Amazon Vehicles Up to 80 Percent Off Textbooks Amazon Fashion Learn more nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc Britney Spears Fire TV Stick Happy Belly Snacks Totes Amazon Cash Back Offer ElvisandNixon ElvisandNixon ElvisandNixon  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Starting at $49.99 All-New Kindle Oasis AutoRip in CDs & Vinyl Water Sports
Customer Review

72 of 78 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars IT IS BIG!, October 20, 2011
By 
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Mitsubishi WD-92840 92-Inch 1080p 3D Projection TV (2011 Model) (Electronics)
I had the 73 inch wd73835 for one and a half years and was very satisfied with the picture quality and the 3D was very good as well. I upgraded to the wd92840 and am happy with the quality of most HiDef programming but the standard definition programs are not nearly as nice. It seems that the screen size magnifies any video noise and picture imperfections. The 3D quality is not as good as the 73 inch either and the screen is so much more reflective then the 73 inch as well. I love the TV size and I just close the blinds if needed. I am happy with the purchase and would do it again but I would recommend people go see the TV at a local store before buying so you understand the TVs limitations.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

[Add comment]
Post a comment
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Amazon will display this name with all your submissions, including reviews and discussion posts. (Learn more)
Name:
Badge:
This badge will be assigned to you and will appear along with your name.
There was an error. Please try again.
Please see the full guidelines here.

Official Comment

As a representative of this product you can post one Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
The following name and badge will be shown with this comment:
 (edit name)
After clicking the Post button you will be asked to create your public name, which will be shown with all your contributions.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.  Learn more
Otherwise, you can still post a regular comment on this review.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
 
System timed out

We were unable to verify whether you represent the product. Please try again later, or retry now. Otherwise you can post a regular comment.

Since you previously posted an Official Comment, this comment will appear in the comment section below. You also have the option to edit your Official Comment.   Learn more
The maximum number of Official Comments have been posted. This comment will appear in the comment section below.   Learn more
Prompts for sign-in
  [Cancel]

Comments

Track comments by e-mail
Tracked by 3 customers

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-10 of 18 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Oct 20, 2011 3:36:47 PM PDT
Yes, this DLP TV does have its falws, but the 3D performance is not as good as on an older 73 inch set? Could you explain that? Mits boasted the bigger the screen the better the 3D will be. Obviously, you dissagree.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 20, 2011 4:18:05 PM PDT
David says:
I don't know the correct words to describe the differences but I sold the 73 to a friend and have compared the two sets with the same movies (RIO) and the 73 inch TV seems to have a much smoother 3D picture.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 20, 2011 7:24:18 PM PDT
It could be the 3D judder problem with these sets when in 3D mode when watching blu-ray movies. Some of these sets suffer from it some don't. However, if you notice it when watching 3D programming (such as on DirecTV), then it could be something entirely different.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 21, 2011 6:13:48 AM PDT
David says:
I will have to look into 3D "Judder" and see if that is my problem.Thanks!

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 21, 2011 12:43:03 PM PDT
Your're welcome David. There should be a firmware upgrade out for it, but there have been mixed reports as to wether it actually resolved the 3D judder issue.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 5, 2011 11:44:52 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Nov 5, 2011 11:48:55 PM PDT
anonymous says:
I have a 73" Mits from 2008. 2D looks great, but there's a definite drop in image quality when watching 3D on it. It's due to the fact that Mitsubishi's DLP TV's deliver half the HD resolution to each eye in 3D mode (as opposed to LCD's and Plasmas, which deliver full HD to each eye in 3D mode so there's no degradation with those). I'm not sure what judder is, but since you're viewing 3D material at 540p instead of 1080p, that might explain why RIO looked better on your 73" Mits than your 92" Mits. 540p is not much better than SD material, and I know how ugly SD material looks on my 73" screen. I would imagine it looks even worse on a bigger set.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 9, 2011 6:33:24 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 9, 2011 6:38:36 PM PST
I dissagree with your post. I have an 82" set from 2009 and the 3D works perfectly. I use Optoma dlp link glasses. The flaw in sets prior to 2010 was DLP link could not be disabled. View your set with the DLP link glasses and you have better 3D (1000X better) than LCD/LED. DLP is the best 3D out there. Mostly all cinemas use this method. When was the last time you've seen 3D in a movie theater represented with plasma or LCD technology? I didn't think so.

True, SD programming doesn't look great on it, but my receiver upgrades everything to 1080P. It better for the $6000 I paid for it.

Here's another fact....You can't hang a DLP set on the wall. If you want to hang the set on the wall then go with LCD (bright room), Plasma (light controlled room). You better use spikes if you think you could hang a 85 inch plasma on the wall. LOL

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 9, 2011 7:59:00 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 9, 2011 8:00:32 PM PST
anonymous says:
I agree that the image on my Mits 3D TV looks better with DLP-link glasses than RF glasses. I sold the RF glasses that came in the Mits adapter kit and purchased Optoma's DLP-link glasses some time ago. Optoma's glasses greatly improved the contrast ratio but did nothing to improve the resolution. That's because Mitsubishi designed all of their DLP 3D TV's to date so that the combined left and right images equal 1080p instead of each eye receiving a separate 1080p image. This is confirmed in the November issue of Home Theater magazine (vol. 18 no. 11). Yes, most cinemas use DLP technology, and their projectors deliver 1080p to each eye (full HD). So does Optoma's HD33 projector for consumers. The magazine goes on to say, "Until such time as they [Mitsubishi] redesign their sets to comply with the full HD format, the only alternative for the DLP fan who wants full-resolution 3D on a big screen is a DLP projector."

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 9, 2011 9:27:34 PM PST
I agree with you, however, the larger the screen the better the 3D experience. Regardless of full resolution 3D or half resolution. There is no ghosting as found in led sets. Plasma displays are close, but yet again, DLP is faster smoother at displaying images in fast motion. Unless you have $85,000 to blow on a 85like inch Panasonic plasma, I'll stick to my DLP 3Dis and unmatched huge screen size value.

Posted on Dec 15, 2011 11:50:42 PM PST
G. Gray says:
First it is an over simplification to say the 3D resolution is 540P. That is not how it is done. Checkerboard is used so while there is some loss of resoltuion is not near to the 540P level. There also needs to be a separate calibration for 3D and that is virutally never done. The other thing is that the clear screens are dramatically sharper than the matte screens and will reveal more detail and more flaws. The matte screens themselves actually decrease effective resolution by the additional diffusion. With a clear screen you are more accurately seeing the source. If you havenot upgraded the firmware than you are likely encountering judder. I have been using a 2009 82" set for right at 2 years now and my 92840 is enroute. While I have not seen a 92840 in my living room yet. The increase in resoltuion do the clear screen was amazing in a Fry's theater showroom. There is a downside to the clear scree which is the reflectivity that comes from the clear screen. My room lighting will need some adjustment but it seems ludicrous to compare this older 73" to the new one. The 92840 is nearly 60 percent larger of course that is going to impact SD material. I have a DVD DUO to do all my SD scaling and SD looks quite nice at my viewing distance on the matte finish 82" screen. I never send anything but 1080P to my display. A set of this size needs a top notch outboard video processor to bring out its best. The Lumagen Radiance Mini 3D does even better scaling than my DUO and it is no slouch.
‹ Previous 1 2 Next ›

Review Details

Item

Reviewer


Location: Springfield, VA.

Top Reviewer Ranking: 116,859