Have your say & ask the experts

Ginder:

Very Annoyed:

 

   Also sad to see how ppl such as Ravey are trying to misinform ppl of their statutory rights, sounds like a retailer to me lol. The test of reasonable period is layed out in section 48B part 5: http://www.johnantell.co.uk/SOGA1979.htm The test of reasonalbe time is a test of fact, dependent on price and product, it is reasonable to expect a tv to out last an electrical kettle that was purchased for a tenner. However both have a warranty of one year? That would not be seen as reasonable. Anyway I cant be done with reiterating the law, its up to the person to persue it if they so wish as the retailer will always try and fight it and argue against it.

My final word at the moment -

a/ I have already stated I am not a retailer and never have been.

b/ I am not misinforming people Please refrain from making that accusation.I am reacting to your and others comments .I have willingly looked at the sites provided and find nothing concrete to substantiate the claim.I even quoted them  back on this post.If this is misinformation then the sites provided are misinforming.

c/ I agree with your comments above on the different product values v equal warranty terms,in fact I agree on a lot of what you say on defending consumer rights,it is just I do not believe the law currently  gives you a five or six year warranty,just a statute of limitation for claiming against a seller ,and the onus is on the buyer to prove said claim so the retailer does seem to have the upper hand.

I am quite happy to be proved wrong if the proof is there and also because it is a big plus for all us consumers..To this end I will be seeing a mate in a couple of weeks who has been a solicitor for 25 years so I shall pick his brains for free and report back on a separate thread,if I may be permitted.

C'mon guys, lets get back to the topic. Start a new thread if you want to continue this.

marineman:

marineman:

Haha like i said earlier in the thread i had the 52inch w4500 and it had clouding problems went to get a replacement but that was the same,decided to buy the 52inch W4000 instead and this set has no clouding problems at all and i very happy with it,

Highway:

D.J.Krime. - I was the one who said that your comments were not helpful. Just advocating a plasma on each of your posts does nothing to help the people who have already purchased one of these TV's which is exhibiting clouding problems.

I do not want to enter into a forum battle with you, I just wish you could place yourself in the position of having spent a lot of money on a product you feel is defective or not performing as you would expect, only to hear that Sony say that it is a characteristic of LCD's and that you now stand less of a chance of getting a resolution or having to work hard to get your retailer to exchange or refund.

Personally, I am somewhat saddened by the Sony statement as I would love to have purchased one of these TV's, but now will hold off and look in another direction.

 If this was a characteristic of LCD's, has this been a big problem for other manufacturers over recent years ?

 

I dissagree as if you are a owner of said TV and are experienceing these problems then as others have done take it back to where you got it and exchange it for something else which as a consumer you are entitled to do so, and am pointing out that if this is the case you will not get any of these issues on a Plasma as they are not back lit!

And as for "If this was a characteristic of LCD's, has this been a big problem for other manufacturers over recent years ?" the answer is YES! LCD's will always have a issue with backlight bleed to some extent (tho usually not as severe as the ones here) due to the nature of how a LCD TV works. A LCD pannel produces NO NATURAL LIGHT thus in turn must have light forced through  it in order for you to see what is on the screen, this system inherently causes issues with vissible backlight bleed and poor off-axis viewing due to the filter system of the screen.

Each generaion of LCD's does improve but these issues will allways be there to some extent as where a Plasma omits a natural light much in the same way as a traditional CRT did and also fantastic viewing angles also like your old CRT sets so IMHO are much more "natural" to view.

The thing that gets me with sonys response re: the backlight bleeding and clouding, are Sony and Samsung LCD screens not the same screens, made in the same factory by a joint venture company between the two?

If so, how come its not as much of an issue on Samsungs, or is it?

If this is the case then surely the problem does not lie with the panel but with how Sony put the end product together (sloppily) and how its designed (flawed).  

EHonda:

The thing that gets me with sonys response re: the backlight bleeding and clouding, are Sony and Samsung LCD screens not the same screens, made in the same factory by a joint venture company between the two?

