Slickdeals.net

Slickdeals.net (http://slickdeals.net/forums/index.php)
-   Deal Talk (http://slickdeals.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=30)
-   -   LG 55LM4600 120Hz LED 3D HDTV $799.99 FS Walmart (http://slickdeals.net/f/5782728-lg-55lm4600-120hz-led-3d-hdtv-799-99-fs-walmart)

apang 01-05-2013 12:27 PM

LG 55LM4600 120Hz LED 3D HDTV $799.99 FS Walmart
 
65534 Attachment(s)
Walmart has the LG 55LM4600 120Hz LED 3D HDTV free shipping- includes 4 3D glasses

http://www.walmart.com/ip/LG-55LM...m/21693006

i think i saw it at frys same price before a few weeks ago

LG 55LM4600 55" 1080p 120Hz LED 3D HDTV:

55" LED panel
With a 1920 x 1080 resolution
True 16:9 aspect ratio
View your movies as the director intended on the 55" LG LED 1080p 120Hz HDTV
Built-in digital tuner
Watch digital broadcasts, including HDTV programs where available on the LG 3D HDTV, (1.4" Ultra-Slim)
4,000,000:1 dynamic contrast ratio
HDMI Inputs: 3
Enjoy a superior HD experience with HDMI one cable solution
54.6" screen measured diagonally from corner to corner
LG 3D HDTV, (1.4" Ultra-Slim) is wall mountable
VESA standard 400mm x 400mm

yuugotserved 01-05-2013 12:27 PM

55" LG 55LM4600 1080p 120Hz 3D LED HDTV $800 + Free Shipping
 
2 Attachment(s)
Walmart has 55" LG 55LM4600 1080p 120Hz 3D LED HDTV for $800 with free shipping. Thanks apang

Specs:
  • Resolution: 1920x1080
  • Refresh Rate: 120Hz
  • Contrast Ration: 4,000,000:1
  • 3D
  • Tuners: ATSC/NTSC/Clear QAM
  • Inputs:
    • 3x HDMI
    • 2x Component
    • 1x USB
    • 1x PC Input
    • 1x Ethernet
Price Research: Our research indicates that 55" LG 55LM4600 1080p 120Hz 3D LED HDTV is $100 lower (11% savings) than the next best available price from a reputable merchant with prices ranging from $900 to $1200. - yuugotserved

pharmdogg 01-05-2013 02:28 PM

whats better? This deal or the $899 deal at Fry's?

SamKQboro 01-05-2013 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pharmdogg (Post 56646788)
whats better? This deal or the $899 deal at Fry's?

I think that's a smart tv, but not available for shipping. :rolleyes:

ConFu 01-05-2013 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pharmdogg (Post 56646788)
whats better? This deal or the $899 deal at Fry's?

I think the 899 at Fry's is a Panasonic, in which case I would chose Panasonic. The LG LEDs has pretty bad glare, almost as bad as my Samsung Plasma. Be careful.

bravesfan87 01-05-2013 02:52 PM

this is the same tv that was $799 at frys during black friday only that was a bundle with a soundbar and 3d blu ray player, i bought that bundle and it is a nice tv certainly especially with this price however since this is not the bundle and just the tv i would not reccomend it. I would say buy a smart tv those have better 3d than this tv, if you dont care about 3d but still have the money i say buy a better tv or a 240hz tv. This tv is not bad but i wouldnt have bought it if not for the bundle, my buddys smart tv looks better.

pharmdogg 01-05-2013 02:52 PM

For $100, I think I'll get the Panny then. Seems like SmarTV and IPS makes that one sweeter.

bravesfan87 01-05-2013 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ConFu (Post 56647134)
I think the 899 at Fry's is a Panasonic, in which case I would chose Panasonic. The LG LEDs has pretty bad glare, almost as bad as my Samsung Plasma. Be careful.

i dont notice much glare on mine and my room can be quite bright at times the smart tvs are better though

anythingbut 01-05-2013 03:11 PM

Stupid question here but folks what exactly makes a TV a Smart TV? I thought all HDTVs are smart but then this is coming from a guy that still uses my old 27" tube TV.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bravesfan87 (Post 56647168)
this is the same tv that was $799 at frys during black friday only that was a bundle with a soundbar and 3d blu ray player, i bought that bundle and it is a nice tv certainly especially with this price however since this is not the bundle and just the tv i would not reccomend it. I would say buy a smart tv those have better 3d than this tv, if you dont care about 3d but still have the money i say buy a better tv or a 240hz tv. This tv is not bad but i wouldnt have bought it if not for the bundle, my buddys smart tv looks better.


Deal2go 01-05-2013 03:11 PM

would have ordered if it is samsung or sony brand. LG brand is a junk!
to make it worst, this is not even a SMART TV

Hack 01-05-2013 03:15 PM

Hard to take you seriously when you give no reasons why LG is junk.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Deal2go (Post 56647594)
would have ordered if it is samsung or sony brand. LG brand is a junk!
to make it worst, this is not even a SMART TV


mD- 01-05-2013 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deal2go (Post 56647594)
would have ordered if it is samsung or sony brand. LG brand is a junk!
to make it worst, this is not even a SMART TV

My goodness lol...

You can turn any TV into a "smart TV" if you have anything like a PS3, Xbox 360, Roku Media Player (which is cheap), or Apple TV...

There's no need to be redundant about TV features you have access to...seriously, use your head.

hashpile 01-05-2013 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deal2go (Post 56647594)
would have ordered if it is samsung or sony brand. LG brand is a junk!
to make it worst, this is not even a SMART TV

You have no clue..

ConFu 01-05-2013 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bravesfan87 (Post 56647230)
i dont notice much glare on mine and my room can be quite bright at times the smart tvs are better though

Hmm maybe you have one of the more premium models. Or you don't watch a lot of dark content (glare is mostly noticeable wherever the screen is dark/black). Watching sports or animation movies is usually okay on all TVs. However that said, we noticed no glare with our previous TV (which was a Panasonic Plasma, believe it or not) but did so with the LG.

findingi7 01-05-2013 03:34 PM

I got one from Walmart the last time it was $799 (end of Dec.), so far so good. I agree with others that the sound from the TV sucks, and it had some glare during day but not affecting watching much. The 2D->3D was fun and better than I thought. Kids enjoyed the animated movies more. It's very thin, thinner than most, but heavier than some thicker ones (like TCL). Looks good, no big complaints so far. The 1080p resolution worked fine as a computer monitor - played SC2, no ghost or problems noticed.

