Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Samsung 32 inch Full HD LCD TV LE32A556

Options
  • 03-02-2009 12:23am
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 422 ✭✭


    Samsung 32 inch Full HD LCD TV LE32A556 for €488 over on ibood.ie.


«1

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭podge3


    No real point on spending brass on a full HD 32" screen. Get a 720p/1080i for over €100 less.

    IMHO you need at least a 46" screen to benefit from full HD.

    You canna change the laws of physics etc etc ;)


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,531 ✭✭✭Zonda999


    Full HD is not totally pointless at 32". What if the screen is going to be used as a monitor for example?? This is a good deal none the less. About 500e would be the standard price for the series 4 32" samsung, not a series 5. This is an excellent tv by all accounts as well. They have very good blacks for an LCD and SD processing is good too. Also the 556 version(As opposed to 558 or 559) is very good looking.

    Linke here by the way


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,512 ✭✭✭✭vectra


    podge3 wrote: »
    No real point on spending brass on a full HD 32" screen. Get a 720p/1080i for over €100 less.

    IMHO you need at least a 46" screen to benefit from full HD.

    You canna change the laws of physics etc etc ;)

    Dont you just love these answers
    And I assume you have a 32" full hd that you can warrant your statement? :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭podge3


    vectra wrote: »
    Dont you just love these answers
    And I assume you have a 32" full hd that you can warrant your statement? :rolleyes:
    Don't you just love replies like that :cool:

    To answer your question, I don't have a 32" full HD set. I have a 46" 1080p and 32" 720p.

    Once again, IMHO, a 32" screen is really too small to appreciate the fine detail of full HD unless you sit 4 feet from the screen. That doesn't mean that the picture will not look fantactic but it may not be down to the fact that its 1080p.


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,512 ✭✭✭✭vectra


    podge3 wrote: »
    Don't you just love replies like that :cool:

    To answer your question, I don't have a 32" full HD set. I have a 46" 1080p and 32" 720p.

    Once again, IMHO, a 32" screen is really too small to appreciate the fine detail of full HD unless you sit 4 feet from the screen. That doesn't mean that the picture will not look fantactic but it may not be down to the fact that its 1080p.

    So what else could it be down to ??

    I happen to have a 32" Full HD
    In fact I have the exact one in this post
    Trust me
    It is superb quality
    abd yes
    I do sit quite close to it as it is in a confined area ;)


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭podge3


    vectra wrote: »
    So what else could it be down to ??
    The overall quality/expense of the set, the response time, the contrast ratio etc etc.

    There are 2 threads on here at the moment about a €299 32" bush in Powercity. I recently got a 32" Sharp (720p) and, while I haven't seen the 2 side by side, I'm pretty sure you would see a difference in picture quality ;).


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,512 ✭✭✭✭vectra


    podge3 wrote: »
    The overall quality/expense of the set, the response time, the contrast ratio etc etc
    I recently got a 32" Sharp (720p) and, while I haven't seen the 2 side by side, I'm pretty sure you would see a difference in picture quality ;).


    So,
    Isnt that a total contradiction to your initial reply?? :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭podge3


    vectra wrote: »
    So,
    Isnt that a total contradiction to your initial reply?? :rolleyes:
    How is that?


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,512 ✭✭✭✭vectra


    podge3 wrote: »
    No real point on spending brass on a full HD 32" screen. Get a 720p/1080i for over €100 less.

    IMHO you need at least a 46" screen to benefit from full HD.

    You canna change the laws of physics etc etc ;)
    podge3 wrote: »
    The overall quality/expense of the set, the response time, the contrast ratio etc etc.

    There are 2 threads on here at the moment about a €299 32" bush in Powercity. I recently got a 32" Sharp (720p) and, while I haven't seen the 2 side by side, I'm pretty sure you would see a difference in picture quality ;).

    Spot the difference?

    1st post= you more or less said Dont waste your money

    4th post= You say On second thoughts there probably is a difference.


    So is there a difference or not?


    I say yes.. go get it especially at that price.
    I paid near €800 for that exact tv last october


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,848 ✭✭✭Fnz


    This thread is really harshing my mellow.

