Quantcast

Hmmmm! Sammy LE32R41BD or Sony KLV-S32A10

P

prycop

Guest
Sammy LE32R41BD or Sony KLV-S32A10?

Found a source for the Sony (£970) only £130 dearer than the cheapest Sammy (£840)

Which would you go for - what are the pro's and cons?

Surely a newer Sony TV is 'better'??
 

chriszzzzzz

Active Member
Can only go on experience. SAMMY every time the pic quality on mine blows away the opposition.... :thumbsup:
 
S

Shin Gouki

Guest
If you can afford the extra cash then you would be stupid to go for anything other than the Sony "S" . It uses the latest Sony/Samsung panel which has a response time of 8ms compared to 12ms for the Samsung LE32R41BD.

There is nobody on this forum who would choose the Sammy over the Sony "S" if they had the money to purchase the "S".

The fact that the Sony "S" uses the new 8ms Sony/Samsung panels is all you need to know. :thumbsup:
 
P

prycop

Guest
Glad to see the debate growing - comments appear to be 50/50.

I'm going down the track that latest screens must be better train of thought....
 

vallii

Standard Member
prycop said:
Glad to see the debate growing - comments appear to be 50/50.

I'm going down the track that latest screens must be better train of thought....
Sammy get my vote, say no more.
 

Barzo

Well-known Member
Shin Gouki said:
There is nobody on this forum who would choose the Sammy over the Sony "S" if they had the money to purchase the "S".
Yes, there is! Me and I did. Saw the Sony in John Lewis, and saw no reason, given that this model does not have WEGA engine, for purchasing over the Samsung. It cost more, certainly, but the image seemed much the same, imho. In fact, if anything, a little worse. And, yes, I did have a play around with the settings. Made my decision that a Samsung was the panel for me - it cost £859.99 delivered, which was a major bonus, but not the reason for buying the panel. I had budgeted up to £1,500.
 

vallii

Standard Member
Shin Gouki said:
If you can afford the extra cash then you would be stupid to go for anything other than the Sony "S" . It uses the latest Sony/Samsung panel which has a response time of 8ms compared to 12ms for the Samsung LE32R41BD.

There is nobody on this forum who would choose the Sammy over the Sony "S" if they had the money to purchase the "S".

The fact that the Sony "S" uses the new 8ms Sony/Samsung panels is all you need to know. :thumbsup:
Faster 'Response Time' does not mean it's better, a 14ms Panny did very well (beat) against the 8ms Sony, check the latest mag out today.
 

chriszzzzzz

Active Member
Shin Gouki said:
If you can afford the extra cash then you would be stupid to go for anything other than the Sony "S" . It uses the latest Sony/Samsung panel which has a response time of 8ms compared to 12ms for the Samsung LE32R41BD.

There is nobody on this forum who would choose the Sammy over the Sony "S" if they had the money to purchase the "S".

The fact that the Sony "S" uses the new 8ms Sony/Samsung panels is all you need to know. :thumbsup:
Sorry to rain on your parade but 8ms is the response time on the Sammy. Also the pic quality is superior to the Sony.
I think you will find many people on this forum who would choose the Sammy over the Sony. Sony is not the byeword for quality or top range it once was...
 

Random Hajile

Active Member
I had the samsung panel for a month and sent back after that time so I know how well the samsung works with SD and Hi def material over TV and games. And I demoed the S series sony and can honestly say you will notice the sonys faster response time straight away especially playing soul calibur 2 in 720p. Prime example on soul calibur is where you first start the stage and the camera pans fast around the arena and characters and on the sony there`s no blurring what so ever where on the samsung panel there is slight blurring. Plus the sony panel seems alot brighter and slightly better contrast aswell. Don`t get me wrong the samsung is a great screen but anyone thinking It`s the same panel or as good as the sony haven`t clearly demoed the sony properly. Overall If you have the extra cash go for the sony as you are paying for a better panel and not just the name.
 

Random Hajile

Active Member
Contrast Is 800:1 I think same as the samsung, It`s hard to describe but the overall image didn`t look as dull as the samsung when It came to displaying darker areas on screen. And As I said in a previous thread, with progressive sources you really need to ram the brightness up on the samsung to around +75 where on the sony being on 50 was perfect. Plus I found the sony image overall slightly sharper when It came to games (probably down to the faster response time)
 

richard plumb

Well-known Member
to be fair, I think the differences are pretty small between them, and not easily quantifiable.

Therefore the best advice is that

a) both sets are very good

b) you need to see them both with your own eyes to decide.

You might notice if there is a difference in response times and prefer the Sony. Or you might like the 'look' of the Samsung - how an LCD presents its pictures to you.
 
