in Search
Untitled Page

ARCHIVED FORUM -- April 2007 to March 2012
READ ONLY FORUM

This is the first Archived Forum which was active between 17th April 2007 and 1st March February 2012

 

Latest post 12-04-2007 4:59 PM by 355f. 74 replies.
Page 1 of 3 (75 items) 1 2 3 Next >
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • 11-30-2007 8:22 AM

    BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    It seems that a number of us have now received our Mark III BV-7-40 televisions so it seems a good time to start a review of this set and get some general feedaback as to what people think.

    • What are your initial reactions?
    • Does the TV meet your expectations?
    • Is it a marked improvement over the Mark II?
    • What DVD films have you noticed an improvement on in terms of upscaling?
    • New LED and Sound?
    • Other comments...

    I have noticed a slight improvement between the Mark II and the Mark III when watching digital channels through Sky. I have played DVDs recorded from the 70s and 80s which include Fawlty Towers, Only Fools and Horses and more recent footage such as James Last in concert which was recorded earlier in the year at the Royal Albert Hall and Cirque Du Soleil recorded 2 years ago. None of them seem any different to the Mark II and in fact on some of the more recent ones the Root Menu looks awful with terrible pixelation, although the film itself is better when you start playing it. I accept that you can't upscale/improve footage recorded on earlier cameras so what would be a good DVD film to use that would show the superb upscaling that this new set is supposed to incorporate? I have also watched Planet Earth and The Blue Planet with no difference in quality between the Mark II and Mark III. I would really like to see something that is noticeably different.

    As for the choice of white LEDs (as discussed in another post) I quite like this and think it works quite well with other B&O equipment although it seems others would prefer it to have remained red.

    Watching the BBC HD freeview channel is good depending on the footage being played. Sometimes I like what I see but other times, particularly with landscape shots, it seems that the background (sky, grass, desert etc) is shaking up and down very quickly, albeit very slightly but still very noticeable. I did not notice anything like this on the Mark II so I am at a loss to explain it. I am being told that because this set is good it will show up bad footage even more so until the quality of broadcasts improves. Is this true because I struggle to accept that? It has been suggested on this forum that 1080p is not as good as 720p because of picture stretching leading to degredation. Is this the reason I am noticing things? If this is the case then why is the industry pushing 1080p forward? I don't understand.

    I also find that I have to turn the volume up louder on this new set. A setting of 60 seems to be equivalent to a setting of 45-40 on the older Mark II set. Does anyone else notice this? If their is a way to change this please advise.

    Generally speaking I don't find it much different to the Mark II so I am interested to hear other people's comments. I want to see evidence of the following review that gives the set http://www.hdtvsolutions.com/BangOlufsenBeoVision7-40Review.htm a 5/5 review for perfomance and features.

    Simon.

    "We can rebuild him. We have the technology." 7-40, 7-2, 9000, BS3, BC2, LC2, BC6000, Beo5
  • 11-30-2007 11:41 AM In reply to

    • 355f
    • Top 100 Contributor
    • Joined on 04-19-2007
    • Posts 655
    • Bronze Member

    Re: BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    The Beonic Man:

    It seems that a number of us have now received our Mark III BV-7-40 televisions so it seems a good time to start a review of this set and get some general feedaback as to what people think.

    • What are your initial reactions?
    • Does the TV meet your expectations?
    • Is it a marked improvement over the Mark II?
    • What DVD films have you noticed an improvement on in terms of upscaling?
    • New LED and Sound?
    • Other comments...

    I have noticed a slight improvement between the Mark II and the Mark III when watching digital channels through Sky. I have played DVDs recorded from the 70s and 80s which include Fawlty Towers, Only Fools and Horses and more recent footage such as James Last in concert which was recorded earlier in the year at the Royal Albert Hall and Cirque Du Soleil recorded 2 years ago. None of them seem any different to the Mark II and in fact on some of the more recent ones the Root Menu looks awful with terrible pixelation, although the film itself is better when you start playing it. I accept that you can't upscale/improve footage recorded on earlier cameras so what would be a good DVD film to use that would show the superb upscaling that this new set is supposed to incorporate? I have also watched Planet Earth and The Blue Planet with no difference in quality between the Mark II and Mark III. I would really like to see something that is noticeably different.

    As for the choice of white LEDs (as discussed in another post) I quite like this and think it works quite well with other B&O equipment although it seems others would prefer it to have remained red.

