LCD TV Reviews

This '92 series set performed nearly identically to its '62 series for better and in some cases much worse. Again, rather than repeat myself, I refer you to those measurements, which you can read here. I will merely highlight some of the significant results in this space.

The biggest difference with this set was its significantly worse performance with respect to uniformity and the "clouding" and banding problems. When a low-to-mid-level gray field such as 40 IRE is on screen the issue on the LC-52D92U is obvious. Instead of a uniform brightness level across the gray screen, large, non-linear portions of it are darker, hence the term clouding. It's exactly what it sounds like- large, irregular blotchy areas. On the LC-52D62U the clouding was noticeable on the 40 IRE field pattern, but not with regular program material. On the LC-52D92U however, the clouding was darker and I felt it was more obvious, especially with the set's otherwise snappy contrast.

The banding problem is similar in that areas of the screen looked darker, but in this case it was in the form of a horizontal line across the screen. This was noticeable on the LC-52D62U on the 40 IRE field pattern, and only occasionally with program material. Although it was at the midpoint vertically on the screen, and on the left side, it didn't prevent me from watching movies and shows and enjoying them immensely on that set.

On the LC-52D92U the band was in the same position—midway up and to the left—but darker, and far more noticeable and distracting on nearly every program I watched. I couldn't get through a program without wishing this problem was gone. So the problems on the two sets I reviewed were the same, but varied in degree, and not by a subtle margin.

Geometry and linearity on the set was perfect with HDMI and component inputs at all resolutions, and overscan only approached 4% in Stretch mode over component video. Dot by Dot and Full Screen modes eliminated overscan entirely, but even the stretch modes over HDMI showed only 3%.

Luma resolution at 1080i from my Accupel generator and 1080p from my Spears and Munsil sample test disc was perfect all the way out to the single pixel-width bursts at the highest frequencies—so long as Dot by Dot was the selected aspect ratio. It was, in other words, full 1080p, and as good a result as I've seen from any display with these tests. This is consistent, in particular, with the tremendously detailed HD images I saw.

As with the '62 series set the chroma bursts rolled off at the highest frequencies of 1080i/p 720p and even 480p bursts over HDMI. With component, at 720p and 1080i the chroma bursts were much improved at the highest frequencies, but the luma response rolled off. I still recommend HDMI as I believe most viewers will prefer the full luma extension.

Deinterlacing is merely OK with standard definition video, but quite good with 1080i. Using Silicon Optix' HD HQV Benchmark HD DVD, it doesn't appear that the Sharp can perform 3/2 pulldown detection and compensation when converting 1080i film sources to 1080p.

The grayscale tracking here was numerically worse than on the LC-52D62U, but follows the same general trend. The results for each display, in the Mid-Low settings, is shown below for comparison. Mid-Low was the lesser evil; the Low setting ran 5800K or less throughout the upper end of the scale, which gave brighter images a reddish tint I didn't like. Mid-Low was plus blue, and minus green, which is far less noticeable on program material. Still, as I noted in the review, Sharp should provide a clear, simple method for adjusting this critical performance parameter in the field.