# Sharp Aquos LC52LE810UN



## Guest

I recently went to sears with a family member because they had a warranty credit on a 3 year old Samsung DLP that couldn't be repaired. We walked out with the Sharp. Overall, they didn't have a whole lot of options in the 50" range in store, and the choice was mainly this against a 60" LG plasma. The plasma was tempting, but I know they get hot and use a lot more power, so we chose LCD.

This was free to take home!!! SCORE! The black and white levels are amazing. I have not fully calibrated it yet, because the one TV we got had bad HDMI ports, so right now it is only hooked up with component cables. They will probably have to replace it, so I've just eye balled it for now.

I have a few questions that I'm having trouble getting information on. I was aware of HDMI 3.1 and deep color, but after some research, I had no ideal no one was using it. I thought Blu-rays were and it sounds like some might, but most don't. Not sure. I'm wondering if this Sharp TV is stuck with the same color pallet as a RGB TV or if it does some sort of processing of the incoming video to add yellow. At the moment, I know for sure that the source is only R,G,B and I've never seen a picture this good before. Keep in mind, I don't go out and demo every TV all the time, but I've seen a few proper calibrated setups and this TV looks really good. Best black level I've seen so far.

So, does yellow even get used at all on this TV? In the end, It doesn't really matter, it was a major freebe upgrade, but can a standard R,G,B TV looks as good with the same source? Is this Sharp not even using yellow unless it gets a deep color signal?


----------



## Alan Brown

Here's a pretty thorough test and review of the Sharp LCD with the extra yellow pixel from AVForums in Great Britain: http://www.avforums.com/review/Sharp-LE821-LC-46LE821E-Review.html . Their test results, analysis, and conclusions are pretty much as one should expect if you understand how video fidelity really works. Such practices are typical feeble marketing gimmicks designed to distinguish one brand from another in the marketplace. Since video is truly standardized, all well designed TVs should pretty much make pictures that look the same. Marketing departments don't like the thought of their products making pictures that look like their competition's. They resort to tomfoolery that, much like this case, end up distorting an otherwise good picture. Unfortunately, in the case of adding a fourth yellow pixel, you can't just shut the so-called "feature" off. My recommendation would be to return it and get a plasma.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.
A Lion AV Consultants Affiliate

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"


----------



## Guest

Thanks for the link. That was an interesting read, but I have to disagree 100% with how the screen looks with ambient light hitting it. This Sharp is way better with reflections then the old TV it replaced. If I'm not getting the same results with that, then its hard to take the rest of it as serious. It seemed more of a bashing then a review. Standard AVS forum format :whistling:

Either way, with so many TV manufactures making useless deep color compatible displays, I wonder if the market is going to have a 2nd gen blu-ray player with backwards compatible disk that can support deep color. It might be all marketing to sell new TVs today, but the market doesn't usually do something unless they can sell something later to take advantage of it. Most of the HDMI 1.3 and deep color bashing post I've seen have been dated from 2007 and while it might not be needed today, I kind of suspect that something around the corner will be sold that can take advantage of all those gimmick TVs.

Overall I'd want to read another independent review to see if it matches the one linked above. As far as returning the TV, maybe because it was delivered broken, but I'd still want a LCD for power usage reasons and not a plasma. Maybe some people don't care, but my sis got one and that thing really puts off heat. Enough to warm a room.

Update:

This UK version must not be the same. I double checked and red can be adjusted. Actually, ALL the colors can be, so I don't understand how colors couldn't be corrected.


----------



## lcaillo

The article that Alan linked was at AVForums.com, not AVS. The model was slightly different and may have a different screen. 

The issue of color gamut and color reproduction is a complex one. The terminology is often confusing, with marketing terms not often aligning with accurate technical terms nor the industry standards.

The report linked is consistent with the calibration experience of professionals that Alan and I communicate with regularly, so it has a bit more credibility than most consumers might realize. The color management system appears to be incapable of achieving proper luminance, although it can be adjusted pretty close for saturation/colorimetry of RGB primaries. As expected, yellow is oversaturated somewhat, but the luminance (brightness) of yellow could not be adjusted properly.