    Watching the BBC HD freeview channel is good depending on the footage being played. Sometimes I like what I see but other times, particularly with landscape shots, it seems that the background (sky, grass, desert etc) is shaking up and down very quickly, albeit very slightly but still very noticeable. I did not notice anything like this on the Mark II so I am at a loss to explain it. I am being told that because this set is good it will show up bad footage even more so until the quality of broadcasts improves. Is this true because I struggle to accept that? It has been suggested on this forum that 1080p is not as good as 720p because of picture stretching leading to degredation. Is this the reason I am noticing things? If this is the case then why is the industry pushing 1080p forward? I don't understand.

    I also find that I have to turn the volume up louder on this new set. A setting of 60 seems to be equivalent to a setting of 45-40 on the older Mark II set. Does anyone else notice this? If their is a way to change this please advise.

    Generally speaking I don't find it much different to the Mark II so I am interested to hear other people's comments. I want to see evidence of the following review that gives the set http://www.hdtvsolutions.com/BangOlufsenBeoVision7-40Review.htm a 5/5 review for perfomance and features.

    Simon.

    The marketing boys have done a wonderful job in pushing 1080 and they continue to do so becaise it sells TVs!!

     

    We had a discussion before and my thoughts then was that B&O had not created the 'holy grail' of LCDs but it was probably 10% better than the MK11  and it would seem from your post thats about right.

    The juddering you describe is not down to the fact that B&O have made a screen so good that it shows up all those  inadequte pictures!! with 1080 you have 45% more information to process than a standard HD screen. So HD should look slighly better but its open to debate how it handles standard broadcast material. For plasma pansaonic now support 24 frme rate panels which it transpires seem to cause more problems than they intended to solve!- in an effort to stop juddering- which some individuals notice more than others

     

    The BV7 is a great product though- for an lcd but for the most part the 1080 panels now being produced for the mass market are made to a price and the only way that can be acheived is to reduce the processing power of the TV.

    Interestingly I was recently involved with an associate who purchased a sony b300 blue ray and a samsung 1080 plasma- even in HD the picture was truly awfull , the inbuilt DTV a disaster- but in the trade its a 'mugs eyeful' all the specs but cant deliver. I think HD ( unless one uses a projector) is the biggest con ever perpetrated on the public, Very poor disc quality at enourmous expense, and on many dvd one cannot tell the difference between stadard upsacled dvd and HD- so one is left with a small number of trophy discs( which generally have rubbish content) to impress with true HD!

  • 11-30-2007 12:01 PM In reply to

    Re: BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    My BV7 mk3  showed a light improvement  after about a week.At present I am underwhelmed with the PQ.This is watching SD via Freview and terrestrial broadcasts.

    Blacks may be better than before but with the lights out it is still 'LCD black'...meaning grey! 

    Perception of depth is also pretty average [compared to the Avant] it is far from the stunning 3D that the CRT delivers.

    The biggest problem I have is with pixellation,especially during panning/movement.Not impressed.This is less noticeable on good quality dvds,however. 

    Fed a decent signal,I'm sure it will deliver it's potential,whatever that may be.

    Very happy with the sound quality of the 7.2. So far I haven't felt the need to hook up the sub.

    I did consider the Pioneer Kuro which was great with dvd/blueray but unwatchable on terrestrial [pixel-city] No doubt partly due to aeriel losses/lights etc.

    I love the design and integration though.That was a big factor in my decision making process. 

    If B&O offered a Kuro [BV4+?] panel,with integrated dvd/hddvd/blueray/BS3 that could be mounted on the BV7 stand for a similar price to the LCD panel,I'd go for one of those tbh.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • 11-30-2007 12:13 PM In reply to

    Re: BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    Great!
    Two new Beowold forums:-
    The Flat-Earth Cables Believers Forum and the Sun Goes Round the HDTV Specs Forum.
    10%
  • 11-30-2007 1:38 PM In reply to

    Re: BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    haha , true dat

     i'd hardly call james last in concert testing material for any a/v system

    unless you're testing the listener's patience that is 

     :) 

    popgear is grate™

  • 11-30-2007 1:47 PM In reply to

    • 355f
    • Top 100 Contributor
    • Joined on 04-19-2007
    • Posts 655
    • Bronze Member

    Re: BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    Flappo The Grate:

    haha , true dat

     i'd hardly call james last in concert testing material for any a/v system

    unless you're testing the listener's patience that is 

     :) 

    Actually I think the author should be congratulated for saying exactly what he feels about the product rather than defending it to the extreme saying how wonderful it all is- if more individuals were like this it would not be so easy for marketing departments to create the illusion that is largely HDTV

     

    As to your rather uncalled for comment about the choice of DVD- the dts sound track on that particular DVD is extremely good and is very good testing material. If its a disc one has played before on another system- this is the best way to check how much better ones new set up is- not by inserting some star wars sh.....  

    What really worries me is when I look at lovefilm.com and see the top ten rented DVDs  im afraid the underclass has taken over!

  • 12-01-2007 12:36 AM In reply to

    Re: BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    .

    popgear is grate™

  • 12-01-2007 3:59 AM In reply to

    Re: BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    Hello. I am also an owner of the BV 7 40 MKIII since 4 weeks. Before I had an Avant. The picture sharpness and the colours are amazing (like the Avant before). But from the first moment I thought, there's something different and propably wrong with this TV set. So I started to test with different DVD's.

    Now I realize, that the picture gets unsharp as soon as there's a little motion in there. Example: In Star Trek 9 the starship ist very sharp when I freeze the picture. When I put play now, the vessel and its contoures gets unsharp and the lights gets much longer. Example 2: The Simpsons Movie: I can see double pictures. I also see that in other films (there's the normal motion unsharpness as we know it from cinema plus the unsharpness from the panel!). 

    If I go to the Media Market an look to the newest 100 Hz Solutions of Philips or Sharp, than I realize that these TV's have not such a "motion problem" as my BV 7 has. I could see that very good, because there was also the Simpson's Movie running.  So, I have the bad feeling now, that I bought the most expensive TV set on the market and get an old 60 Hz Samsung panel with it. I really trustet blind to the B&O Marketing Service that promissed, that I will get "the most advanced TV on the market." I never was disappointet by B&O products before (since 15 years). But now, I consider to wait for the next BV 7 MK IV and sell my MK III then (after testing the new MK IV of course). Or the other solution (which would hurt of course) could be to sell all B&O stuff and change the brand. I will see, what future brings.

    Regards

    Patrick 

     

     

     

     

  • 12-01-2007 4:42 AM In reply to

    • 355f
    • Top 100 Contributor
    • Joined on 04-19-2007
    • Posts 655
    • Bronze Member

    Re: BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    wallace:

    Hello. I am also an owner of the BV 7 40 MKIII since 4 weeks. Before I had an Avant. The picture sharpness and the colours are amazing (like the Avant before). But from the first moment I thought, there's something different and propably wrong with this TV set. So I started to test with different DVD's.

    Now I realize, that the picture gets unsharp as soon as there's a little motion in there. Example: In Star Trek 9 the starship ist very sharp when I freeze the picture. When I put play now, the vessel and its contoures gets unsharp and the lights gets much longer. Example 2: The Simpsons Movie: I can see double pictures. I also see that in other films (there's the normal motion unsharpness as we know it from cinema plus the unsharpness from the panel!). 

    If I go to the Media Market an look to the newest 100 Hz Solutions of Philips or Sharp, than I realize that these TV's have not such a "motion problem" as my BV 7 has. I could see that very good, because there was also the Simpson's Movie running.  So, I have the bad feeling now, that I bought the most expensive TV set on the market and get an old 60 Hz Samsung panel with it. I really trustet blind to the B&O Marketing Service that promissed, that I will get "the most advanced TV on the market." I never was disappointet by B&O products before (since 15 years). But now, I consider to wait for the next BV 7 MK IV and sell my MK III then (after testing the new MK IV of course). Or the other solution (which would hurt of course) could be to sell all B&O stuff and change the brand. I will see, what future brings.

    Regards

    Patrick 

     

     

     

     

    I think you are confusing a few issues here. Firstly, you only get ultimate resolution when you have NO movement, with a fast moving picture resolution falls apart- Whilst you mention other brands I think you will find that when you get it home they will have issues as well!

    the problem is the technology, B&O cant do what the technlogy cannot deliver.

     

  • 12-01-2007 4:48 AM In reply to

    Re: BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    Well, I am really delighted to see how honest people are about their new Beovision 7 latest version.

    Not only pray stories but a plain straight look at the product. I don't have a Beovision LCD by myself but I am shocked that Bang & Olufsen seems to have motion problems and other picture disturbtions on this brand new high end pricy Beovision 7 and that other brands which cost much less don't seem to have them.

    That is not what you may expect for such a high price and from a brand that calls itself premium. Can't you give it back to your dealer that it does not reach your demand of expectations?

    To watch every day to a television with those trouble if you see them seems to me very hard.

  • 12-01-2007 5:01 AM In reply to

    • 355f
    • Top 100 Contributor
    • Joined on 04-19-2007
    • Posts 655
    • Bronze Member

    Re: BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    Bingo:

    Well, I am really delighted to see how honest people are about their new Beovision 7 latest version.

    Not only pray stories but a plain straight look at the product. I don't have a Beovision LCD by myself but I am shocked that Bang & Olufsen seems to have motion problems and other picture disturbtions on this brand new high end pricy Beovision 7 and that other brands which cost much less don't seem to have them.

    That is not what you may expect for such a high price and from a brand that calls itself premium. Can't you give it back to your dealer that it does not reach your demand of expectations?

    To watch every day to a television with those trouble if you see them seems to me very hard.

    The problem relates to the technology not the brand- All LCD panels have the same fundamental problems

     

  • 12-01-2007 5:11 AM In reply to

    Re: BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    I agree with 355f here.
    Flat screen fashion got way ahead of the technology, and people scrapped wonderful CRT-screens in order to follow the trend. (My parents are still hanging on to their CRT, but their friends are constantly nagging them to "switch to flat").

    LCD has motion artifacts that are very difficult to get rid of, and that you'll notice when you get too close. At ordinary viewing distances you won't notice this as much -- though if the screen is large, upscaling artifacts are added to the smudge.
    To be fair, one shouldn't judge modern flatscreens by what you're seeing with your head a foot or two from the screen. People who comment on bad SD resolution on flatscreens should sit in the couch and judge, they'll probably relax then.

    It's not a "B&O should use better panels" thing. I believe that the BV7 mkIII with a BeoSystem 3 engine is trying to do the best that LCD can do today, with available technology.

  • 12-01-2007 5:28 AM In reply to

    Re: BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    Well, If I read what Wallace says, he went to the mediamarkt and saw that some other brands did not have that problems. So then it is not the case of with every LCD panel.
  • 12-01-2007 6:01 AM In reply to

    Re: BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    So if you want the best picture quality, buy an Avant! Laughing

    Actually thinking of a BV5 with D7 panel myself - a small nagging voice keeps on at me - but I only speak to Lee once a week! LaughingLaughing 

  • 12-01-2007 6:54 AM In reply to

    Re: BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    Bingo:
    Well, If I read what Wallace says, he went to the mediamarkt and saw that some other brands did not have that problems. So then it is not the case of with every LCD panel.

    Yes, I understood that. But I think we can also safely assume that the source material at Mediamarkt was optimized for the screens on display, where several of his comments referred to what he had viewed at home? Or did I misunderstand?

    You can't really compare panels unless you have them side-by-side, in the same room, showing the same material. 

  • 12-01-2007 6:54 AM In reply to

    • David
    • Top 500 Contributor
    • Joined on 05-05-2007
    • England
    • Posts 128
    • Bronze Member

    Re: BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    When I was looking for a flat panel TV for the family room I looked at the BV7 MK2 and was not impressed at all. Then my dealer told me a MK3 version would be out at the end of the year so I thought I would wait.

    I purchased a 42" Pioneer PDP-507XD HD Plasma and connected it to my B&O system to fill the gap and waited for the MK3 to arrive. After viewing the BV7 MK3 it I was very dissapointed......more of the same faults as the MK2.

    I'm thinking about a used BV5 at the mo to replace the Avant, then change up to a BV9 when a good used one comes available.

    Beolab 8000, Beolab 6000, Beolab 2, LG CX65, Beosystem 3, Beosound 9000, Beolab 3500

  • 12-01-2007 7:11 AM In reply to

    Re: BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    Peter:

    So if you want the best picture quality, buy an Avant! Laughing

    Actually thinking of a BV5 with D7 panel myself - a small nagging voice keeps on at me - but I only speak to Lee once a week! LaughingLaughing 

    You are all right about the Avant. I bought my Mum an Avant 32 RF DVD 6 months ago and she absolutly loves it and comments on the sharpness of the picture all the time. Trying to get her used to the Beo 4 is another matter! I also love watching it when I visit her. I think there is no question at all that the Avant is an incredible television. Imagine if they had made one with a 40 inch screen size and HD compatable? That would have been interesting. Although, I am also in full agreement with 355f that HD is an illusion, certainly at the moment. I notice only a marginal difference each time I look at HD content. However, when I play the Blue Planet and such footage it is easily as comparable as HD footage in my opinion.