S

Shin Gouki

Guest
ThePimpmaster said:
Sory to say it, by the Samsungs are 8ms as well. The Sony and Samsung havethe same panel.
No they are'nt they are 12ms. The only sets to use the new 8ms panels are the Sony "S", "V" and "W" series.
 
S

Shin Gouki

Guest
Barzo said:
Yes, there is! Me and I did. Saw the Sony in John Lewis, and saw no reason, given that this model does not have WEGA engine, for purchasing over the Samsung. It cost more, certainly, but the image seemed much the same, imho. In fact, if anything, a little worse. And, yes, I did have a play around with the settings. Made my decision that a Samsung was the panel for me - it cost £859.99 delivered, which was a major bonus, but not the reason for buying the panel. I had budgeted up to £1,500.
I think if you set them both up perfectly you would of gone for the Sony. Why anyone woudl go for a set with a 12ms response time over one with 8ms is beyond me. I would of taken the new 8ms panel right away.

You say you fiddled about with the settings but you didnt have the time to set them up perfectly and test everything.

Hey if i offered to buy someone one of these sets, and they choose the Sammy, i woud still buy them the Sony, and they woudl thank me for it later. ;)

Makes no sense to go for an older inferior panel, and further, more detailed testing would of showed that.
 
S

Shin Gouki

Guest
vallii said:
Faster 'Response Time' does not mean it's better, a 14ms Panny did very well (beat) against the 8ms Sony, check the latest mag out today.
I don't trust magazines. What version of the Sony did they put it up against anyway?
 
S

Shin Gouki

Guest
chriszzzzzz said:
Sorry to rain on your parade but 8ms is the response time on the Sammy. Also the pic quality is superior to the Sony.
I think you will find many people on this forum who would choose the Sammy over the Sony. Sony is not the byeword for quality or top range it once was...
:nono:

No, the resposne time for the sammy is 12ms and it does not use the same panel as the Sony BRAVIA series.

Many people have the Sammy over the Sony because the Sammy was released earlier and is now cheper than the Sony.

It's got nothing to do with the Sammy being better because it's not.
 
G

Gizmoboy

Guest
Shin Gouki said:
No they are'nt they are 12ms. The only sets to use the new 8ms panels are the Sony "S", "V" and "W" series.
Shin Gouki,

With all due respect - you are wrong. I have seen the label on the physical LCD with 8ms written on it. I have seen the specs on the Samsung website. I have just returned from Dubai (and have seen the same sticker/specs stating 8ms). Perhaps you would like to check your information again?

Regards,

Gizmo
 

Random Hajile

Active Member
I`d say after having the samsung It`s no way 8ms. After Demoing the Sony, I can believe that`s 8ms but I`d say the 12ms whats been quoted pretty much everywhere for the samsung Is more near the mark.

Are you sure you aren`t confusing it with the Samsung LE26M51B Milano Gizmo which is samsungs more expensive panel which has a 8ms response time?
 
S

Shin Gouki

Guest
It seems that there is a lot of confusion with these sets. The UK website does'nt give any info at all on response times. The american website says 12 ms and according to an email someone recieved the sets are 12 ms.

Is it possibe that they have upgradd the panles? because the whole point of people buying the new Sony Bravia sets is that they use the new 8ms Sony/Samsung panel, and no other sets used this panel yet.

Maybe they have started putting this panel in the Sammy? or maybe they just have an 8ms panel but it is'nt the new panel thats in the Sony BRAVIA series? :confused:
 
S

Shin Gouki

Guest
Random Hajile said:
I`d say after having the samsung It`s no way 8ms. After Demoing the Sony, I can believe that`s 8ms but I`d say the 12ms whats been quoted pretty much everywhere for the samsung Is more near the mark.

Are you sure you aren`t confusing it with the Samsung LE26M51B Milano Gizmo which is samsungs more expensive panel which has a 8ms response time?
He must be talking about another set.

The main reason peope wanted the Sony BRAVIA series is becaue they have the new 8ms panel which no other sets were supposed to have.
 
S

Shin Gouki

Guest
Everywhere i look it says that the LE32R41B has got a 12ms panel.
 
G

Gizmoboy

Guest
Shin Gouki said:
Everywhere i look it says that the LE32R41B has got a 12ms panel.
Hi Shin Gouki,

Have a look at this link. I guess someone will just have to call Samsung directly!

http://www.samsung.com/fr/products/tv/lcdtv/lcd169/le32r41bxxec.asp

Again, I know the models as I wanted to buy this one and saw the updated m51 & 61 models as well. All had 8ms response times on them (sticker attached/specs attached). Maybe someone else could confirm!