There are industry standards for color. The one used for virtually all video production and film transfers that is relevant today is rec.709 which specifies the primaries for R,G,&B. This defines the color gamut that displays should reproduce and the color of the included colors. Wide gamut displays can produce colors outside that color primary triangle, which may be needed for other standards such as xvYcc, sRGB, or others. At some point you may see options on the source end for extended gamuts, but this is not what the Sharp is producing. It's color reproduction would be very wrong for those systems, perhaps more so than our current standard. Deep color, BTW, has nothing to do with the color of the primaries or gamut, but with the number of bits used in processing and transfer of the information to the display. Many sets have higher bit density, and depending on many factors, it may or may not be a big benefit. 

The bottom line is, the reports of measurements on the sharp sets with the quad pixel design have shown a slightly oversaturated yellow with lower brightness of yellow. That may result in a more intense looking yellow in what you see. Whether it is a realistic yellow in terms of what was recorded, encoded, filmed or intended is another matter. If you like the look and are happy with it, it really does not matter what reviews, measurements, or others suggest. Most who have a great deal of experience with displays of many flavors, however, have found that in the end, many people are more satisfied with accurate color reproduction and variations used by manufacturers to differentiate their products from others often become tiresome or less desirable when compared to color produced according to the industry standards. 

We have seen this pattern of marketing many times. Red push, driving color temperatures higher, excessive filtering, escessive edge enhancement, higher saturation levels, etc, have all been used by manufacturers to differentiate their products and give sales people something to demonstrate to sell one product over another. It is easy to convince ourselves or others that something different is better, because differences capture our attention. Over time, however, most people end up finding that reproducing what things should look like according to the standards that are provided for both production and display is more satisfying and less irritating to watch. The same has been found in many areas, such as audio reproduction.

Once again, however, if you like what you are being sold, then enjoy. It may not be correct according to the standards that the industry has adopted, but that may not be what you want. If you think it has a pretty picture, then you may have found the right set for you. I suspect that Sharp will be quite successful selling these products, regardless of their accuracy. I have been recommending to my dealers to either carry the product or be prepared to service them, as I expect they may be well marketed in the near future. What people want to buy is not always technically the best product.


----------



## adkatz

> Overall I'd want to read another independent review to see if it matches the one linked above. As far as returning the TV, maybe because it was delivered broken, but I'd still want a LCD for power usage reasons and not a plasma. Maybe some people don't care, but my sis got one and that thing really puts off heat. Enough to warm a room.


My understanding is that power consumption with a plasma TV is a function of brightness -- turning the brightness and contrast down from the factory default setting (always a good idea, since you'll get a more accurate picture anyway and extend the set's useful life to boot) should reduce energy consumption to near LCD levels (although LED-backlit LCD sets are the best in this regard). Personally, I find any increase in energy consumption a small price to pay, given the plasma's superior color reproduction and black levels.

Re the Quattron, a recent review in an on-line magazine noted that it did a good job with golds and grass, but was much less successful with fleshtones, and the reviewer took the set, and the Quattron concept, to task for producing inaccurate color at a time when sets with essentially perfect color (i.e., ones where the primary color points match those of Rec.709) are readily available.


----------



## lcaillo

Saying that a calibrated PDP will be close to LCD power consumption is a stretch. My measurements put the difference typically in the20-30% range, with a backlight full on on the LCD compared to a calibrated PDP. A calibrated LCD will draw even less, because you will likely want to reduce the backlight level to get better blacks, and that does reduce power consumption, though not as dramatically as contrast on a PDP.

The fact is, however, that both technologies have improved in efficiency greatly over the years. A typical PDP now consumes less than some of the early LCD sets. It still varies greatly by brand and model, however. 

I will try to start recording the power consumption on the units that I calibrate so that I can report their performance in this area.


----------