    Peter, I would like to see you buy the BV5 because you clearly have the same passion for it I did and in hindsight, perhaps the HD BV5 would have been the better choice for me. If you can't have the best picture (as with the Avant) then have the best styling, and this is where its an individual thing. For you, I and many others, the BV5 was the ultimate design statement. For others its the BV7 and other variants. Lets face it, B&O don't make any badly styled products (not really) so all the TVs are great, but each of us will have their heart set on a certain product in the range. I will never forget the first time I saw a BV5 when they came out, it was in the Kingston upon Thames shop, which was my local dealership at the time. It was leaning up against the wall and I fell in love with the whole concept, including its positioning. I started planing out a new home in my mind completly around a BV5 television! Take the plunge Peter, I can't see how you would regret it. Providing you can get parts for it for several years to come then I think its still a worthwhile choice.

    I got caught up in the HD trap and wanted to be futureproof, but to what end? As we are beginning to realise, HD is a bit of a myth. Sky only broadcast 11 HD channels. Several of these are just upscaled footage and not even recorded in HD and those programs that are - still only slightly - to conserve bandwidth so nobody is seeing the true HD quality, whatever that may be. Additionally, of the 11 channels that Sky offer, 2 are sports and 2 are movies, so if you are not subscribing to the Premium package you don't get to view these. A further channel is the BBC HD channel that is free anyway, so in fact, you are getting 6 channels only that are not true HD. That costs an extra £10 per month. Now if that isn't an attempt to take the customer for a ride, I don't know what is! Suffice to say I am no subscribing.

    My TV will be used mostly for watching documentaries, wildlife programs, UKTV Gold, British and American sitcoms and for playing DVDs. I think we have been spolit with the Avant (tube technology generally) because you can see a clean picture close up just as you can from a distance. Although my BV7-40 is admirable from a distance, I am still distracted by looking at it close up, even though I know I am not supposed to, but I do, simply because I could with previous technology!

    Simon.

    "We can rebuild him. We have the technology." 7-40, 7-2, 9000, BS3, BC2, LC2, BC6000, Beo5
  • 12-01-2007 9:06 AM In reply to

    Re: BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    I will get one - just waiting for the right set at the right price! HD will come and will be great eventually. However I will be the first to admit that my eyes are following my ears and I just don't need HD! My only problem will be where to put the Avant! Too big for the bedroom - and perfectly happy with the LX6000 - and I have an AV9000 in the study. Despite having a perfectly reasonably sized house, I just don't have that many rooms for big TVs!! Laughing
  • 12-01-2007 10:23 AM In reply to

    • 355f
    • Top 100 Contributor
    • Joined on 04-19-2007
    • Posts 655
    • Bronze Member

    Re: BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    David:

    When I was looking for a flat panel TV for the family room I looked at the BV7 MK2 and was not impressed at all. Then my dealer told me a MK3 version would be out at the end of the year so I thought I would wait.

    I purchased a 42" Pioneer PDP-507XD HD Plasma and connected it to my B&O system to fill the gap and waited for the MK3 to arrive. After viewing it I was very dissapointed......more of the same faults as the MK2.

    I'm thinking about a used BV5 at the mo to replace the Avant, then change up to a BV9 when a good used one comes available.

     

    Very suprised at that.A calibrated plasma is definately the way to go. The latest Kuro Pioneers and the panasonic panels are just suberb-

    In my opinion the BV5 route is not the way to go either. The avant chassis in that unit doesnt match well with todays technology- has all the horrible traits ofplasmas of old and even the latest varient does not have the D9 panel which in my opinion is a fundamental step forward in generation. You would find the pioneer panle a LEAP forward from a BV5!  Get a BS3 based system or the pioneer KURO- both superb pieces of kit!  very few motion problems- stunning depth- excellent colours and all show SD well which os what 90%in the UK use!

  • 12-01-2007 1:59 PM In reply to

    • David
    • Top 500 Contributor
    • Joined on 05-05-2007
    • England
    • Posts 128
    • Bronze Member

    Re: BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    355f:
    David:

    When I was looking for a flat panel TV for the family room I looked at the BV7 MK2 and was not impressed at all. Then my dealer told me a MK3 version would be out at the end of the year so I thought I would wait.

