HMDI and Sharp Aquos

[ncted]

Given that Dish pushes Sharp Aquos TVs, is it safe to assume they will work correctly with Dish HD Receivers and DVRs, such as the 622 when connected via HDMI? I am in the market for a new HDTV for the master bedroom. I have a 622 on order to replace my 625, and I want to choose a model that will work well over HDMI. I am looking in the 26-27" size. Should I choose a Sharp, or is there something else out there that would be a better choice?

Thanks,
Ted

PS - Why would Dish offer me the 622 for free, but the 612 for $100 to upgrade? The 722 was not even an option.

 

[KAB]

The Sharp is not going to work any better or worse than most any other brand with the 622. The tie-in was promotional, nothing more. On a ironic note, Seagate Free Agent drives were originally featured in demos for External Hard Drive support. They won't work right unless you do some messing with them..

 

[Darrell S]

I have a 32" Sharp hooked up to HDMI on a 722. It looks great, but is one of their models with 1080p. I also have it hooked to a Blu-ray player.

 

[Laddyboy]

The 622 like the 625 supports 2 TVs, one in HD and 1 in SD. The 612 is a dual tuner that supports only 1 TV (no 2nd TV option) so it's not directly comparable to the 625 and isn't the direct upgrade. You likely could get a 722 by paying $. There's not that much difference between the 622 and 722. You might even get a 722 when they do the install anyway. Some have based on posts in the forum. It just depends if the installer has any 622s available I think.

 

[ncted]

The 622 like the 625 supports 2 TVs, one in HD and 1 in SD. The 612 is a dual tuner that supports only 1 TV (no 2nd TV option) so it's not directly comparable to the 625 and isn't the direct upgrade. You likely could get a 722 by paying $. There's not that much difference between the 622 and 722. You might even get a 722 when they do the install anyway. Some have based on posts in the forum. It just depends if the installer has any 622s available I think.

Makes sense that the 622 is the direct upgrade for the 625. I am not getting an installer. They are shipping me the 622 with instructions to activate. When I asked about the 722 instead of the 622, I was told it was not available to me.

Thanks,
Ted

 

[ncted]

BTW: I got a Samsung LN32A450. It was rated much higher than the equivalent Sharp or Sony models. Now, I just have to hope that HDMI works.

Thanks,
Ted

 

[Jerryinvirginia]

BTW: I got a Samsung LN32A450. It was rated much higher than the equivalent Sharp or Sony models. Now, I just have to hope that HDMI works.

Thanks,
Ted

Who rated your tv?

 

[KAB]

BTW: I got a Samsung LN32A450. It was rated much higher than the equivalent Sharp or Sony models. Now, I just have to hope that HDMI works.

Thanks,
Ted

I'm glad you went bigger than you originally hinted at. I have two Samsungs, a DLP and Plasma...both doing great.
HDMI vs Component is a wash, in fact most polls here over that past year gives component an edge. My plasma definitely likes component better.

 

[ncted]

Who rated your tv?

CNET rated it very highly:

Samsung LN32A450 Flat-panel TV reviews - CNET Reviews

Other reviews I read at various reseller sites also gave it the edge.

Ted

 

[Jerryinvirginia]

Glad that you researched before you purchased. I have heard that Sammy was S L O W with repair parts and that concerns me a little. Hope you continue to enjoy your purchase.

 

[ncted]

I have a LN-S4696D that I am very happy with. If I didn't, I might have gotten something else, probably the Sony. Here's hoping I don't have to get any repairs done.

Thanks,
Ted

 

[Sammy033]

HDMI vs Component is a wash, in fact most polls here over that past year gives component an edge. My plasma definitely likes component better.

I have yet to try component for the DVR as the only cables I have is for the DVD player. Who knows for sure but HDMI seems to look fine so long as the original is good. The test will be what Encore movies look like. Ugh.

 

[RobertsD]

I haven't done done this with my 622, but when I had the older 922(or was it 925?) I did a comparision between HDMI and component. The results were basically that with HDMI, the picture was slightly clearer(more "crisp"), but you loose a little bit of the color compared to component. The color difference was not huge, but they just seemed a little bit more dull over HDMI.

 

[ncted]

I haven't done done this with my 622, but when I had the older 922(or was it 925?) I did a comparision between HDMI and component. The results were basically that with HDMI, the picture was slightly clearer(more "crisp"), but you loose a little bit of the color compared to component. The color difference was not huge, but they just seemed a little bit more dull over HDMI.

I'm not necessarily interested in using HDMI to get a better picture. If it is worse, I will not use it for sure. I would simply like to only have to use 1 cable from STB to TV instead of 5.

Seems like they would be able to send the same information over HDMI as Component given the bandwidth of HDMI. My Apple TV definitely looks better over HDMI than Component, but there I am dealing with highly compressed information, so who knows.

Ted

 

[slicked25]

I haven't done done this with my 622, but when I had the older 922(or was it 925?) I did a comparision between HDMI and component. The results were basically that with HDMI, the picture was slightly clearer(more "crisp"), but you loose a little bit of the color compared to component. The color difference was not huge, but they just seemed a little bit more dull over HDMI.

I can't tell one difference in picture between the two but on my surround sound's digital display it says PCM 48 for HDMI and PCM 44.1 for Component. Oh, and that's with regular old RCA Cables. Haven't actually tried Component Cables yet but it's good to have a set of the two because HDMI can fail.

I guess Wal-Mart has added 1080's to their inventory because they had my TV that I bought at Sear's last year for 400 bucks cheaper. 42'' Vizio 1080P for $997.

 

[rspainhower]

I have a samsung LN32A450 with a 722 and the picture is crisp and beautiful. Even better than other 1080p sets with blu-ray.

 

[LER]

I have a 42" 1080p Aquos on a 622. works great. Exact model in signature

 

[haertig]

I am looking in the 26-27" size.

For a 26" screen, you'd need to be closer than 7 or 8 feet before your eyes could begin to distinguish SD from HD 720p. To begin to distinguish 1080p from 720p (or to fully realize 720p benefit) on that screen size you'd need to be closer than 5 feet. 3 feet to fully realize the benefits of 1080p. Depending on the size of your bedroom and your viewing distance, 26-27" doesn't sound like it would be big enough to be worth it. I'd consider a 42" screen if it would fit and you can afford it (that would probably be a big jump in price compared to a 26" screen however).

Refer to:

1080p charted: Viewing distance to screen size - Engadget HD

 

[ncted]

For a 26" screen, you'd need to be closer than 7 or 8 feet before your eyes could begin to distinguish SD from HD 720p. To begin to distinguish 1080p from 720p (or to fully realize 720p benefit) on that screen size you'd need to be closer than 5 feet. 3 feet to fully realize the benefits of 1080p. Depending on the size of your bedroom and your viewing distance, 26-27" doesn't sound like it would be big enough to be worth it. I'd consider a 42" screen if it would fit and you can afford it (that would probably be a big jump in price compared to a 26" screen however).

Refer to:

1080p charted: Viewing distance to screen size - Engadget HD

I got a 32" which is just about right. A 37" might have been a little better, but it would not have fit as well.

Ted