!!! WOW LOL A WHOLE 1.5FT!!! HAHAHAHAHAHA CONSIDORING THE 26INCH IS MADE FOR A SMALLER ROOM THAN YOU'RE AVERAGE LIVING ROOM LIKE A BEDROOM OR A SMALLER SIZE LOUNGE THEN THE VIEWING DISTANCE TO SCREEN SIZE RATIO WILL BE ALMOST IDENTICAL AND THE SIZE OF THE LCD IN YOUR LINE OF VIEW WILL BE PRETTY MUCH THE SAME! CUTTING THAT MIGHTY 1.5FT DIFFERENCE IN MOST CASES!!! HAHAHAHAHAHA THANKYOU FOR THIS MATE!! YOU ARE OFFICIALLY THE MOST STUPID INDIVIDUAL I HAVE EVER CAME ACROSS ON THE INTERNET!! LOL I EVEN RANG SAMSUNG TO HAVE A CHUCKLE ON THE PHONE WITH THEM ABOUT YOUR RIDICULOUS VIEWS AND I HAVE TO SAY I'M BEGINNING TO LIKE YOU AS I HAVE LAUGHED A LOT ABOUT THIS A LOT! ALL THE BEST IN YOUR IMPENDING JOB DOWN THE CIRCUS YOU CLOWN!! HAHAHAHA Last edited by jacks13 : 07-06-2006 at 15:06. |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 22
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntlhellworld
Equally as laughable is that i’m going to believe someone with 16 posts on a internet message board towards the end of a discussion has randomly had a flash of inspiration and remembered that they actually have all along had both the 32” and 26” R7. Strange that this somewhat relevant information should only just come back to you? And that you conveniently have them both sat next to each other for comparison.
![]() -Chris |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Sandy Heath, Beds. UK
Posts: 10,386
|
Boys, play nicely, or I can see one or both of you getting banned. If you must trade insults, do it via personal messages please.
BTW, I have a 26" Samsung and it's great... but... I wish it was bigger!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 22
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stig
Boys, play nicely, or I can see one or both of you getting banned. If you must trade insults, do it via personal messages please.
BTW, I have a 26" Samsung and it's great... but... I wish it was bigger! ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 22
|
This moron ntlhellworld say's: Quote:
Originally Posted by ntlhellworld
There is really no point in buying a R7 26" as there is no difference between the new 26" R7 and the old samsung 26" other than the hidden speakers and improved image enhancement (which if youve any brains youl have disabled anyway). It has the same resolution and contrast ratio, so save yourself £200 and buy the old one
26" lcds suck and are no replacement for a trusty 28" CRT Even standing two feet from the 26" high definition TVs in stores, it barely looks better than SD at all. Infact I went into loads of stores around my area looking at the TVs (before retreating as they were all total crap). That 2000:1 improvement makes a huge difference The maximum reccomended viewing distance for a 32" 16:9 TV is 9.1 feet. Do you know what it is for a 26" HDTV (Fully resolved 1080i; 1920 x 1080) ? Go on. Take a guess. I dare ya Its 3.4 feet. I suggested that you cannot see the difference at a typical viewing distance between HD and SD on a 26” TV. And I’m right. You carnt. Stop saying otherwise. There isn't such thing as a 'typical' viewing distance as the recommended viewing distance varies between screen sizes!! What part of the 26inch isn't intended for you're average living room and is for a bedroom or smaller lounge can't you understand!!! No you're not right you couldn't be further from the truth. The rubbish you have come out with including all the nonsense above is frankly embaressing and to call the 26inch R7 crap and to not touch it with a barge poll, has to be one of the most ridiculous things I have ever read on a forum (amonst the rest of your totally false and moronic posts about this LCD). You are i'm sorry to say, obviously either somebody with learning difficulties or somebody who resuses to admit they are wrong!This guy must be from another planet!!! To draw an end to this matter as this lunatic is boring me now: FACTS: Wide-screen TV-viewing distances You'll notice that we said regular televisions. Wide-screen televisions showing high-resolution DVD and HDTV look better than regular sets, allowing you to sit closer and experience a more immersive, theaterlike picture. With wide-screen sets showing DVD or HDTV, you can sit as close as 1.5 times the screen's diagonal measurement and still not notice much of a loss in quality, while sitting farther away than three times the screen size means you're likely to miss out on the immersive feel. Here's a rundown of minimum and maximum recommended viewing distances for wide-screen sets. http://www.cnet.com/4520-7874_1-5108580-2.html 26inch Minimum 3.3ft 32inch Minimum 4.05ft 26inch Maximum 6.5ft 32inch Maximum 8.0ftaprox! 1)There's only a 1.5ft difference between the 26inch and 32inch's recommended maximum viewing distances. 