Regards

Gizmo
 
S

Shin Gouki

Guest
Someone on the forum emailed Samsung about this and got a reply from a very helpful guy from Samsung. He said the LE32R41BD had a response time of 12ms and the only sets they sold that had a response time of 8ms are the M51 and M61 models. My guess is that they just stuck those stickers on all the sammy LCD's unless they have started to use an 8ms panel all of a sudden.

Here this is the email conversation they had-

"Dear ____

Thank you very much for your enquiry regarding Samsung LCDs.

The response time of these units is 12 ms.

Regarding the differences between these models it is purely design difference.

Both are HD Ready 32” LCDs with built in freeview digital tuners.

I hope this helps.

Rob Shaw

Product Manager CTV SEUK
Tel: 01932 455047"

______________________________________________________________

"Hi Rob

Thanks for getting back to me.

I was wondering, why do we have a lower response time in the UK product? On European sites for the same model it states 8ms: http://www.samsung.com/es/products/...=Specifications

Thanks for your time."

______________________________________________________________

"Robs reply
Dear _____

I would suggest that some of the information on their websites may be incorrect.

From information we have been given the only current models we have with an 8ms response time are the M51 and M61 models.

I hope this clarifies
Rob Shaw"
 

AgentCool

Novice Member
At the end of the day you're talking about four one-thousandths (or a 250th) of a second difference here. If it were something like 10ms difference you might be onto something but really there shouldn't be any noticable difference between the two. Plus, even if they were both 12ms, this is still a pretty decent response time. Besides, the picture processing technologies in each set such as the DNIe in the Samsung should also have a bearing on the picture quality thus making the statistical response time fairly irrelevant.
 

dllord

Novice Member
markwpage said:
At the end of the day you're talking about four one-thousandths (or a 250th) of a second difference here. If it were something like 10ms difference you might be onto something but really there shouldn't be any noticable difference between the two. Plus, even if they were both 12ms, this is still a pretty decent response time. Besides, the picture processing technologies in each set such as the DNIe in the Samsung should also have a bearing on the picture quality thus making the statistical response time fairly irrelevant.
4 ms can make a difference, i had a 19" dell monitor with 20ms and it smeared quite a bit, but i upraded to the 20" dell with a 16ms responce time and the smearing went away!
 

Barzo

Well-known Member
Shin Gouki said:
I think if you set them both up perfectly you would of gone for the Sony. Why anyone woudl go for a set with a 12ms response time over one with 8ms is beyond me. I would of taken the new 8ms panel right away.

You say you fiddled about with the settings but you didnt have the time to set them up perfectly and test everything.

Hey if i offered to buy someone one of these sets, and they choose the Sammy, i woud still buy them the Sony, and they woudl thank me for it later. ;)

Makes no sense to go for an older inferior panel, and further, more detailed testing would of showed that.
You believe what you want to believe - far be it from me to tell you how to think. I'll happily stick with my Samsung. If response time is your thing, why not buy one of the new xxDS6 JVC panels? They are 7ms. Does that make them superior to any of the Sonys? Response time is only one part of the equation. Glad you like your Sony, though.
 

chriszzzzzz

Active Member
Shin Gouki said:
Everywhere i look it says that the LE32R41B has got a 12ms panel.
Don't know where you are looking but I can't find anything saying 12ms.
Everything says 8ms.
Even Samsung are quoting 8ms on the European sites.
The guy sending the email won't be the first to get it wrong. Samsung Uk are usually way behind with product info as we know. :thumbsdow
all the European panels are made at the same facility. The Sammy is better than the Sony for pic quality IMHO. You may have had a faulty set.
Sometimes pic quality is subjective....So lets agree to disagree.. :)
 

Dune

Active Member
dllord said:
4 ms can make a difference, i had a 19" dell monitor with 20ms and it smeared quite a bit, but i upraded to the 20" dell with a 16ms responce time and the smearing went away!
But that isn't comparing 8ms to 12 ms is it?

20ms is slow and not recomended for fast moving images.

Anything at or below 16ms is considered acceptable on a computor monitor for games (for example) by most people.

The question is can you tell the difference between 8ms and 12ms? Both aremuch faster response times than you have witnessed.

So while you can to see the difference between 16ms and 20ms it does not follow that you will be able to see the difference between 12ms and 8ms as these latter two response times are both so much faster.

Dave
 

Similar threads

Trending threads

Latest News

Xbox Series X console rises from Microsoft's Project Scarlett
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
BT Sports introduces all-access monthly pass for £25
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Dolby Atmos Music comes to Tidal streaming service
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Samsung TVs unexpectedly losing access to BBC iPlayer
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Bowers & Wilkins to release updated Formation Home app in 2020
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom