Also, it'd be good to put the location (Costco B&M) and date (Feb 4-28) in the title. Thanks!
Cybernaut77
New Member
posted: Feb. 2, 2010 @ 1:14a
I got the ad in my mailbox today for West LA (90066). The ad doesn't say, but I'm pretty sure it is a P2770HD.
1920x1080 (1080p), Built in TV tuner, which actually makes it a TV, but great as a computer monitor as well. PiP, 50000:1 (dynamic) contrast ratio, 300:1 contrast ratio, energy star, hdmi+dvi+vga inputs, integrated speakers.
Cybernaut77 said: I got the ad in my mailbox today for West LA (90066). The ad doesn't say, but I'm pretty sure it is a P2770HD.
1920x1080 (1080p), Built in TV tuner, which actually makes it a TV, but great as a computer monitor as well. PiP, 50000:1 (dynamic) contrast ratio, 300:1 contrast ratio, energy star, hdmi+dvi+vga inputs, integrated speakers.
Would love to see a few more reviews for this. 2 reviews on the samsung page, below. This is a great price for a 27", closest is the Hanns-G 28 on Newegg. That seems to have power-supply reliability problems (PS breaking just after 1 year warranty is up).
Samsung page is here The 300:1 contrast ratio in the summary seems wrong. Samsung states "Contrast Ratio (Typical) DC 50,000:1(1000:1)(Typ)", so I'm guessing it's a "true" contrast ratio of 1000:1, right? Not bad. Slightly better than my old Acer 22" at 700:1.
Both reviews on the samsung page state no PIP, sad. One review got their set from costo, another clue that this is prob. the right model.
I've been eying that hanns-g 28 for a while, but then got jaded about reliability after reading reviews. This looks like a great alternative for just a bit more money, and includes more inputs & a tuner(!). Now I just have to justify getting a new monitor to replace my old...
nydoofus
Ancient Member
posted: Feb. 4, 2010 @ 7:35p
jumpfroggy said: Would love to see a few more reviews for this. 2 reviews on the samsung page, below. This is a great price for a 27", closest is the Hanns-G 28 on Newegg. That seems to have power-supply reliability problems (PS breaking just after 1 year warranty is up).
Samsung page is here The 300:1 contrast ratio in the summary seems wrong. Samsung states "Contrast Ratio (Typical) DC 50,000:1(1000:1)(Typ)", so I'm guessing it's a "true" contrast ratio of 1000:1, right? Not bad. Slightly better than my old Acer 22" at 700:1.
Both reviews on the samsung page state no PIP, sad. One review got their set from costo, another clue that this is prob. the right model.
I've been eying that hanns-g 28 for a while, but then got jaded about reliability after reading reviews. This looks like a great alternative for just a bit more money, and includes more inputs & a tuner(!). Now I just have to justify getting a new monitor to replace my old...
I think the 300:1 contrast ratio is a typo. The brightness is 300 cd/mē (probably what that was supposed to be) and the contrast ratio is 1000:1 (typical), 50,000:1 (dynamic). This is off Samsung and Costco's site.
DEAD on the Costco site, which is surprising since it is only February 5th.
May I suggest instead the Samsung T260HD 26" Widescreen LCD HDTV, now on sale at Office Depot for $300 after instant discount, no rebate, through February 6th.
This one is also built on a computer monitor platform, but it is a better platform, 1920 x 1200 resolution. HDMI x2 (!) + Component + DVI-D + VGA (Computer). It also features a 1080p digital HDTV tuner and digital audio-out so you can connect to a home theater system.
zerodeal said: just a note, there is an issue with wall mount. you need to buy a samsung mount to mount this TV on your wall mount. ie You need 2 wall mounts. Also CC is selling this for $330 with 10% bing Cash Back and no tax (at CA) Link to CC? Can't find it on search...
I saw this in Costco today. Not impressed at all. For some reasons, the color looks sort of fragmented. The LCD TV next to it (I think it's a vizio?) looks much better. Is there some difference in color resolution between a monitor and LCD TV? I own a 52' Samsung LCD TV and never saw this issue.
nhdeal said: I saw this in Costco today. Not impressed at all. For some reasons, the color looks sort of fragmented. The LCD TV next to it (I think it's a vizio?) looks much better. Is there some difference in color resolution between a monitor and LCD TV? I own a 52' Samsung LCD TV and never saw this issue.
depends on your definition of 'monitor' and 'television'.