If so, how come its not as much of an issue on Samsungs, or is it?

If this is the case then surely the problem does not lie with the panel but with how Sony put the end product together (sloppily) and how its designed (flawed).  

Samsung supply Sony with the raw screen and nothing else much in the same way Sharp supply Pioneer, so issues with say the Sony does not mean the same issue on a Samsung (tho all LCD's have Backlight isssues) so in this case it is down to How Sony have built the TV. LED backlit LCD's as in some of the Samsungs are better as they have more zonal control over lighting making them more comparible with a Plasma but still can not turn indivual pizxes on and off, but definatly improve on the standrd floureset tube approach traditionally used in LCD's.

Tho personally I do find the fact LCD's owners harp on about how bright and detailed the screen is,but to be able to get anything remotely black on screen you have to turn the back light down thus sacrificeing detail. And this goes to Sony's response to this issue of "turn your backlight down"

I really don't have an axe to grind regarding LCD vs Plasma and would gladly go for the later if:

1) There was absolutely no way I could get burn-in damage if I watch a chanel with an static logo in the corner, play a game with a static HUD or leave a DVD paused. At the very least not during normal usage (of course, if I left it on for a week then it would be my fault);

2) It didn't spend so much energy compared with an LCD. I mean, from what I see it can be up to twice as much Wh for similar sets. Having said that, I haven't really worked out how much the difference is in cost terms assuming the set is on for an average 2 or 3 hours a day: it may very well be peanuts;

3) My room has windows facing the screen (from 4m away). The windows are North-facing but can be pretty bright during the day (hey, it's Portugal!). Would a plasma's luminance be enough to contradict my windows? (I have the same doubt regarding Sammy Ultra Clear LCD's)

The thing is, if I went for a Plasma, actually selecting a set would be difficult. The Pioneers are too expensive. The Samsung 756 is probably too big for my room (50" - I was looking at 46") and the Panasonics don't have PiP on sets available in Portugal (i.e. I would have to order an 81 from Spain).

So, the situation is:

WHF is still publishing online an unchanged fabulous review of the 46W4500, while many people are having considerable problems with the same model(s). So, who is right?

I believe WHF should do what it is most appreciated for: conducting unbiased reviews and writing insightful journalism. The question your readers have are: Has Sony been taking advantage of WHF? Are users exaggerating their problems? How common are these problems? Are they real? Is Sony trying to avert a disaster during the Christmas season? Who's right? Do they still deserve your Award? Will you withdraw it? What is going to happen?

I would frankly appreciate a lot more an article entitled "The great Sony W4500 swindle! All inside! (how we ended up in an uncomfortable position, and what this means for you", rather than no article at all. Equally, if you find that there is no real clouding problem, we would like to know!

Above all, we need to know that we can rely on What Hi-Fi?, as always. I know I can.

Give us a chance! In case anyone has missed this thread, or doesn't want to read it all, we posted a Blog last night covering the settings Sony recommend (complete with a link to this thread). We're now in the process of flagging up that blog in our W4500 reviews, just as we alerted you all to the Sky HD issues with Sony receivers.

We will also continue to monitor the situation very closely to see if it either improves or worsens in terms of reported good/bad sets. And the team will also continue to review as many alternatives to the Sony sets as possible so we can offer a different  - but still excellent - TV route for anyone who's been totally put off the Bravias by this business...

Ginder:

how you finding the motion on it?

No problems with motion,didnt have any with my Sony 40"v2000 either which i bought 2 years ago

That's unfair Rismondo. If anyone cares enough about the TV they are going to buy they will do a lot of research and will know about these issues. How can you criticise Whathifi when they have this massive thread going, which includes honest feedback from some of the editors. 

bennyben:

That's unfair Rismondo. If anyone cares enough about the TV they are going to buy they will do a lot of research and will know about these issues. How can you criticise Whathifi when they have this massive thread going, which includes honest feedback from some of the editors. 

And the fact they have continuely been pursueing Sony for a answer, even tho Sony's response was rather feeble and some what perdictible.