    I've also heard that, at traditional television viewing distances, noticing a appreciable difference in image quality between a 720p and a 1080p 32" display can be difficult. I guess this assumes all other things being equal.

    People be jumping to conclusions, or overly combative up in here. Word! :D


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭podge3


    vectra wrote: »
    Spot the difference?

    1st post= you more or less said Dont waste your money

    4th post= You say On second thoughts there probably is a difference.


    So is there a difference or not?
    I'm breaking the cardinal Forum rule here of "Never argue with an idiot. He'll try to drag you down to his level and beat you with experience". So this is my last reply to you.

    In my first post I was referring to a full HD 32" TV and, IMHO, that it is a waste of money.

    In my third post I said that, side by side, a more expensive comparable TV will almost certainly look better than a cheaper one i.e a 32" Sharp 720p and 32" Bush 720p.

    Goodbye Sir :cool:




    Fnz wrote: »
    or overly combative up in here.
    Indeed ;)

    But if I had paid €800 for a 32" TV 3 months ago I might be angling for a fight also :)


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,353 ✭✭✭coldfire1x


    I do have a 32" Sharp, full HD 1080p and it does make a difference.

    Good deal OP.


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,512 ✭✭✭✭vectra


    podge3 wrote: »
    I'm breaking the cardinal Forum rule here of "Never argue with an idiot. He'll try to drag you down to his level and beat you with experience". So this is my last reply to you.

    In my first post I was referring to a full HD 32" TV and, IMHO, that it is a waste of money.

    In my third post I said that, side by side, a more expensive comparable TV will almost certainly look better than a cheaper one i.e a 32" Sharp 720p and 32" Bush 720p.

    Goodbye Sir :cool:





    Indeed ;)

    But if I had paid €800 for a 32" TV 3 months ago I might be angling for a fight also :)


    Nobody mentioned the Bush TV only YOU as this specific thread was regarding a Samsung FULL HD
    You are obviously the FOOL that you refer to for bringing it into the topic.

    As for the €800
    It doesnt bother me in the least bud
    only consider it a drop in the ocean.
    I would gladly pay the same again for another one if needed.
    I am not one to "Cut Corners" and buy HD ready as a 2nd best option
    I would prefer to go the whole hog and buy quality
    If you want to be a cheapskate then go ahead. but do not try to put others off when they obviously want the better item just because you couldnt.;)


  • Registered Users Posts: 688 ✭✭✭Shulgin


    vectra wrote: »
    If you want to be a cheapskate then go ahead. but do not try to put others off when they obviously want the better item just because you couldnt.;)

    Its not about being a cheapskate. Its weighing up the benefits of 1080p on a 32" tv and extra cost compared to a 720p model.

    Most people wouldnt notice the difference. Its a fact.

    Now if its gonna be used as a pc monitor or you have it in a tiny room, then you will see the extra 1080p definition. otherwise its kinda pointless to spend a couple of hundred more right?


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,166 ✭✭✭enda1


    What people are probably missing is the point that it is not just one feature which changes when you go from one brand's 720p to 1080p. Usually the other features get a boost aswell.

    Contrast increase, response time decrease, design, speakers etc. etc.
    Also maybe the person wants to use the screen as a computer monitor?


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,512 ✭✭✭✭vectra


    Shulgin wrote: »
    Its not about being a cheapskate. Its weighing up the benefits of 1080p on a 32" tv and extra cost compared to a 720p model.

    Most people wouldnt notice the difference. Its a fact.

    Now if its gonna be used as a pc monitor or you have it in a tiny room, then you will see the extra 1080p definition. otherwise its kinda pointless to spend a couple of hundred more right?


    To a certain point I do agree.
    BUT
    what I was trying to say was:
    Why should anyone ASSUME it is going to be used at a 15 or 20 foot distance and come along saying "DO NOT BUY IT, YOU ARE THROWING MONEY AWAY"

    Why not ask the OP where it will be used and what for?


    And you
    @ €499 for this TV anyone buying a HD ready to save another 100 or whatever I would consider to be a cheapskate :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 30,123 ✭✭✭✭Star Lord


    Can't speak for the 32" model, but I have the 37" of this exact telly (LE37A556P), and it is a fantastic TV, and well worth the asking.