2)This 1.5ft in most cases is cut due to natrually sitting closer to a 26inch with it being intended for use in a smaller room than your average living room. 3)The difference between the 3000:1 dynamic contrast ratio on the 26inch and the 5000:1 dynamic contrast ratio on the 32inch meaning an improved graduation from black to white isn't really noticeable. 4) The claims from this guy that you can't notice HD on a 26inch is complete rubbish. 5) The difference between SD and HD on the 26inch is almost identical to the difference between SD and HD on the 32inch. 6)You can walk out the shop with an LE26R73BD for an excellent value £639 or even a bargain £599 in dixons and currys if you quote the £40 discount dixons are offering online if you spend more than £500. 7) Why this guy actually thinks people would be bothered to scour the internet looking for an older model for the sake of a hundred pounds or so is beyond me when you can get the improved newer and better looking R7 at such a good price. The £200 saving that is claimed to be saved on puchasing an older LE26R41BD seems a little unrealistic. I have yet to find one for even close to £399. A quick search on pricegrabber, pricerunner and unbeatable and the lowest price you get is £547.11. Even if you could get it cheaper than that by the time you've scoured the net then paid for delivery it's not going to much more than £100 difference. The old model isn't even displayed on Samsung's website anymore so why you think anybody would even bother beginning to find an older less up to date model for the sake of what is not a great deal of money is very strange and you should get in the real world. The R7 has advertisements in various mags and papers too aswell as being displayed on the Samsung site and people who are currently looking to buy a new TV would in most cases rather have the new and better model. The LE26R73BD has a 8ms response time and Game Mode where as the LE26R41BD only has a 12ms response time so yes the LE26R73BD is better and better looking too. The R7 also has 12.8blillion colours and 10bit processing. 8)The 26inch ooozes quality and excellent value for money. 9)This will be my last post on here guys and I can honestly say i've enjoyed my time on here very much. Excellent site! 10)Bye bye ntlhellworld - I'll always remember you!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 17
|
Deleted post
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 6,572
|
The correct distance to view any size TV is the distance you feel most comfortable with. Whatever that is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Sandy Heath, Beds. UK
Posts: 10,386
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by call100
The correct distance to view any size TV is the distance you feel most comfortable with. Whatever that is.
![]() It's a shame we couldn't have a reasonable debate about it without someone getting banned!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Kingston Upon Thames
Posts: 1,516
|
Actually, I think is one of the funniest threads I've read here, I kept getting a mental picture of Mr T.
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,052
|
Yeah but you godda admit it was very abusive language, i pity the fool
|
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: South Wales.
Posts: 615
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stig
Hear hear! I think we can now declare the topic of viewing distances closed.
It's a shame we couldn't have a reasonable debate about it without someone getting banned! ![]() Hi Stig, Whilst looking on the internet, I found the following. The Society of Motion Picture & TV Engineers (SMPTE) recommends a 30 degree field of view. For THX certification, the back row in the cinema should have a viewing angle of at least 26 degrees and the recommended optimum angle is 36 degrees. They say 'It is believed that within this range the viewer will get better immersed into the action movie itself'. The optimum TV screen size is directly related to the available viewing distance. Nearest TV viewing distance should be limited to 1.87 X screen width (not the diagonal) for a subtended angle of 30 degrees. The furthest distance should be no more than 5 X the screen width. With HDTV this should be 3 to 4 X to enable the viewer to see the finer detail. I have not worked out any of the optimum distances 'cos in the interest of marital bliss, we sit at a distance where 'Her Indoors' places the chairs. Apparently the room looks better that way. I don't want any rows with other members of this thread 'cos this information is from another source. Best Wishes George. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 17:05.