SamKQboro 01-05-2013 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by anythingbut (Post 56647584)
Stupid question here but folks what exactly makes a TV a Smart TV? I thought all HDTVs are smart but then this is coming from a guy that still uses my old 27" tube TV.

It's basically a tv that has Internet connectiivity with access to apps like video and music streaming services like Netflix, YouTube, pandora, Hulu, etc.. Some have internet browsers and widgets. It can be a redundant feature as some have similar features on many gaming consoles, blu ray players, stand alone web tv devices or computers hooked up to their tvs. Hope that helps a bit.

Cachapon 01-05-2013 05:30 PM

Bought this tv from sears. Had it price matched to walmart and got the 100K sywr which the wife already spend. Great picture when properly Calibrated, I love the fact than when connected to your home network can detect any DLNA server to play all your movies and home videos. Last thing is the passive 3D and 2D to 3D mode its awesome kids and wife love it. There is a little bit of glare but nothing major. So far we love the TV. Check the AVS forums for some calibration settings but dont be afraid to use the built in calibration mode.

nalagec 01-05-2013 05:31 PM

I just brought the same TV from Best buy and they matched the Walmart price. I brought additionally a LG blue ray player with WIFI to make it smart TV. I will receive the delivery after 3 days. But 55" screen with 3D ability and 2D->3D ability looks good for price.

anythingbut 01-05-2013 05:44 PM

That helps a lot. Thank for the information.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SamKQboro (Post 56648248)
It's basically a tv that has Internet connectiivity with access to apps like video and music streaming services like Netflix, YouTube, pandora, Hulu, etc.. Some have internet browsers and widgets. It can be a redundant feature as some have similar features on many gaming consoles, blu ray players, stand alone web tv devices or computers hooked up to their tvs. Hope that helps a bit.


sdineen 01-05-2013 05:45 PM

Have to agree on the glare front. I for one was very surprised that the glare on this lg tv is actually worse than my old panny plasma. Yes i realize comparatively my 2007 panny would be a more expensive "with anti glare" model now adays, but still.

Devedander 01-05-2013 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bravesfan87 (Post 56647168)
this is the same tv that was $799 at frys during black friday only that was a bundle with a soundbar and 3d blu ray player, i bought that bundle and it is a nice tv certainly especially with this price however since this is not the bundle and just the tv i would not reccomend it. I would say buy a smart tv those have better 3d than this tv, if you dont care about 3d but still have the money i say buy a better tv or a 240hz tv. This tv is not bad but i wouldnt have bought it if not for the bundle, my buddys smart tv looks better.

I don't get how you relate smart TV functionality to 3d performance... many smart TVs are the exact same picture elements as the non smart versions but with apps... so it doesn't make sense you can just say a smart tv is better...

I would expect your friends smart tv perhaps has better picture elements, is another model, or even another brand...

Saying a smart TV has better picture quality is like saying a car with Traction control has better sound from the stereo... maybe correlation but I do'nt see how it's causation.

pcmax 01-05-2013 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Devedander (Post 56652196)
I don't get how you relate smart TV functionality to 3d performance... many smart TVs are the exact same picture elements as the non smart versions but with apps... so it doesn't make sense you can just say a smart tv is better...

I would expect your friends smart tv perhaps has better picture elements, is another model, or even another brand...

Saying a smart TV has better picture quality is like saying a car with Traction control has better sound from the stereo... maybe correlation but I do'nt see how it's causation.

I think he is just comparing his friend's TV to the LG so forget the "Smart" part of it. That being said I bought this on BF with the bundle and my 2 cents are that HD cable TV is okay depending on channel, 3D is decent but not phenomenal kids still get a kick out of it though, 2D Blu-ray is very very phenomenal looking.

Devedander 01-05-2013 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pcmax (Post 56652384)
I think he is just comparing his friend's TV to the LG so forget the "Smart" part of it. That being said I bought this on BF with the bundle and my 2 cents are that HD cable TV is okay depending on channel, 3D is decent but not phenomenal kids still get a kick out of it though, 2D Blu-ray is very very phenomenal looking.

Except for where he says "I would say buy a smart tv those have better 3d than this tv"

JakesCakes 01-05-2013 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Devedander (Post 56653402)
Except for where he says "I would say buy a smart tv those have better 3d than this tv"


:lmao::lmao:

bravesfan87 01-06-2013 02:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Devedander (Post 56652196)
I don't get how you relate smart TV functionality to 3d performance... many smart TVs are the exact same picture elements as the non smart versions but with apps... so it doesn't make sense you can just say a smart tv is better...

I would expect your friends smart tv perhaps has better picture elements, is another model, or even another brand...

Saying a smart TV has better picture quality is like saying a car with Traction control has better sound from the stereo... maybe correlation but I do'nt see how it's causation.

my buddys tv is the thinner upgrade version of this tv its a lg smart tv but its 240hz same brand same 3d but 240hz and smart tv and yes it looks much better

JakesCakes 01-06-2013 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bravesfan87 (Post 56656398)
my buddys tv is the thinner upgrade version of this tv its a lg smart tv but its 240hz same brand same 3d but 240hz and smart tv and yes it looks much better

:lmao::lmao::lmao:

sadmaker 01-06-2013 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hashpile (Post 56647670)
You have no clue..

This. A $50 roku box will make your HDTV infinitely "smarter" than the built in widgets for which people pay hundreds extra

Devedander 01-06-2013 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sadmaker (Post 56660870)
This. A $50 roku box will make your HDTV infinitely "smarter" than the built in widgets for which people pay hundreds extra


I am fine with my PS3 and my dumb TV and with laptops coming with HDMI/Display port you can get a very smart TV very easily now adays... but I have to admit there is something to be said for the convenience factor of built in apps, especially for the non tech savvy.

Dziuggy 01-06-2013 11:40 AM

this is tempting, one of the things for me i personally prefer passive 3D. there is no bulky powered glasses that my kids will break all the time

Curb71 01-06-2013 06:51 PM

If I want to be able to watch downloaded videos on my tv from my computer via wifi will the "smart" tv let me do this or will I still need a roku/boxee box/apple tv type of device? Can a smart tv stream flash videos from websites?

IceMole 01-06-2013 07:22 PM

Picked one up today so far it's been awesome :woot:

ne4ious 01-06-2013 07:44 PM

i got this 55lm4600 lg 3dhdtv at sears for about $700 after pricematch, sywr and 8% cashback from urlhasbeenblocked dot com

love my tv. 2d to 3d upconvert works like a charm. love watching the playoff games on 3d. passive 3d doesnt give me eye strain.

i highky rexommend this even at $799 is an awesome deal for this very slim tv.

Supratt85 01-06-2013 08:34 PM

hows the glare on this model ? Planning on putting this in an area that is surrounded by windows.

Dziuggy 01-06-2013 10:39 PM

couple question for people that has this.

how is back light bleeding? i have 47ls4500 and when screen goes black corners look horrible. in general picture quality was better on my 5 year old olevia 747i.

so is lm better than ls?

another question is why the fcuk they made inputs facing backwards on tv thats 1.4" thick

DealGypsy 01-06-2013 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deal2go (Post 56647594)
would have ordered if it is samsung or sony brand. LG brand is a junk!
to make it worst, this is not even a SMART TV

Agreed, I owned one and never again.

DealGypsy 01-06-2013 11:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Devedander (Post 56661136)
I am fine with my PS3 and my dumb TV and with laptops coming with HDMI/Display port you can get a very smart TV very easily now adays... but I have to admit there is something to be said for the convenience factor of built in apps, especially for the non tech savvy.

i have a roku, however still want my next tv with built in apps, the roku is a PITA sometimes.

longview 01-07-2013 12:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DealGypsy (Post 56673614)
Agreed, I owned one and never again.

Agreed. I've had busts on LG LED TV, LG mobile phone, poor customer service on the warranty submissions as well. At that rate, I'd rather get Samsung, Sony, Panasonic, even Vizio

brandensin 01-07-2013 07:50 AM

how is the 3d quality of this compare to panasonic one?

jas036 01-07-2013 10:16 AM

I picked this up as my new TV for the spare bedroom. Just to note, in-store will not be the same price (where I looked anyway). You must buy online and pickup in store or have shipped to get the $799.

vham 01-07-2013 11:00 AM

Smart'er TV
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sadmaker (Post 56660870)
This. A $50 roku box will make your HDTV infinitely "smarter" than the built in widgets for which people pay hundreds extra

I was under the same impression. Ended up buying LM6700 for $100 more. I own PS3, 360, Revue GTV, Sony NSZ-GT1 GTV, PBO. LG's PLEX client (Media Link) is superior than any other streaming client I used. I can use TV screen as a second monitor for my Laptop via wifi (WiDi) to stream Hulu in 720P. I can staream directly to TV using NFC enabled andriod devices. I had the ability to do most of these with differnt devices, but having all of them one unit makes this the best 100$ upgrade I ever did.

BIGFOOT_PI 01-07-2013 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nalagec (Post 56650008)
I just brought the same TV from Best buy and they matched the Walmart price. I brought additionally a LG blue ray player with WIFI to make it smart TV. I will receive the delivery after 3 days. But 55" screen with 3D ability and 2D->3D ability looks good for price.

*bought
(buy/bought)
(bring/brought)

Lindsford 01-07-2013 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deal2go (Post 56647594)
would have ordered if it is samsung or sony brand. LG brand is a junk!
to make it worst, this is not even a SMART TV

It can't possibly be as bad as your grammar.

Regardless, LG is not a junk brand. People with champagne taste and a keystone light beer budget are often upset when buying base model TVS.

So it's not a Smart TV. Big deal. Chances are your 3D Player will have smart functions anyways. Also, Most people I know have a Roku/360/PS3/Smart Blu Ray anyways. It's not the end of the world.

Devedander 01-07-2013 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dziuggy (Post 56673096)
couple question for people that has this.

how is back light bleeding? i have 47ls4500 and when screen goes black corners look horrible. in general picture quality was better on my 5 year old olevia 747i.

so is lm better than ls?

another question is why the fcuk they made inputs facing backwards on tv thats 1.4" thick

As for back facing ports... I do not know wtf they were thinking... Especially yhe ethernet port.
My backlight bleeding is bad when the tv is physically cold. Big flashlighting.

After it warms up, its quite decent with only minor flashlighting.

If the ambient temp is over about 75 it doesn't even need to warm up really.

So its only bad on cold nights and mornings and then for only 20 min or so.

zyxwvuuu 01-07-2013 10:18 PM

Weird seeing LG hate, I own 2 LG TV's, a home theater system, a blue ray burner, all from LG, and they all have worked great. I love LG brand.

Raki 01-07-2013 10:20 PM

I have the 47LM4600 and it is a pretty nice TV. Yes, it's not a SmartTV but I already have a PS3, xbox360, wii, 2 tablets, computers, laptops, etc... I don't need a 10th way to update my facebook. The picture quality and color is good. The black levels could be better. I don't notice any back light bleeding during normal operation. Only in a dark room with a pure black screen; even then it is barely noticeable. I paid $550 for the 47 inch version and I'm happy.

PS: I have a 5 year old LG LCD that's been used for at least 8 hours everyday and it still works perfectly (only the power LED light went out). I've never had any LG problems but that could be just luck.

worthmining 01-07-2013 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Devedander (Post 56652196)
I don't get how you relate smart TV functionality to 3d performance... many smart TVs are the exact same picture elements as the non smart versions but with apps... so it doesn't make sense you can just say a smart tv is better...

I would expect your friends smart tv perhaps has better picture elements, is another model, or even another brand...

Saying a smart TV has better picture quality is like saying a car with Traction control has better sound from the stereo... maybe correlation but I do'nt see how it's causation.

Instead of the "smart TV", might as well get an android stick or roku/google tv, those are better "smart TV" that can be connected to a HDMI.

The built-in Smart TV is slow to load and way redundant apps. The only ones I found useful are youtube, netflix and plex player (medialink in LG TV), and hulu as well as other paid media sources. Others are all useless. It even comes with an angry bird clone, give me a break.

Xception2ThRule 01-07-2013 11:06 PM

Plasma > led

poohbie 01-07-2013 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by worthmining (Post 56700450)
Instead of the "smart TV", might as well get an android stick or roku/google tv, those are better "smart TV" that can be connected to a HDMI.

The built-in Smart TV is slow to load and way redundant apps. The only ones I found useful are youtube, netflix and plex player (medialink in LG TV), and hulu as well as other paid media sources. Others are all useless. It even comes with an angry bird clone, give me a break.

Many people all they want are Netflix, Hulu, Youtube and to have it built into the TV for convenience and simplicity.

Qhuck 01-08-2013 12:13 AM

There's quite a big difference between the image quality of Samsung LEDs vs any other brands... Don't save a little money and get a LG. If you want a TV go for a Samsung.

joesai 01-08-2013 12:35 AM

in the CES, 4k is a new concept

SlackDealHunter 01-08-2013 01:54 AM

I bought this TV when Best Buy couldn't give me a 47LM4600, they upgraded me to the 55LM4600 or I could have chosen the 47LM6700 - since I have a severe overload of 'smart' devices already, I chose the larger screen.

Comparisons - depends on where you are coming from.
I have plasma TVs otherwise - sobacklight bleed problems were not known to me before and I was disappointed to see it on a TV sold in 2012/2013.
Reflections - hmmmm, especially in 3D mode, try to not have ANY light source reflecting including windows - it severely impacts 3D viewing.

3D - I was disappointed by the angles where I would get ghosting (when positioned lower or higher than the physical TV) with various types of 3D glasses... out-of-the-box LG, bought set of LG glasses, vanilla movie theater 3D glasses and even one set of 'Gunnar' 3D glasses. So you want to be level when looking a the TV and have a fairly straight angle.
But that mostly is due to the passive 3D technology.

Now, with all that being said - since I got some customer satisfaction credit at the retailer from a previous mishap they had with me when they could not fulfill an order I placed, I paid less than $450 for the TV and so I am extremely happy.

I would say, for $800 and below it is a very good TV.

mrwoooo 01-08-2013 02:05 AM

I've owned this TV for about 3 months now. The TV itself is great. Picture quality is stunning. Also, it's not documented anywhere but it actually plays MOV and MKV files off of a USB stick. The only "smart" app I use on it is netflix.

It does have a pretty serious flaw in my opinion, and that is the remote. You need to "connect" it with the TV before any of the buttons work. I assume this is some sort of Bluetooth pairing. That's really annoying when all you want to do is turn down the volume but you have to jiggle up the remote, wait a few seconds for it to connect, and then it works so you can press buttons.

The remote attempted to be simplistic, but it's annoying. To change the input with the remote you need to jiggle it to wake it up, go to settings, go to input, then click on one of the other inputs. It's a 5 or 8 second process when it would be nice just to click the "input" button a few times.

I even went as far as to buy a Harmony remote, but since the smart remote is bluetooth there's not much the Harmony can do. I can change the volume and the channel and turn it off and on.

TrystinJ 01-08-2013 04:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deal2go (Post 56647594)
would have ordered if it is samsung or sony brand. LG brand is a junk!
to make it worst, this is not even a SMART TV

I've had my 50" LG plasma since 05 with no issues. They sell millions of every product, of course there will be a "few" with issues.

iveo83 01-08-2013 05:54 AM

I have always heard that electronics sold at Walmart are of a lower quality. They use cheaper parts to bring down the price. Anyone know if this is true? I think it was with Computers, so the same HP you buy from HP is not the same one you buy from HP. That makes me leery buying almost anything from Walmart.

chong67 01-08-2013 05:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xception2ThRule (Post 56700808)
Plasma > led

Not true. My parent Plasma got burn in logo now. Only watch 2-3 hrs of the same channel. Its too late. Did turn on a burn in thing n it didnt work. It was a Samsung n 2 yrs old.

Plasma has this weird emitting noise from the back.

And its an oven during the summer.

jayhawknative 01-08-2013 06:09 AM

All this bad Engrish make me sowwy for future. Samsung Shill alert!! =)

Samsung and Panasonic plasmas forever! I prefer Samsung for my appliances too. My brother repairs appliances, and he's always telling me what crap LG is nowadays.

cubsoxbull 01-08-2013 06:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Qhuck (Post 56701478)
There's quite a big difference between the image quality of Samsung LEDs vs any other brands... Don't save a little money and get a LG. If you want a TV go for a Samsung.

LOL, Okay if you say so. My LG blows away any Sammy.

ardonshen 01-08-2013 06:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SlackDealHunter (Post 56702202)
Reflections - hmmmm, especially in 3D mode, try to not have ANY light source reflecting including windows - it severely impacts 3D viewing.

Good point. Most people tend to forget that when they go to the theaters, the only source of light when a movie is playing are the emergency exit lights and the floor lights, everything else is off. So in order to get the same “cinema” quality that the unit claims, total darkness is needed.

On a side note, I’m not sure why this is a good deal now seeing as how this unit has been at the $800 price mark for close to two weeks. Walmart had it from $999 advertised price to a “check-out” price of $799 since after Christmas.

bcapello 01-08-2013 06:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dziuggy (Post 56673096)
couple question for people that has this.

how is back light bleeding? i have 47ls4500 and when screen goes black corners look horrible. in general picture quality was better on my 5 year old olevia 747i.

so is lm better than ls?

another question is why the fcuk they made inputs facing backwards on tv thats 1.4" thick

workaround for the HDMI inputs - http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/...C2X15EGCH6

coolnessm 01-08-2013 06:37 AM

nice deal

Wyat_Earp 01-08-2013 06:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iveo83 (Post 56703798)
I have always heard that electronics sold at Walmart are of a lower quality. They use cheaper parts to bring down the price. Anyone know if this is true? I think it was with Computers, so the same HP you buy from HP is not the same one you buy from HP. That makes me leery buying almost anything from Walmart.

No. Sometimes stores have exclusive model numbers, but one model number is the same across all stores as well as on the website. (Yes, including HP)

ash_y16k 01-08-2013 07:07 AM

Before saying junk to anyone or anything, I think we should give some details (some feature comparisons and some data from websites are OK)......else, whoever said junk, may be consider as mindless fellow...

killak 01-08-2013 07:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wyat_Earp (Post 56704642)
No. Sometimes stores have exclusive model numbers, but one model number is the same across all stores as well as on the website. (Yes, including HP)

LG isn't junk and this wasn't a wal-mart special so quality should be fine. This was just a black friday model that was produced for Christmas and sent to all retailers. It'll be off the street as soon as LG gets rid of the inventory it produced. Hopefully, it'll drop a bit more in price the further out we get from Christmas and I can snag one then. But for $800 I"d rather have the 55 inch Panny 55UT50 plasma that Costco is selling right now.

crazykid 01-08-2013 07:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BIGFOOT_PI (Post 56698714)
*bought
(buy/bought)
(bring/brought)

Thanks English Professor! :lmao:

Xymox 01-08-2013 07:25 AM

The nastiness strewn about this thread is pathetic.