    Also, shouldn't this have been in the Ibood thread in the first place?


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,053 ✭✭✭jimbling


    I just made the purchase anyway. Its 650 on pixmania so happy enough with the savings.


  • Registered Users Posts: 422 ✭✭clickhere


    sorry DamoElDiablo, if i put it in the wrong section. p.s. I did not mean to start a row. Im only new here. Great site by the way.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭podge3


    clickhere wrote: »
    p.s. I did not mean to start a row.
    It takes 2 people to have a row, although some lads will box with their shadow :).

    Most of us can have an informed debate without resorting to aggressive posts.

    Its still a good TV BTW, but I wouldn't pay that for a 32" telly nowadays. I rather spend a few € more and get a 42" like this one at Richersounds: http://www.richersounds.com/showproduct.php?cda=showproduct&pid=LG-42LF75

    Just my opinion, of course ;)


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 15,512 ✭✭✭✭vectra


    podge3 wrote: »
    Most of us can have an informed debate without resorting to aggressive posts.


    Yes.
    Like calling people Fools :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,763 ✭✭✭podgeandrodge


    so does it have mpeg4 tuner?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭podge3


    so does it have mpeg4 tuner?
    Doesn't say so in the specs so I doubt it.

    There are some advantages to a set top box, though i.e. recording a program. If the tuner is built in then you need to have the TV on to record. If its a STB then all you need is for that to be switched on.

    I'd still rather a built-in tuner, though.


    edit - I see its marketed with a Freeview tuner in the UK, so no Mpeg4. Unless its supplied with a different tuner.....


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,993 ✭✭✭Barr


    Not so long ago they ran an offer with much the same tv but 720p. This was a steal at €350 . Personally i would'nt pay the extra for this one .


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,166 ✭✭✭enda1


    Barr wrote: »
    Not so long ago they ran an offer with much the same tv but 720p. This was a steal at €350 . Personally i would'nt pay the extra for this one .

    It wasn't the same "but 720p".

    It had lower contrast longer response time, different design etc. etc...


  • Registered Users Posts: 810 ✭✭✭muincav


    vectra wrote: »
    Yes.
    Like calling people Fools :rolleyes:

    If the sh*t fits, wear it...:D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 289 ✭✭gilbert


    Guys,Check this out.

    http://www.currys.co.uk/martprd/store/cur_page.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@1518613090.1233744626@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccfhadeggjgddfgcflgceggdhhmdgmj.0&page=Category&category_oid=-34802&fm=12&sm=0&tm=undefined


    Samsung 32" HD ready digital LCD TV


    Built-in digital TV tuner
    10000 : 1 dynamic contrast ratio
    SRS Tusurround sound
    £379.99

    around 400 EURO(if 1euro =95p)


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,053 ✭✭✭jimbling


    enda1 wrote: »
    It wasn't the same "but 720p".

    It had lower contrast longer response time, different design etc. etc...
    Precisely. There is a big difference between a 720p and a 1080p.... depending on what you use it for.
    I bought this TV for a bedroom. It will serve as a Monitor for my laptop. 1080p was a absolute requirement. That and the other improvements are well worth the extra money.

    gilbert wrote: »

    eh... you do realise that that's one of the 4 series models though... right?


  • Registered Users Posts: 30,123 ✭✭✭✭Star Lord


    gilbert wrote: »
    Guys,Check this out.

    http://www.currys.co.uk/martprd/store/cur_page.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@1518613090.1233744626@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccfhadeggjgddfgcflgceggdhhmdgmj.0&page=Category&category_oid=-34802&fm=12&sm=0&tm=undefined


    Samsung 32" HD ready digital LCD TV


    Built-in digital TV tuner
    10000 : 1 dynamic contrast ratio
    SRS Tusurround sound
    £379.99

    around 400 EURO(if 1euro =95p)
    HD ready = 720p so it's not an direct comparison.
    Kinda like saying you can buy a Lancer cheaper than an Evo!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 383 ✭✭lpool2k05


    I went ahead and bought one anyway...does anybody have any experience with delivery times?


Advertisement