    I purchased a 42" Pioneer PDP-507XD HD Plasma and connected it to my B&O system to fill the gap and waited for the MK3 to arrive. After viewing it I was very dissapointed......more of the same faults as the MK2.

    I'm thinking about a used BV5 at the mo to replace the Avant, then change up to a BV9 when a good used one comes available.

     

    Very suprised at that.A calibrated plasma is definately the way to go. The latest Kuro Pioneers and the panasonic panels are just suberb-

    In my opinion the BV5 route is not the way to go either. The avant chassis in that unit doesnt match well with todays technology- has all the horrible traits ofplasmas of old and even the latest varient does not have the D9 panel which in my opinion is a fundamental step forward in generation. You would find the pioneer panle a LEAP forward from a BV5!  Get a BS3 based system or the pioneer KURO- both superb pieces of kit!  very few motion problems- stunning depth- excellent colours and all show SD well which os what 90%in the UK use!

    Hahaha.....sorry about the misunderstanding. Have just read my post back and it dosn't make sense!

    What I meant to say was that when the BV7 MK3 arrived at the dealers I was very dissapointed after viewing it.

    My Pioneer Plasma is a work of art,the pq is amazing.

     

    Beolab 8000, Beolab 6000, Beolab 2, LG CX65, Beosystem 3, Beosound 9000, Beolab 3500

  • 12-01-2007 2:39 PM In reply to

    • moxxey
    • Top 25 Contributor
    • Joined on 04-14-2007
    • South West, UK
    • Posts 2,360
    • Bronze Member

    Re: BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    I'm not sure how you can be 'very disappointed'. That's like saying that - compared to rivals - it's somewhat around the 3/10 mark. No way. I've compared a lot of the latest TVs and I own a MKI BV7 and it's better than 2007 model Samsung LCDs. I don't know of other LCD TVs that better the BV7-40 MKIII. Certainly nothing that lends me to think it's 'very disappointing'.

    I can't see how you can say a Pioneer is 'amazing' in comparison. Many have said that the MKIII is close or equal to a BV9 plasma, which uses a Panasonic plasma screen. So, who is right?

    As I've said many times, there are few 2007 screens that better my old MKI BV7 using BBC HD or Sky HD. Sure, the contrast ratio and brightness could be better, but I'd certainly wouldn't call it 'very disappointing' and it's a MKI.

  • 12-01-2007 3:35 PM In reply to

    • David
    • Top 500 Contributor
    • Joined on 05-05-2007
    • England
    • Posts 128
    • Bronze Member

    Re: BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    moxxey:

    I'm not sure how you can be 'very disappointed'. That's like saying that - compared to rivals - it's somewhat around the 3/10 mark. No way. I've compared a lot of the latest TVs and I own a MKI BV7 and it's better than 2007 model Samsung LCDs. I don't know of other LCD TVs that better the BV7-40 MKIII. Certainly nothing that lends me to think it's 'very disappointing'.

    I can't see how you can say a Pioneer is 'amazing' in comparison. Many have said that the MKIII is close or equal to a BV9 plasma, which uses a Panasonic plasma screen. So, who is right?

    As I've said many times, there are few 2007 screens that better my old MKI BV7 using BBC HD or Sky HD. Sure, the contrast ratio and brightness could be better, but I'd certainly wouldn't call it 'very disappointing' and it's a MKI.

    I take on board your comments and respect your views. I think it comes down to the old argument of which is best....LCD or Plasma?

    We will always differ on opinion concerning LCD. You were very happy with your BV7 MK1 and I thought the picture was too dark and the colours were cartoon like.

    Take a look at the new gen Pioneer Plasma screens, they are in a league of thier own, they are"amazing" to watch. Don't get me wrong I am a die hard B&O fan and my house is filled with it. I would of loved to have had a BV7/40 but it is not good enough for me, hence the dissapointment and hence the Pioneer purchase.

    You have got to remember that this is a £6k+ TV and it has issues with picture quality.

    Some people love the look of LCD and I was waiting for the BV7 MK3 to arrive so my views could have been changed, but sadly they havn't been. Just my opinion.