BIGFOOT_PI 01-08-2013 07:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazykid (Post 56705552)
Thanks English Professor! :lmao:

you laugh, but I was clearly being constructive trying to help.
thats how I was taught so clearly one of that persons teachers failed him/her

kronikwisdom 01-08-2013 07:44 AM

I picked this TV up a few weeks ago when it was on sale from Walmart for $840. It's a great TV with no glare in my room and the only thing missing is the "smart" apps but who cares. Just plug in your PS3/Xbox/Roku and you don't need the TV to be "smart". The next time I buy a tv the smart features and skype built in should be much cheaper I imagine.

The 4 free glasses are trash but do actually fit over my eye glasses and the 3d looks great. The convert 2d -> 3d is functional but I haven't done enough with it to look great.

cpgoose 01-08-2013 07:59 AM

With respect to "Smart TVs", I currently don't have cable/satellite - I use an antenna (sorry, is that a bad word?). So we hook up the laptop a lot and watch episodes of some shows from various sites (including You Tube, Hulu, and some of the station websites like ABC, CBS, etc).

So I guess I would like a TV that's capable of letting you view a webpage and play a video, and not one that just has apps for Netflix, etc. Are Smart TVs that have a browser capable of this, or do they not have Flash, or other needed software, installed?

Just curious what peoples' thoughts are.

smtelegadis 01-08-2013 08:14 AM

yes, but. . .
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by cpgoose (Post 56706474)
With respect to "Smart TVs", I currently don't have cable/satellite - I use an antenna (sorry, is that a bad word?). So we hook up the laptop a lot and watch episodes of some shows from various sites (including You Tube, Hulu, and some of the station websites like ABC, CBS, etc).

So I guess I would like a TV that's capable of letting you view a webpage and play a video, and not one that just has apps for Netflix, etc. Are Smart TVs that have a browser capable of this, or do they not have Flash, or other needed software, installed?

Just curious what peoples' thoughts are.

Some panels support flash and java, Samsung for one as of firmware 1004.1. Although I don't think you are going to be pleased with the general experience.

Now this is my opinion so . . . I've never been happy with the interpretation of the television CE industry ability implement these features in a way that makes sense or is easy to use. I'd much rather have a standard HDTV and use a third party set top box running preferably XBMC. I just figure on a large investment that's the best way to ensure your able to update the services and use the content providing device in the most effective way.

Bruno137 01-08-2013 08:36 AM

I know it's smaller, but what are peoples thoughts on this Vizio LED 3D Smart TV?

55" is too big for the room I'm looking at and am really thinking at jumping on this one...

http://www.amazon.com/VIZIO-E3D47...+47%22+led

resq330 01-08-2013 08:59 AM

For those with the complaints of the LG not being a "Smart TV"....this Vizio could be another option for less than $100 more.

http://www.walmart.com/catalog/pr...gMethod=rr

apang 01-08-2013 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by resq330 (Post 56707872)
For those with the complaints of the LG not being a "Smart TV"....this Vizio could be another option for less than $100 more.

http://www.walmart.com/catalog/pr...gMethod=rr

Thats not 3D though

surve 01-08-2013 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cubsoxbull (Post 56704182)
LOL, Okay if you say so. My LG blows away any Sammy.

my brother and I each got an LED about 3 years ago. His was a Sammy and one of the first, if not the first LED to hit market. Mine was definitely the first LG Led out. Both pics are stunning....but my LG has much much more adjustments, modes, etc for PQ. Over 3 years later, both are going strong still and while the Sammy's PQ is undeniable, I would put my LG against any comparable model from that period.

FrederickA 01-08-2013 10:19 AM

+1 for samsung. I've owned multiple brands and still like my samsung over the others.

hilaryshotlips 01-08-2013 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruno137 (Post 56707294)


It looks a bit thicker than what I would hope for in a 60" set, let alone a 47".

I really need a TV, but I find 3D completely unnecessary. That extra $150 or so for the cost of 3D would be better spent on smart features, a better picture, or more component inputs.

From walking around Costco and Bestbuy, I've come to the conclusion that 60" is the best size for my living room, where I normally sit 7 ft. away. Being nearsighted, when watching a news channel or a sporting event, that's the best size to clearly see all the graphics being transmitted.

Sultanofdeals 01-08-2013 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hilaryshotlips (Post 56710884)
I really need a TV, but I find 3D completely unnecessary. That extra $150 or so for the cost of 3D would be better spent on smart features, a better picture, or more component inputs.

From walking around Costco and Bestbuy, I've come to the conclusion that 60" is the best size for my living room, where I normally sit 7 ft. away. Being nearsighted, when watching a news channel or a sporting event, that's the best size to clearly see all the graphics being transmitted.

I sit at 5' from my 60'' and find it too small

lotus18 01-08-2013 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iveo83 (Post 56703798)
I have always heard that electronics sold at Walmart are of a lower quality. They use cheaper parts to bring down the price. Anyone know if this is true? I think it was with Computers, so the same HP you buy from HP is not the same one you buy from HP. That makes me leery buying almost anything from Walmart.

wonder how true it is, one owner said similar thing in amazon:

"Stay away from Wal-Mart's/K-Mart's and such when making your purchases. Otherwise you will find that television isn't as clear or quality is degraded in one way or another even though it appears to be the same as a friends television that was purchased online or at a higher-end electronic store."

http://www.amazon.com/LG-Electron...B00AJU7IBK

hilaryshotlips 01-08-2013 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sultanofdeals (Post 56711120)
I sit at 5' from my 60'' and find it too small

I thought I was the only one who see people with 40" to 51" sets in their living rooms and wonder how they don't find the set too small. I used to sit even further from the old 32" CRT tubes, and I didn't have a problem with graphics.

henucu 01-08-2013 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BIGFOOT_PI (Post 56698714)
*bought
(buy/bought)
(bring/brought)

he probably meant he "brought" the tv home from bestbuy, as in bringing the tv home.
In any case thanks for filling the grammer nazi role on SD.:worship:

love2havedeals 01-08-2013 11:21 AM

Is this a smart TV or dumb TV? No Ethernet or Wi-Fi so dumb? How about the one from Fry's? Can you one please confirm? Should I wait till Super Bowl or get this now?

love2havedeals 01-08-2013 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hilaryshotlips (Post 56711460)
I thought I was the only one who see people with 40" to 51" sets in their living rooms and wonder how they don't find the set too small. I used to sit even further from the old 32" CRT tubes, and I didn't have a problem with graphics.