Most 24" or smaller "TVs" are actually based on TN panel monitors with bad viewing angles ... and might be only 6bit color (with dithering) or 8bit .
Most 32" and larger TVs are MVA/PVA/IPS panels that are at least 8bit color depth with good viewing angles (178 degrees).
Judging by the viewing angles this is TN panel based which means possibly only 6bit color natively and color distortion when you view it anything but straight.
The specs say the screen size is 27W, but the product dimension is 26.3" wide. how can that be? And for the T260HD, they state the screen size is 25.5" wide but the product dimension is 24.02" wide.
Also although 27", the specs say it's only 16.6" tall without stand, but my Toshiba 26AV502R is only a 26" but is 18" tall without stand. Maybe my bezel is bigger?
nhdeal said: I saw this in Costco today. Not impressed at all. For some reasons, the color looks sort of fragmented. The LCD TV next to it (I think it's a vizio?) looks much better. Is there some difference in color resolution between a monitor and LCD TV? I own a 52' Samsung LCD TV and never saw this issue. Could be that the vizio is a better monitor. But it's equally possible that the video splitter is not giving the samsung bad video. If all the TV's are playing the same video and it's split from a single source (which is common in a lot of TV sales dept's), then it's just about the worst signal to judge from. So to judge them, they'd have to be connected to separate sources at the right resolution w/o crappy splitters, and then have their settings adjusted properly. Could be this is just a crappy monitor, but I'm guessing it has more to do with the store display. TV = a monitor with a tv tuner. Monitor = tv w/o a tuner. That's the technical definition.
lzpoof said: depends on your definition of 'monitor' and 'television'. Most 24" or smaller "TVs" are actually based on TN panel monitors with bad viewing angles ... and might be only 6bit color (with dithering) or 8bit . Most 32" and larger TVs are MVA/PVA/IPS panels that are at least 8bit color depth with good viewing angles (178 degrees). Judging by the viewing angles this is TN panel based which means possibly only 6bit color natively and color distortion when you view it anything but straight.
I didn't realize most 32" TV's were non-TN panels. Is that true? I know IPS panels are crazy expensive, so it seems strange that a 26-28 inch IPS computer monitor would be in the 1000's, while 32" 1080P tv's are 400-800. I'm guessing most 32-42 inch tv's are not IPS, but I'd *love* to be wrong. Do you have any links? That would def. make me reconsider this tv.
Slickone said: The specs say the screen size is 27W, but the product dimension is 26.3" wide. how can that be? And for the T260HD, they state the screen size is 25.5" wide but the product dimension is 24.02" wide. Also although 27", the specs say it's only 16.6" tall without stand, but my Toshiba 26AV502R is only a 26" but is 18" tall without stand. Maybe my bezel is bigger?
The 27W means 27 inches diagonal, widescreen. Not 27 inches wide. It's confusing, but makes sense if you know how tv's/monitors are traditionally measured. Also, that 26.3" wide is probably including the bezel. The "27W" refers to the diagonal LCD panel only, so the LCD panel width is probably smaller. Measure the screen ratio, calculate pythagorean's theorem, and you can calculate the theoretical width/height of the LCD panel itself. The "product" width (ie. bezel) is arbitrary, and only matters when considering external dimensions for placement. Doesn't really affect display size.
Likely your Toshiba's bezel is bigger too. Looks like the bottom bezel is twice the top/sides. That could give it another inch or two.
I didn't realize most 32" TV's were non-TN panels. Is that true? I know IPS panels are crazy expensive, so it seems strange that a 26-28 inch IPS computer monitor would be in the 1000's, while 32" 1080P tv's are 400-800. I'm guessing most 32-42 inch tv's are not IPS, but I'd *love* to be wrong. Do you have any links? That would def. make me reconsider this tv.
Panasonic is the only manufacturer I'm aware of that regularly uses IPS panels in its LCD's. The rest are MVA/PVA.
And you are correct about the backwards pricing on TV's versus monitors. The excuse used is generally that large PC monitors are higher resolution than 1920X1080 and therefore should cost more but really its hard to justify how some 26" MVA/PVA/IPS monitors go for like 700 bucks when there's 32" MVA/PVA 1920X1080 Tv's in the 450-500 range.