    Cheers,

    David

    Beolab 8000, Beolab 6000, Beolab 2, LG CX65, Beosystem 3, Beosound 9000, Beolab 3500

  • 12-01-2007 4:39 PM In reply to

    • moxxey
    • Top 25 Contributor
    • Joined on 04-14-2007
    • South West, UK
    • Posts 2,360
    • Bronze Member

    Re: BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    David:

    We will always differ on opinion concerning LCD. You were very happy with your BV7 MK1 and I thought the picture was too dark and the colours were cartoon like.

    I would not disagree with that. I've mentioned that before. However, ever seen a 32" 'top of the range' Samsung LCD? That has further issues than simply panel-related issues (which are the reason for the darkness and colours on the MKI BV7). For instance, watch football on the Samsung and there is obvious motion blur around the football. Watch F1 and it can't process the sun shine off the car, track and the motion at the same time. Seriously, compared to my 2004 model BV7, it was amateur.

    Of course, pricing is a big issue. Is the BV7-40 worth £8800? Absolutely not. People argue that, as you have a £5K BS3 integrated in to the system, it is now 'better value for money'. However, you could argue that the BS3 isn't really worth £5K.

    I wouldn't say I was seriously disappointed though, as you have to be realistic. The problem with the BV7-40 is never going to be the processing power of the TV, it's going to be held back by the panel and LCD technology. That's an issue that will affect all LCDs. However, as I mentioned above, it affects cheaper LCDs far more significantly. If you want one of the best LCDs around, get the BV7 MKIII. If you want something better, get the latest Pioneer or Panasonic plasma, or consider the BV4 with BS3, if money is no object! I would say that this is a level or two higher than the BV7. Colours are fantastic, no motion blur etc etc.

    I'm still impressed how my MKI 2004 model BV7 holds its own against the latest LCDs. That's probably why I'm impressed with this TV. There are few 2007 LCDs that are significantly better than my old BV7.

  • 12-01-2007 5:58 PM In reply to

    • dp
    • Not Ranked
    • Joined on 06-28-2007
    • Posts 47
    • Bronze Member

    Re: BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    I've seen side-by-side BV7-40 MKII and MKIII playing the same (last samurai) DVD and the difference in motion blur was hugely noticable.

     The colours of a BV7-32 MKII displaying the same SKY BBC HD preview at the same time as the BV7-40 MKIII looked washed out in comparison - a week ago i thought the BV7-32 was fantastic!

  • 12-01-2007 6:26 PM In reply to

    • 355f
    • Top 100 Contributor
    • Joined on 04-19-2007
    • Posts 655
    • Bronze Member

    Re: BeoVision 7-40 Mark III - Customer Review

    moxxey:

    I'm not sure how you can be 'very disappointed'. That's like saying that - compared to rivals - it's somewhat around the 3/10 mark. No way. I've compared a lot of the latest TVs and I own a MKI BV7 and it's better than 2007 model Samsung LCDs. I don't know of other LCD TVs that better the BV7-40 MKIII. Certainly nothing that lends me to think it's 'very disappointing'.

    I can't see how you can say a Pioneer is 'amazing' in comparison. Many have said that the MKIII is close or equal to a BV9 plasma, which uses a Panasonic plasma screen. So, who is right?

    As I've said many times, there are few 2007 screens that better my old MKI BV7 using BBC HD or Sky HD. Sure, the contrast ratio and brightness could be better, but I'd certainly wouldn't call it 'very disappointing' and it's a MKI.

     

    well firstly im not sure that to take a second tier brand like Samsung is a good comparison to make( lcds not that good) but take a look at the latest Sharp and that I think is a more favourable comparison. Of course one has to judge the bv7 as a complete package- it looks good and the sound is good but i saw the latest sharp lcd at the electronics show- subjected to a number of variable inputs and difficuolt to say the BV7 is better to be honest.

    The individuals that say the BV7111 is close to the BV9 may have done so while watching a good HD feed with a program that suits the panel and they may also like the bright colours (especially yellows and reds) and sharp image that LCD gives- in which case thats why they vote for it!  If one goes back to the thread about the bv9- in the end it was clear plasma has it for movement, accurate colours and depth.

    Obviously we dont want another lcdv plasma thread but really do have an extnded look at the pioneer kuro- with SD with DVD and then with HD- I defy anyone to say the BV7111 even comes close to that especially on SD. interestingly if one goes to the professional forums where free choices can be made as to product- its plasma that is the primary choice. pioneer or panasonic- you dont see any with an LG or samsung plasma- wonder why!

     

Page 1 of 3 (75 items) 1 2 3 Next >