Compared to 80" these are small, not sure if going for 80" TV is good or getting a projector and 100" screen is better. Or a 60" TV for daily use and projector for big games and movies

BIGFOOT_PI 01-08-2013 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by henucu (Post 56711506)
he probably meant he "brought" the tv home from bestbuy, as in bringing the tv home.
In any case thanks for filling the grammer nazi role on SD.:worship:

no
reading the context disqualifies that
an extreme term such as "grammar nazi" should be reserved for those who do such corrections with little tact, uncalled for snarkiness or cruelty or without an attempt to actually teach the differences
I did none of the above.

kevinmscs 01-08-2013 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by love2havedeals (Post 56711836)
Compared to 80" these are small, not sure if going for 80" TV is good or getting a projector and 100" screen is better. Or a 60" TV for daily use and projector for big games and movies

Dont go for 80 incher TV. Go for this or a projector. The investment per capita is much more efficient.

crazykid 01-08-2013 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BIGFOOT_PI (Post 56705936)
you laugh, but I was clearly being constructive trying to help.
thats how I was taught so clearly one of that persons teachers failed him/her

No. You took it wrong. I was literally laughing out with the way you nailed it. I liked it!! Sorry, if I offended you.

burticus 01-08-2013 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lotus18 (Post 56711290)
wonder how true it is, one owner said similar thing in amazon:

"Stay away from Wal-Mart's/K-Mart's and such when making your purchases. Otherwise you will find that television isn't as clear or quality is degraded in one way or another even though it appears to be the same as a friends television that was purchased online or at a higher-end electronic store."

http://www.amazon.com/LG-Electron...B00AJU7IBK

LOL. It's the same TV.

That might have been true years ago, when a manufacturer would make specific lower end models targeted for specific stores. Nowadays the profit margin is so thin it just doesn't make sense to have too many similar product lines.

Now, that being said, is there a higher end LG model available elsewhere? Probably. But I'm talking apples to apples.

magbarn 01-08-2013 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by surve (Post 56709996)
my brother and I each got an LED about 3 years ago. His was a Sammy and one of the first, if not the first LED to hit market. Mine was definitely the first LG Led out. Both pics are stunning....but my LG has much much more adjustments, modes, etc for PQ. Over 3 years later, both are going strong still and while the Sammy's PQ is undeniable, I would put my LG against any comparable model from that period.

The reason for so much hate on LG right now with videophiles is the massive downslide in PQ in going from 2011 to 2012. The highest end LG notwithstanding, LG put all their R&D into making the bezels looking good for 2012 and not so much into their screens. Grab an equivalent 2011 model LG LCD and compare against it's 2012 successor and you'll see the increase in glare, flashlighting, poor black levels, and backlight bleed. Hopefully the 2013 models rectify this.

One more thing... On the 47" models you're almost guaranteed to get a high quality IPS LG screen, but on the 50" size, especially on the lower price sets, you might end up with a losing ticket on the 'LG Screen Lottery' and end up with a Chinese MVA/PVA panel.

shawn2kool 01-08-2013 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deal2go (Post 56647594)
would have ordered if it is samsung or sony brand. LG brand is a junk!
to make it worst, this is not even a SMART TV


Did you even now anything about LG?

surve 01-08-2013 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by magbarn (Post 56714460)
The reason for so much hate on LG right now with videophiles is the massive downslide in PQ in going from 2011 to 2012. The highest end LG notwithstanding, LG put all their R&D into making the bezels looking good for 2012 and not so much into their screens. Grab an equivalent 2011 model LG LCD and compare against it's 2012 successor and you'll see the increase in glare, flashlighting, poor black levels, and backlight bleed. Hopefully the 2013 models rectify this.

One more thing... On the 47" models you're almost guaranteed to get a high quality IPS LG screen, but on the 50" size, especially on the lower price sets, you might end up with a losing ticket on the 'LG Screen Lottery' and end up with a Chinese MVA/PVA panel.

ok, I didnt know this, because I am just now getting back in the market for a 3D set, so I havent kept up with LG after I purchased my LED back at the end of 09. The PQ was the best to me at the time, even better than the Sammy LEDs. Its funny you mentioned about the bezels because sooooo many people were complaining about the bezel of my model, but its fine to me, I look at the screen, not the bezel. So now they have prettier bezels at the sacrifice of PQ? ehh.

hilaryshotlips 01-08-2013 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by burticus (Post 56714018)
LOL. It's the same TV.
That might have been true years ago, when a manufacturer would make specific lower end models targeted for specific stores. Nowadays the profit margin is so thin it just doesn't make sense to have too many similar product lines..

I'm not sure about that. There seem to be TV model #'s in Costco that you don't see anywhere else. Take the case of printers. Some of the manufacturers make 2 or 3 model #'s that are practically the same, but shipped to different retailers so that they can sell their unique version and not have to price match.

eydaimon 01-08-2013 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hilaryshotlips (Post 56716988)
I'm not sure about that. There seem to be TV model #'s in Costco that you don't see anywhere else. Take the case of printers. Some of the manufacturers make 2 or 3 model #'s that are practically the same, but shipped to different retailers so that they can sell their unique version and not have to price match.


Yeah, but those have different model numbers to distinguish them. In this case we're talking about the same model number being of lower quality for a particular store.

stinkybottom 01-08-2013 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DealGypsy (Post 56673614)
Agreed, I owned one and never again.

I owned at LF and sold it two years later for only $50 less than I paid. I loved that tv. So I disagree. This coming from a person who brought home four new tv's to replace the LG before I kept one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sultanofdeals (Post 56711120)
I sit at 5' from my 60'' and find it too small

That's what she said.

wiremanart 01-08-2013 11:04 PM

the best LG model is the lm7600 240hz. take a look at it at a real tv store (i.e. no walmart) and compare it to any other LG and you will see it has a far superior image. only samsung (6500 or 7100) will have a better picture but good luck paying less than 1500-1800 for either of those.