It's hard to justify for instance how Sams' club was selling a 26" TN panel Samsung 1080p "TV" for $300 when it was also selling a Vizio 32" 1080p 120hz MVA panel TV for $450. The cost difference basically jsut reflects the size difference so you were getting 120hz processing,an MVA panel, and more inputs for free.
The manufacturers really want to make sure you're buying a 'TV' AND a 'monitor' so they push those terms hard instead of talking about the panel used.
The technical differences in the terms used to bethat a monitor has no built in tuner (i.e. it can only MONITOR something plugged into it) and a television has a tuner. This appears to be swept under the rug though nowadays.
The original issues regarding the usage of 'television' and 'monitor with a tuner' were due to tariffs on shipping the items. I believe there were higher tariffs on televisions than monitors so companies like Samsung used to say their 17" and 19" models were 'monitors with builtin tuners". It's harder to claim your device isn't a "television" when it's 32" and has fifty inputs on the back.
There really is no good reason for a manufacturer to label one TN panel 19" LCD with tuner a 'LCD TV' and a 24" TN based LCD with tuner a "monitor" other than marketing. They want you to think you need both.
jumpfroggy said: Slickone said: The specs say the screen size is 27W, but the product dimension is 26.3" wide. how can that be? And for the T260HD, they state the screen size is 25.5" wide but the product dimension is 24.02" wide. Also although 27", the specs say it's only 16.6" tall without stand, but my Toshiba 26AV502R is only a 26" but is 18" tall without stand. Maybe my bezel is bigger?
The 27W means 27 inches diagonal, widescreen. Not 27 inches wide. It's confusing, but makes sense if you know how tv's/monitors are traditionally measured. Also, that 26.3" wide is probably including the bezel. The "27W" refers to the diagonal LCD panel only, so the LCD panel width is probably smaller. Measure the screen ratio, calculate pythagorean's theorem, and you can calculate the theoretical width/height of the LCD panel itself. The "product" width (ie. bezel) is arbitrary, and only matters when considering external dimensions for placement. Doesn't really affect display size.
Likely your Toshiba's bezel is bigger too. Looks like the bottom bezel is twice the top/sides. That could give it another inch or two. That makes sense. I wasn't thinking about being diagonal.
I have had one of these for a few weeks which now means i have to go back and see if i can get $50 off. As far as what panel it uses i don't know. I used it to replace a 22" computer monitor so that i can route my Xbox to it while people are watching TV. It sits in the same room as my 52" Samsung which i believe is a LN52A750 (I know the 52 and 750 numbers are right).
How good is it? I like it. Viewing angle good and i have not noticed any issues with color from anywhere in the room. The color is a bit harsh compared to my larger TV but making some adjustments to brightness and color I got the picture to look really close to the 52"
27" computer monitor is huge compared to the 22" which ran at 1600x1050 i think. Yes for its size in a computer application more pixels would be great but 1920x1080 is plenty of desktop to play with and it still looks sharp.
I have played some MW2 on it and now prefer to as my scores are always higher. I think that is more related to being closer to it and the size to distance ratio lets me see things a bit better.
The only reason to get the tv version, IMO, is for the remote so you can power it on and off or if you need a tuner. Uhhhhh... What about the speakers. Kinda need that for watching tv. The speakers on this are not rated very well for entertainment. You might find yourself looking for external speakers depending on your setup.
lzpoof said: Vizio 32" 1080p 120hz MVA panel TV for $450. The cost difference basically jsut reflects the size difference so you were getting 120hz processing,an MVA panel, and more inputs for free.
The manufacturers really want to make sure you're buying a 'TV' AND a 'monitor' so they push those terms hard instead of talking about the panel used.
I wish that deal was still around. I just purchased a Samsung TOC T260HD for my new desktop with a Radeon 5870. It would be awesome to have the better panel on the Vizio (MVA and 1 billion colors) and a higher refresh rate (120 hz) even though the resolution is lower. I wish panel makers would start pushing monitors to have higher refresh rates than 60 hz.
Disclaimer: By providing links to other sites, FatWallet.com does not guarantee, approve or endorse the information or products available at these sites, nor does a link indicate any association with or endorsement by the linked site to FatWallet.com.
Members of our community may attach files to a post in accordance with the User Agreement. FatWallet is not responsible for the content, accuracy, completeness or validity of any information contained in any attached file. Files have *not* been scanned for viruses. Be especially wary of Excel files which may contain malicious content.
