Hi, I was looking for suggestions on a reasonably priced 27" TV ($250-$350
range). So far, I've been looking closely at two models, both sold at
Circuit City:

RCA 27F5307
Apex PF-2725

Was wondering if anyone had any opinions on these or any other models in my
price range... thanks!

Julie

On Mon Dec 15, Jose Luiz disturbed my nap when he said:

Hi, I was looking for suggestions on a reasonably priced 27" TV ($250-$350
range). So far, I've been looking closely at two models, both sold at
Circuit City:

RCA 27F5307
Apex PF-2725

Was wondering if anyone had any opinions on these or any other models in my
price range... thanks!


I happen to be researching a 32" so I'm no expert and I'm no CR-freak
either but one of their recent issues rates the Toshiba 27af43 highest
(flat screen CRT) with best picture quality and high reliability. Sears
has it for around $400 and I bet this time of year you can beat that there
or at Bestbuy without much trouble (CC doesn't sell Toshiba). CR rates
RCA at the bottom in reliability.

Mike
--

mike.ballard--at--earthlink.net

"Roses are red, violets are blue,
I'm schizophrenic and so am I"

Philps/Mag is decent in that price range...

--
Alan
"Jose Luiz" wrote in message
...
Hi, I was looking for suggestions on a reasonably priced 27" TV ($250-$350
range). So far, I've been looking closely at two models, both sold at
Circuit City:

RCA 27F5307
Apex PF-2725

Was wondering if anyone had any opinions on these or any other models in
my
price range... thanks!

Julie

"Jose Luiz" wrote in
:

Hi, I was looking for suggestions on a reasonably priced 27" TV
($250-$350 range). So far, I've been looking closely at two models,
both sold at Circuit City:

RCA 27F5307
Apex PF-2725

Was wondering if anyone had any opinions on these or any other models
in my price range... thanks!

Julie




Both are garbage. What a shame because RCA was the flagship color TV in
the '60s. Mad man Muntz where have you gone!

Tim

--

"The strongest human instinct is to impart information,
and the second strongest is to resist it."

Kenneth Graham

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 14:57:37 GMT, Browntimdc
wrote:

"Jose Luiz" wrote in
:

Hi, I was looking for suggestions on a reasonably priced 27" TV
($250-$350 range). So far, I've been looking closely at two models,
both sold at Circuit City:

RCA 27F5307
Apex PF-2725

Was wondering if anyone had any opinions on these or any other models
in my price range... thanks!

Julie




Both are garbage. What a shame because RCA was the flagship color TV in
the '60s. Mad man Muntz where have you gone!

I bought a 31 inch Toshiba at Target that at the top end of that price
range and I've been pretty happy with it. It's got a relatively flat
screen (not totally flat) and reasonably good color, although, in
in-store comparisons, I thought that the comparable Phillips was a
little better (not always a good thing to compare TV signals
in-store). The Phillips was a little more than I wanted to spend on a
fairly short-term solution to a dying TV though.

Toshiba's always been pretty active in video and has usually offered
competitive products, and some innovative ones as well. I would also
suggest that if you can get a 31" in your price range *and* you have
the room for it, that you take the step up, because it will improve
your viewing pleasure.

yea....get a 57" RPTV.
"Jose Luiz" wrote in message
...
Hi, I was looking for suggestions on a reasonably priced 27" TV ($250-$350
range). So far, I've been looking closely at two models, both sold at
Circuit City:

RCA 27F5307
Apex PF-2725

Was wondering if anyone had any opinions on these or any other models in
my
price range... thanks!

Julie

Gheez. That much money? Just get a Sony non-WEGA 27" and be done with it.

If they don't have any in stock, go for the Panasonic CT27E13
This is a step up from their other TV models - a flatter, cleaner
picture that's as good as the non-WEGA Sonys. It's also made
better than the budget models. $279.

The CT32E13(same thing, just 32 inches) is $399. I'd consider
it as it's a quality unit and a much larger screen for $50 more
than your budget.

I have a 27" Sharp (don't know the model number) and I have been extrememly
happy with it. Any TV these days could be considered crap by some
people...so take what people say here with a grain of salt.

The question you have to ask yourself is..."how much do i really care about
TV". I for one can't see any logic in spending lots of money on a television
that may only be marginally better than a competitor's product. To me, it's
just not that important. As long as the picture quality is good, and the
color quality is good, than that's enough. DO NOT waste your money on an
HDTV or one of those sony Wega flat screens. Complete waste of money.