Personally i own the g2 series. It is a smart tv/3D but I chose it because it has a better picture than the lower end models (and a dual-core processor if i want to use netflix or facebook). Even if you made the lower ends "smart" they would still have inferior panels with relatively poor contrast and detail. IMO if you're gonna put 700-800 into a product, why not spend a little more and get something that is at least close to top of the line.

As for the models that are sold at sams/costo etc. with slightly different model numbers they normally have lower contrast ratio, are missing inputs, use inferior quality resin panel, etc. for instance samsung 6150 is nowhere near the samsung 6100 series you will find at most retailers, and it's a mere $50 "savings".

sc302 01-09-2013 06:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hilaryshotlips (Post 56710884)
It looks a bit thicker than what I would hope for in a 60" set, let alone a 47".

I really need a TV, but I find 3D completely unnecessary. That extra $150 or so for the cost of 3D would be better spent on smart features, a better picture, or more component inputs.

From walking around Costco and Bestbuy, I've come to the conclusion that 60" is the best size for my living room, where I normally sit 7 ft. away. Being nearsighted, when watching a news channel or a sporting event, that's the best size to clearly see all the graphics being transmitted.

I walked around too, prior to picking up this tv, and found that there was no big difference between 55 and 60. There was a much bigger difference between 60 and 65 inches. I did end up purchasing this TV from walmart on line (big mistake, they charged my debit card twice and held up funds while causing a fraud hold on my debit card due to the way their system works...all of this during the last week of christmas shopping which was a absolute nightmare, I pay for things only if I have the cash reserve to do so, but I digress).

The TV itself is a good TV, great for about 10 feet away. Hooking up the coax cable directly to the tv yielded better results than putting in the non HD cable box. I was able to get some HD channels without the cable box, with the cable box it is producing some ghosted images. Without the cable box it is perfect, I can only assume that the crappy cable box is to blame for my ghosting. Movies are perfect, streaming content is perfect (even non hd). All in all it is a decent TV, but don't let the advertisements fool you, it is a 60Hz TV. From what I have read on this, it is a 60Hz lcd with 120Hz LED backlighting....basically marketing gimmic to say this is a 120Hz LED TV. Will you be able to tell, probably not. Even the 240Hz TV's with trumotion seem to be 120Hz TV's.

You may also find in research that this is not a true trumotion TV, the issue is that it is always on and you can't tweak it like you can with the higher models. It is still a trumotion TV, the trumotion is what gives the 120Hz characteristic..without it it is just a 60Hz.

All in all a good tv and would recommend for a cheap 55" at under 1000 that supports 3d. It may not be a great performer, but if you are looking for that then you really should be looking at TV's over 1000. It is good enough for gaming on xbox, computers, and watching movies. I have not watched a HD football game on it yet. Also I would recommend getting a Home Theater setup if you want better sound. There is a 55LM4700 that offers the 55LM4600 and a sound bar if that is what you want to go after, google search it you will find it. I ended up picking up one of these http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-HTD...B004PAA876 but was shipped the HTE6500W (this years model, the D was last years model). It has the smartTV built into it that is missing from this tv. Plays everything beautifully but it is a bit slow launching blurays and launching the smart apps. It is decent, not great, but for 400 for that system plus 800 for the TV made it a good combo for under 1500.

freeforfrank 01-09-2013 07:48 AM

So which one is better picture quality and 3D performance wise? This LG or the Panasonic, which is $100 more.

TrackAddicted 01-09-2013 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deal2go (Post 56647594)
would have ordered if it is samsung or sony brand. LG brand is a junk!
to make it worst, this is not even a SMART TV


LG is junk? I think you're just a fool.

sc302 01-09-2013 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freeforfrank (Post 56732358)
So which one is better picture quality and 3D performance wise? This LG or the Panasonic, which is $100 more.

I believe that the Panasonic is a better tv brand, although I heard back in Oct that Panasonic may be getting out of TV manufacturing.

I haven't seen the Panasonic, but the LG is pretty nice. Watched MIB 3 in 3d, it was good, no artifacts or ghosting that I could tell.

cloudRunner 01-09-2013 12:42 PM

tag. on BF the 55" non-3D version of this TV was $699.

skimrn 01-09-2013 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hack (Post 56647654)
Hard to take you seriously when you give no reasons why LG is junk.

My thoughts exactly. There are plenty of other brands which are most definitely inferior such as Vizio, Westinghouse, Coby, Philips, Sceptre, Sanyo, RCA, Emerson, etc...

iceman936 01-10-2013 12:38 PM

One item of note: this TV does not have RCA outputs, only an audio-jack, so if you use a headset for gaming like those by TurtleBeach, it will not work easily with this television.

I'm only bringing it up because someone I know recently bought a TV without checking for that first and got hosed.

eydaimon 01-10-2013 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iceman936 (Post 56765124)
One item of note: this TV does not have RCA outputs, only an audio-jack, so if you use a headset for gaming like those by TurtleBeach, it will not work easily with this television.

I'm only bringing it up because someone I know recently bought a TV without checking for that first and got hosed.

Doesn't sound like they got hosed. Sounds like they screwed up. ;)

RedZombie78 01-10-2013 01:24 PM

So apparently this is not truly a 120hz TV. I assume this means I will be dissapointed since I spend most time watching sports? If so, what 55 inch LG model is truly 120HZ and good for sports. I don't care about the smart or 3D, just want a good deal on a 55 inch LG for impressing me during March Madness. I appreciate any advice. I'd like to buy TV from Walmart because of employee discount.

eydaimon 01-10-2013 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedZombie78 (Post 56766350)
So apparently this is not truly a 120hz TV. I assume this means I will be dissapointed since I spend most time watching sports? If so, what 55 inch LG model is truly 120HZ and good for sports. I don't care about the smart or 3D, just want a good deal on a 55 inch LG for impressing me during March Madness. I appreciate any advice. I'd like to buy TV from Walmart because of employee discount.


What do you mean by truly? Frequency isn't like a maybe or some vague definition. Source?

RedZombie78 01-10-2013 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eydaimon (Post 56766872)
What do you mean by truly? Frequency isn't like a maybe or some vague definition. Source?

