Read more.Quote:
freesat HD on a Sony TV. Find out if the combination is worth £800.
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
freesat HD on a Sony TV. Find out if the combination is worth £800.
Having viewed this TV in the flesh I was massively disappointed. £899 for a TV with this spec? I think not, I'd rather buy the Samsung 650/750 myself, As I think the panel quality is far better, and I can't honestly see any improvement on SD pictures with the Bravia Engine 3.....
I still think Sony's are over priced myself across the whole range and unfortunately cannot rely on their old reputation as the build quality and picture quality is not as good as you'd expect for the price.
just my 2p.
Ben
So when are Samsung gonna bring a Freesat telly to the table?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunjiweb
You wouldn't look at a set like this unless you REALLY wanted the Freesat tuner
Can't you pick up one of those Samsung LED series TV's for £800 ?
this and the 40w5500 are exactly the same supposedly except for the freesat.
and theres quite a big price gap between the two... you decide if you want integrated fresat!
also the networking is a load of tosh, i bought an 37w5500 (love it it bits) but when connected to my Netgear NAS, not one video was able to be streamed (supports like one type of format!)
I think the wave Freesat HD was riding has all but vanished now as Freeview HD is coming out - i know people cant get a signal with freeview etc etc but still...
The reception issue is quite, quite real.Quote:
Originally Posted by Terbinator
You mean people have problems with getting normal freeview or Freeview HD? I seem to have no problems with normal Freeview, if you meant Freeview HD even though its available here there seems to be no equipment available to receive it which i think was a oversight (only 5 miles from the Crystal Palace transmitter as well) :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Terbinator
Well there will be problems with both for some people - thats Freesat's main attraction to some, you have more chance of a signal via satellite than if you live in an area where the signal is poor or non-existant via antenna. I was suggesting that Freesat HD's chance has been and gone though to get people on board who live in Freeview(HD) capable areas sen as FReeview HD will be launching soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barrichello
better to assemble a HTPC for freeview
There are still dead-spots in the UK where Freesat is worth having, personally if I was wealthy enough to live in the country, I would get Sky as the HD service is much better.
Samsung haven't given any indication of doing a range of Freesat sets, I don't suspect they will, they are not aiming for a UK-only Freesat market that is limited and is already a bit of a flop. Anyway, if I were to use freesat, I would NOT use an inbuilt tuner, I don't care how much neater it is, it makes it much harder to record so I would get an external Foxsat HD box from Humax.
Ben
I'm intrigued as to why (or how) BBC HD is sharper via a Sky box?
He's referring to the overall service, choice of channels & recording etc, when cost is taken into account, as opposed to picture fidelity - i asume.Quote:
Originally Posted by probedb
It's exactly the same feed on Sky as on Freesat so it's really down to how competent the picture processor in the freesat box is, the Goodman's one for example is very basic whilst the Humax one seem's to do a better job, but again there has to also be some reliance on the TV's processing, although for a HD image it should just be down to colour as no picture enhancement should be required.
Ben
Unless your using a 1080p tv ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunjiweb
nice but until they make freesat HD versions only a little more expensive to cover costs rather than £100 or so more then take up will be limited plus how many people are put off by having to put up a dish and stuff if they arent already with sky and can run a cable themself?