In article . net,
says...
I have a 27" Sharp (don't know the model number) and I have been extrememly
happy with it. Any TV these days could be considered crap by some
people...so take what people say here with a grain of salt.

my only experience with sharp tv's has not been good. I bought one about
7 years ago. The colors look like crap and the picture tube has dimmed
considerably. On the plus side, the tuner on it is not bad.

The question you have to ask yourself is..."how much do i really care about
TV". I for one can't see any logic in spending lots of money on a television
that may only be marginally better than a competitor's product.

This is true. But if you watch a fair amount of TV, it is a good idea
to get the TV with the better picture. A TV that is not abuse should
last a long time, so the cost over time of getting a better TV is not
that large.

To me, it's
just not that important. As long as the picture quality is good, and the
color quality is good, than that's enough. DO NOT waste your money on an
HDTV or one of those sony Wega flat screens. Complete waste of money.

You obviously have not seen an HDTV showing a good HDTV source. The difference
is dramatic. Unfortunately HDTV TV's are quite expensive at the
moment. Sony is not the only company making flat screens. Many others do
too. Apex makes an inexpensive flat screen. It does make a difference
in picture quality.
----------------
Alex

Here is my choice at the top end of your price range. It is now on sale
at CC for $349 and would be a good choice IMO.

Panasonic 27" Flat-Screen TV
Brand/Model: PAN CT27SL13
"Jose Luiz" wrote in message
...
Hi, I was looking for suggestions on a reasonably priced 27" TV
($250-$350
range). So far, I've been looking closely at two models, both sold at
Circuit City:

RCA 27F5307
Apex PF-2725

Was wondering if anyone had any opinions on these or any other models in
my
price range... thanks!

Julie

Ann Meffert wrote:

Here is my choice at the top end of your price range. It is now on sale
at CC for $349 and would be a good choice IMO.

Panasonic 27" Flat-Screen TV
Brand/Model: PAN CT27SL13

It's actually not a bit better than the E13 model picture and
quality-wise. Just flatter and a hundred dollars more expensive.

On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 10:02:05 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
wrote:

Ann Meffert wrote:

Here is my choice at the top end of your price range. It is now on sale
at CC for $349 and would be a good choice IMO.

Panasonic 27" Flat-Screen TV
Brand/Model: PAN CT27SL13

It's actually not a bit better than the E13 model picture and
quality-wise. Just flatter and a hundred dollars more expensive.

And yet, my suggestion of a $350 32" Toshiba from Target is still
probably better than both of them, provided the poster has the space.

"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message
ink.net
Ann Meffert wrote:

Here is my choice at the top end of your price range. It is now on
sale at CC for $349 and would be a good choice IMO.

Panasonic 27" Flat-Screen TV
Brand/Model: PAN CT27SL13

It's actually not a bit better than the E13 model picture and
quality-wise. Just flatter and a hundred dollars more expensive.

Based on my experience with flat-screen versus traditional slightly curved
screens on PC CRT monitors, as well as a number of hours spent watching
various flat-screen TV's, the flat screen might just be worth the extra
$100.

One major benefit of flat screens is that they reflect light from a fairly
narrow area of the room, while traditional curves screens reflect light from
all over the room. This makes it easier to control distracting reflections
and glare.

In the world of computer monitors, non-flat screens have almost disappeared
from the market, and are now sold for more or less the same as curved
screens sold for a year or two ago. It's reasonable to expect the same thing
to happen with TVs.

So, if you hold onto your money, you'll probably be able to beat the $100
premium in a few months or a year. But, at the chump change price of about
$350, why worry?

This is why I suggested the flat-screen version. I have an old 27 inch
Sony that I love, but it has the curved screen of its generation. I also
have a Sony Wega 20 inch flat screen tv and a Sony flat screen monitor.
The viewing is much better due to the lack of light reflections that are
seen with the curved screen. It's just much better and well-worth the
extra money over time IMO.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message
ink.net
Ann Meffert wrote:

Here is my choice at the top end of your price range. It is now on
sale at CC for $349 and would be a good choice IMO.

Panasonic 27" Flat-Screen TV
Brand/Model: PAN CT27SL13

It's actually not a bit better than the E13 model picture and
quality-wise. Just flatter and a hundred dollars more expensive.