Based on SC302's comment #93. I guess I should have replied directly to that comment. I'm new at this. This TV sounds great for me but if its not really 120hz I think I would be disappointed.

eydaimon 01-10-2013 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedZombie78 (Post 56768678)
Based on SC302's comment #93. I guess I should have replied directly to that comment. I'm new at this. This TV sounds great for me but if its not really 120hz I think I would be disappointed.


He also said you shouldn't worry. And after reading http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moti...erpolation it seems that none of them are truly what they say, regardless of brand.

UPDATE: just to clarify, and correct me if I'm wrong... the TV refreshes at 120Hz, but the limitation is that NTSC is 60fps. So in a sense the TV is still truly 120hz

pcmax 01-10-2013 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sc302 (Post 56730718)
I walked around too, prior to picking up this tv, and found that there was no big difference between 55 and 60. There was a much bigger difference between 60 and 65 inches. I did end up purchasing this TV from walmart on line (big mistake, they charged my debit card twice and held up funds while causing a fraud hold on my debit card due to the way their system works...all of this during the last week of christmas shopping which was a absolute nightmare, I pay for things only if I have the cash reserve to do so, but I digress).

The TV itself is a good TV, great for about 10 feet away. Hooking up the coax cable directly to the tv yielded better results than putting in the non HD cable box. I was able to get some HD channels without the cable box, with the cable box it is producing some ghosted images. Without the cable box it is perfect, I can only assume that the crappy cable box is to blame for my ghosting. Movies are perfect, streaming content is perfect (even non hd). All in all it is a decent TV, but don't let the advertisements fool you, it is a 60Hz TV. From what I have read on this, it is a 60Hz lcd with 120Hz LED backlighting....basically marketing gimmic to say this is a 120Hz LED TV. Will you be able to tell, probably not. Even the 240Hz TV's with trumotion seem to be 120Hz TV's.

You may also find in research that this is not a true trumotion TV, the issue is that it is always on and you can't tweak it like you can with the higher models. It is still a trumotion TV, the trumotion is what gives the 120Hz characteristic..without it it is just a 60Hz.

All in all a good tv and would recommend for a cheap 55" at under 1000 that supports 3d. It may not be a great performer, but if you are looking for that then you really should be looking at TV's over 1000. It is good enough for gaming on xbox, computers, and watching movies. I have not watched a HD football game on it yet. Also I would recommend getting a Home Theater setup if you want better sound. There is a 55LM4700 that offers the 55LM4600 and a sound bar if that is what you want to go after, google search it you will find it. I ended up picking up one of these http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-HTD...B004PAA876 but was shipped the HTE6500W (this years model, the D was last years model). It has the smartTV built into it that is missing from this tv. Plays everything beautifully but it is a bit slow launching blurays and launching the smart apps. It is decent, not great, but for 400 for that system plus 800 for the TV made it a good combo for under 1500.

Totally agree on the TV. Got the 55LM4700 from Fry's on BF and with the sound bar and free 3d BR player could not be happier. The kids love the 3D and I have watched basketball and football games on it and as long as you are about 6+ feet away looks good. I do have a Samsung 46" also so not an LG fanboy just happy with the bang for the buck.

QuestorJones 01-10-2013 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by magbarn (Post 56714460)
The reason for so much hate on LG right now with videophiles is the massive downslide in PQ in going from 2011 to 2012. The highest end LG notwithstanding, LG put all their R&D into making the bezels looking good for 2012 and not so much into their screens. Grab an equivalent 2011 model LG LCD and compare against it's 2012 successor and you'll see the increase in glare, flashlighting, poor black levels, and backlight bleed. Hopefully the 2013 models rectify this.

One more thing... On the 47" models you're almost guaranteed to get a high quality IPS LG screen, but on the 50" size, especially on the lower price sets, you might end up with a losing ticket on the 'LG Screen Lottery' and end up with a Chinese MVA/PVA panel.

When looking at the TV, is there any way to tell the exact panel make/model? Just curious.

pacaveli420 01-11-2013 05:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xception2ThRule (Post 56700808)
Plasma > led

They each have their advantages. LEDs are much better on power, thinner, cooler, and don't get burn ins. LEDs are also a bit better for glare reduction.
Plasmas are better for colors and refresh.

OLEDs >>>>> both

sc302 01-11-2013 06:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eydaimon (Post 56769174)
He also said you shouldn't worry. And after reading http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moti...erpolation it seems that none of them are truly what they say, regardless of brand.

UPDATE: just to clarify, and correct me if I'm wrong... the TV refreshes at 120Hz, but the limitation is that NTSC is 60fps. So in a sense the TV is still truly 120hz

to my knowledge, it is the backlight that refreshes at 120Hz but the lcd refreshes at 60Hz. (again, you aren't going to be able to tell)

To my knowledge, 55LM7600 is a 120Hz lcd with a 240Hz backlight.

RedZombie78 01-11-2013 08:35 AM

I finally decided to roll the dice and the price went up. Figures!

20solara02 01-11-2013 09:20 AM

yea i finally decided to get it and notice the price went up also!!! :(

sadmaker 01-11-2013 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vham (Post 56683808)
I was under the same impression. Ended up buying LM6700 for $100 more. I own PS3, 360, Revue GTV, Sony NSZ-GT1 GTV, PBO. LG's PLEX client (Media Link) is superior than any other streaming client I used. I can use TV screen as a second monitor for my Laptop via wifi (WiDi) to stream Hulu in 720P. I can staream directly to TV using NFC enabled andriod devices. I had the ability to do most of these with differnt devices, but having all of them one unit makes this the best 100$ upgrade I ever did.

$100 more for the 6700 is fantastic. Smart stuff aside, its just a better set from what Ive read. I helped my dad buy the 47" and its very, very nice. I'm actually looking to replace my 55" Sony CCFL LCD with it. Im curious, does your set exhibit edge light bleed? If so, alot of it or manageable?

vham 01-24-2013 07:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sadmaker (Post 56788524)
$100 more for the 6700 is fantastic. Smart stuff aside, its just a better set from what Ive read. I helped my dad buy the 47" and its very, very nice. I'm actually looking to replace my 55" Sony CCFL LCD with it. Im curious, does your set exhibit edge light bleed? If so, alot of it or manageable?

It does a little at edges when I initially turn on the TV and the screen has no picture yet. Once the picture is on, I wouldnt see any, even in dark scenes.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:40 PM.


1999-2014