The DM2350D is the first 3D combination monitor/TV released by LG. Sharing the same passive FPR 3D panel technology as its Cinema 3D TV siblings, it’s presumably aimed at wannabe 3D PC gamers and those looking for a jack of all trades screen that’s easy to accommodate in student digs or wherever. LG DM2350D 3D monitor and TV …
No freeview HD is nuts
For the sake of a few quid for a DVB-T2 tuner they've probably alienated 50% of their prospective customers.
Isn't the amount of import duty greater for a TV with a tuner rather than a monitor?
Probably, but this has DVB-T, is it's irrelevant. I agree that not putting DVB-T2 in is crazy
If it supports H264 et al then it probably has the licences and hardware for the video / hardware codecs it needs to support since it doubles up a media player. Given that H264 over DVB-T is used in some countries it probably supports that too. Quite literally a few quid's worth of tuner circuitry, some certification for its logo and some modest software tweaks would have made this TV capable of receiving HD TV.
No, no, no
"Given its size, ... some may find this resolution [1920x1080] delivers graphics and text that can be painfully small". I made the same point on a thread about laptop screens and received a righteous shoeing for my pains. Apparently the world is full of people who are desperate for 1600 lines on a 14" screen, but the big bad clueless manufacturers are stopping them from getting it.
DrXym - spot on, but (I was looking for a smallish bedroom TV) you'll find a lot of full HD TVs that lack a Freeview HD tuner. Go figure! I suppose in their defence, there's little chance of anyone seeing the difference between an SD and HD picture on this size screen (unless they're sitting a few inches away). See http://www.reghardware.com/2011/05/19/tv_sizes_deconstructed/
I can see the difference
I have a 46" TV and I sit about 2.5 meters away from it. I can easily tell the difference between SD and HD at that distance. It's not just about being able to tell each individual pixel though images are sharper but all the fact that SD is (over) compressed with MPEG-2 and tends to produce a crappier picture quality with more noticeable blocking, washed out colours and less overall detail.
Given that DVB-T2 and DVB-S2 are the only ways to receive HD AVC broadcasts in the UK and both have launched it makes sense to buy an HD TV which supports one or the other.
I'd also point out that if the TV doubles up as a monitor then chances are that the person is sitting very close to the screen where the differences would be even more pronounced.
2.5m from a 46" screen equates to 1.25m from a 23", which is close to the distance I sit from my monitor. I sit about 5m from my TV, though. Blocking effects would suggest that you need a better signal.
I'm referring to macroblocks in compression schemes. In MPEG-2 they are 8x8 and because of the SD resolution and anamorphic stretching they appear that much larger in relation to the screen than the blocks in an HD AVC signal. I can easily see the difference when flicking between SD and HD versions of the same channel.
And that's on satellite where the SD bitrate is typically higher than DVB-T. I expect the effect is far more pronounced on terrestrial where the SD quality is borderline awful anyway.
Almost exactly what I'm looking for...
This seems really close to what I want to replace my current Samsung TV/Monitor combo which is sub-HD and a little small at 21". The only real deal breakers are an absence of picture-in-picture, s-video/composite connectivity (for old games consoles) and a lack of (or only minimal) motion interpolation. The price is really good too, so I might still go for it as the passive 3D is quite tempting!
Hang on a sec can't most monitors do 3d with the right graphics card and drivers - at least for games?
Doesn't the fact that this set compromises that ability with a lousy refresh and has crap tuner mean you would be better off with a good monitor and a pc tv tuner?
Seems a bit pointless.
A 100Khz vertical sync is required which counts out about 95% of standard monitors.
No mention of the sound quality? Fair enough for a monitor but I find the sound quite important on a telly. In fact, after playing back DVD/BD my telly gets used for digital radio more than anything else.
the "sound [is] quite important on a telly" for you then the sound musn't be all that important. Even a £25 2:1 speaker system plugged into a TVs headphone socket* will sound better than most flat panel TV speakers any day. Having that little bit of bass (even if most cheapo 2:1 systems don't go really low), rather than all top and no bottom, makes quite a difference.
If this TV is anything like the LG M227WD (also a 1080p TV/Monitor) then, while the screen is fantastic for the price, the sound quality will be shockingly p*ss poor, requiring something (anything!) other than the panels own speakers (or speaker, as was the case in the aforementioned LG).
* Not the ideal solution but adequate enough for the likes of my ex who just wanted something that sounded better than the built-in speakers but just plugged in with minimal fuss using a connection she understood.
The above was supposed to be in response to Bassey. Why do I keep forgetting to hit the "Reply" button?
I can't think of a more irritating, badly designed, glumphing connector than SCART. Does anyone still use it these days?
"presumably aimed at wannabe 3D PC gamers"
I doubt it. It is my understanding that 3D gaming is currently restricted (on PC) to "Nvidia 3D Vision (nvidia drivers with 3D capabilities and compatible active shutter glasses).
I've read that AMD/ATI are coming up with their own system but I don't think it is available yet.
Nvidia use a WINE style rating scheme to indicate how well a specific game performs on the system from "3D Vision Ready" (best) down to "Not Recommended" (worst)
Of course things being as they are there are Internet guides on how to hack around to get passive 3D working using third party drivers and other hacks but the official support is already patchy (on a game by game basis) so be prepared for a less than 100% return on your efforts.
With sufficient hacking you might be able to get games to run in 3D on a passive monitor in an acceptable quality but I wouldn't recommend it.
- Updated Zucker punched: Google gobbles Facebook-wooed Titan Aerospace
- Elon Musk's LEAKY THRUSTER gas stalls Space Station supply run
- Windows 8.1, which you probably haven't upgraded to yet, ALREADY OBSOLETE
- FOUR DAYS: That's how long it took to crack Galaxy S5 fingerscanner
- Did a date calculation bug just cost hard-up Co-op Bank £110m?