Based on my experience with flat-screen versus traditional slightly
curved
screens on PC CRT monitors, as well as a number of hours spent watching
various flat-screen TV's, the flat screen might just be worth the extra
$100.

One major benefit of flat screens is that they reflect light from a
fairly
narrow area of the room, while traditional curves screens reflect light
from
all over the room. This makes it easier to control distracting
reflections
and glare.

In the world of computer monitors, non-flat screens have almost
disappeared
from the market, and are now sold for more or less the same as curved
screens sold for a year or two ago. It's reasonable to expect the same
thing
to happen with TVs.

So, if you hold onto your money, you'll probably be able to beat the
$100
premium in a few months or a year. But, at the chump change price of
about
$350, why worry?

dave weil wrote:

On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 10:02:05 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
wrote:


Ann Meffert wrote:


Here is my choice at the top end of your price range. It is now on sale
at CC for $349 and would be a good choice IMO.

Panasonic 27" Flat-Screen TV
Brand/Model: PAN CT27SL13

It's actually not a bit better than the E13 model picture and
quality-wise. Just flatter and a hundred dollars more expensive.


And yet, my suggestion of a $350 32" Toshiba from Target is still
probably better than both of them, provided the poster has the space.

My suggestion to get the 32" Panasonic is better still. That $50
gets you a noticeably better picture.

On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 18:40:09 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
wrote:

dave weil wrote:

On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 10:02:05 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
wrote:


Ann Meffert wrote:


Here is my choice at the top end of your price range. It is now on sale
at CC for $349 and would be a good choice IMO.

Panasonic 27" Flat-Screen TV
Brand/Model: PAN CT27SL13

It's actually not a bit better than the E13 model picture and
quality-wise. Just flatter and a hundred dollars more expensive.


And yet, my suggestion of a $350 32" Toshiba from Target is still
probably better than both of them, provided the poster has the space.

My suggestion to get the 32" Panasonic is better still. That $50
gets you a noticeably better picture.

Well, once again, that's outside the stated budget.

And from what I've seen, there's not *that* much difference between
the two brands. I actually prefer Phillips to both of those.

Of course, *now* we're back in the land of the subjective. You might
want to take another look at Toshiba though. The picture is *very*
good on their lesser priced models. I imagine that their next models
up (presumably about the same price as the Panasonic that you tout)
are better still, with more resulution, better comb filters, etc.

My point is, the idea at this point is to spend as little as possible
for non-HD TVs, as they are really just stop-gap measures at this
juncture. You *do* want to insist on a basic level of quality though.

dave weil wrote:

Of course, *now* we're back in the land of the subjective. You might
want to take another look at Toshiba though. The picture is *very*
good on their lesser priced models. I imagine that their next models
up (presumably about the same price as the Panasonic that you tout)
are better still, with more resulution, better comb filters, etc.

I mentioned that specific model because it is noticeably better
than the other models by Panasonic and its competitors. It's akin
to a trinitron tube in image quality, though different technology.
Side by side, it's obvious that it's a cleaner picture.

Is it worth $50 or so more? I think so. Either way, I'd recommend
a 32 inch as it's a big, bright picture for not a lot of money. Movies
are much better on a 32 inch TV. I have a 19 inch in my computer room
($50 used - cheaper than a TV tuner card) and it's small by comparison,
almost like watching a portable set.

My point is, the idea at this point is to spend as little as possible
for non-HD TVs, as they are really just stop-gap measures at this
juncture. You *do* want to insist on a basic level of quality though.

There is some truth in this, which is why I didn't recommend the
flat-screen models. $300 for a 32 inch TV(look for old stock or customer
returns after Christmas) is a steal.

You obviously have not seen an HDTV showing a good HDTV source. The
difference
is dramatic. Unfortunately HDTV TV's are quite expensive at the
moment. Sony is not the only company making flat screens. Many others do
too. Apex makes an inexpensive flat screen. It does make a difference
in picture quality.


I actually have. I work in the entertainment industry. I don't think it's
that impressive.

I don't know, I guess I don't really care that much about it, that's all.


I will say this about my Sharp TV. The speakers on it suck the big one. I
almost always have my sound going to my stereo.

I try to stay away from anything Sony. They are a PAIN to deal with if you
have service needs.

I just turn lights off to avoid the glare. If I decide I want to have some
lights on so I can see my popcorn, I have a light behind the tv I turn on.