ALDI 40" lcd T.V

Aiadi

Got this babe from Amazon the other day:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B000EW98IE/202-1881620-5617421?v=glance&n=560798&s=electronics&v=glance

Currys is selling it for 999 Pounds. What a fantastic piece of kit (read the reviews on Amazon). I'd go for the quality and reliability of a reputable brand and at this price you really can't go wrong.

They are also selling the larger version for a very good price as well:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B000EW2XO0/202-1881620-5617421?v=glance&n=560798&s=electronics&v=glance

terrierlady

yes looks good but the 40 inch is the puller with the aldi set just need to know the price.

seanparkin

RowaN wrote:

Aldi are calling this "Full HD" .. but it is not. Full HD should mean a 1920x1080 resolution, so that it can properly display 1080i signals. It is 1024x768, and therefore not Full HD by any stretch of the imagination.

What a load of garbage.

fuzzyrazer

Aiadi wrote:

Got this babe from Amazon the other day:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B000EW98IE/202-1881620-5617421?v=glance&n=560798&s=electronics&v=glance

Currys is selling it for 999 Pounds. What a fantastic piece of kit (read the reviews on Amazon). I'd go for the quality and reliability of a reputable brand and at this price you really can't go wrong.

£729 @ Dixons,but £659,using discount's (£50 off £500) and go through Quidco (3.5% cashback) for this @ Dixons.... I'm tempted now.....:beer:

Cardew

I don't know if this is an indication of the price for the 40 inch Medion but today my local Aldi has reduced the price of their 32 inch Medion LCD from £699 to £499.

RevOnline

seanparkin wrote:

What a load of garbage.

That isn't garbage. If you're buying your TV for HD (360, PS3 or standalone players) then you're missing out by getting a low-res TV. The jump from 720p to to 1080i is technically about the same as 480i to 720p, although in reality a little less noticable. Of course then there is 1080p out of most peoples price range...

If you're just using it for standard TV then it obviously won't make a jot of difference but if you're buying it specifically for HD you'll not get the best out of it with this TV. Horses for courses, but it certainly isn't garbage.

gazbert_2

In terms of quality a 720p (progressive scan) picture is likely to look better than a 1080i (interlaced) picture.

As always I'd suggest doing research on the technology before you make such statements.

From my research there's no hard and fast rule as to which is better. I believe it comes down to how well each device can display each resolution.

So read those reviews and see it in action before buying if you can.

gazbert_2

Is 720p vs 1080i worth being concerned about? Yes and no. If you're a consumer looking for a new TV, you can happily ignore the 720p vs 1080i debate because every TV which is described as HDTV or HDTV Ready is required to support both formats.


NOTE: You should be aware though that lots of TVs which support 1080i have fewer than 1080 lines and so scale the 1080 signal down. That's not a huge issue as even scaled down 1080i is far ahead of a regular TV signal. It is worth bearing in mind that more expensive HDTVs tend to have better scalers than cheaper ones, and this may be an issue.


However, for broadcasters it's a live issue. Should they broadcast 1080 lines of interlaced video or 720 lines of progressive scan? They could just broadcast two signals, one in each format, but that would use up a huge chunk of bandwidth and be hugely expensive for very little gain.


To answer the question, it's important to understand the difference between 720p vs 1080i. A 720p signal is made up of 720 horizontal lines. Each frame is displayed in its entirety on-screen for 1/30th of a second. This is know as progressive scan (hence the 'p')The quality is like watching 30 photographic images a second on TV. A 1080i signal comprises 1080 horizontal lines but all the lines are not displayed on-screen simultaneously.


Instead, they are interlaced (hence the 'i'), ie every other lines is displayed for 1/60th of a second and then the alternate lines are displayed for 1/60th of a second. So, the frame rate is still 30 frames per second, but each frame is split into two fields, which your brain then puts together subconsciously.


Most of the time interlacing works fine, but for fast moving images, such as sports like baseball and hockey it can cause problems which manifest themselves as a 'stepping' effect on-screen. Progressive scan signals don't have this problem and so are better suited to sports.


ESPN puts it like this: 'Progressive scan technology produces better images for the fast moving orientation of sports television. Simply put, with 104 mph fastballs in baseball and 120 mph shots on goal in hockey, the line-by-line basis of progressive scan technology better captures the inherent fast action of sports. For ESPN, progressive scan technology makes perfect sense.'


Bottom line? For us, as consumers 720p vs 1080i is not a debate worth worrying about, so you can relax and focus on all the other criteria on your list when you buy your next HDTV.

Wickedkitten

Is this not the same telly you think?

http://homecinema.timeuk.com/tv/lcd_screens/17887/37202/TIME_L240_40%22_LCD_TV?gclid=CJ_Irq-s9oYCFTxJEQodgBMlYA

gazbert_2

Not certain. There is a small difference in the viewing angle between the screens. 170degrees vs 178degrees.