Bought the Sharp AQUOS LC-32GP1U **UPDATED**

[Imyourzero]

So my 37" Westy is sitting still sealed in its box behind me. I bought it due to all the hype it has received lately and because it was only $250 more than the 24" BenQ that I originally wanted. However, after I placed the order I began to worry that a 37" monitor might be a bit too large for the distance that I sit at. Due to the layout of my desk/room, I have to sit 2-3 feet away from my monitor. I noticed that many of the people using the Westy in the huge 80+ page 37W3 thread on [ H ] were sitting 4, 5, or even 6 feet away from it. As I waited for my 37W3 to arrive, I had my measuring tape out every day trying to decide if it would be too large and I came to the conclusion that it probably would be just a bit too huge for my current layout. The Westinghouse is 37.3" wide so to get an idea of what I'm talking about, stretch your measuring tape out to 37" and hold it 2 feet away from your face. You'll notice that you'd really have to move your head just to see all of the screen, and I didn't want to do that.

After reading about the incredible image quality on the AQUOS sets and the positive comments on the LC-32GP1U in particular, I decided to go for it. It's a full 1920x1080 unlike my old 32" Westy that was only 1080i (1366x768) so it should be awesome. The pixel pitch is smaller than that of the 37" Westy and the Sharp does 1:1 mapping, woohoo! The Sharp is 31" wide; when I did the measurements using that, I found that a 32" should be just about PERFECT for the distance I sit from the display.

While the LC-32GP1U is tailor-made for gamers (has a ton of inputs and Vyper Drive technology which supposedly eliminates any perceptible lag between the console and the display), the LC-32D62U supposedly uses the same screen but doesn't have Vyper Drive or the extra inputs. I was going to get the 32D62U if I could find it significantly cheaper, but since it was nearly as much as the 32GP1U everywhere I checked, I went ahead and got the gamer's version of the monitor.

It's supposed to arrive on Wednesday. From what I read, the colors and black levels on this bad boy are supposed to be VERY VERY good. I hope I'm happy with it!

 

[JRW]

The black level improvment alone should be worth it ,the 37 Westy is one of the worst displays in this area from my experiance.

 

[MobileLoser]

Too small for that resolution. It's a desk monitor, not a couch TV. That doesn't seem to be a problem for you, so congrats!

 

[Imyourzero]

Originally posted by: MobileLoser
Too small for that resolution. It's a desk monitor, not a couch TV. That doesn't seem to be a problem for you, so congrats!

Smaller = less grainy fonts. Even a 24" would be an upgrade from my 2001FP but after seeing pics of setups with the 32/37" displays I was sold.

And you're right, it's primarily a monitor so it should be perfect for my desk. I'd want something much larger for a main TV... If the 32" ends up shrinking after I get it out of the box, I still have the 37W3 that I can open up in its stead. Would really like to use the 32" for my PC and the 37" in the bedroom, though.

 

[Corporate Thug]

sell me the westy!

oh, and post pics when u get it

 

[allies]

I outbid Corporate Thug by $1 on the westy!

Also... 32" 1080P display would be awesome... I'd really consider getting one. How much did you get it for?

Edit: I see it's 1230ish at Newegg... Pretty sweet, considering it's 1080P. I'd like to get one for <$1000 if I ever did. I'd sell this 22" TN in a heartbeat for $200

Edit 2: I got a LC37D5U last year for $950 (local TV shop...couldn't pass it up at the time). Although it's 37" 720P it's a dang nice picture...

 

[Imyourzero]

Originally posted by: allies
I outbid Corporate Thug by $1 on the westy!

Also... 32" 1080P display would be awesome... I'd really consider getting one. How much did you get it for?

Edit: I see it's 1230ish at Newegg... Pretty sweet, considering it's 1080P. I'd like to get one for <$1000 if I ever did. I'd sell this 22" TN in a heartbeat for $200

Edit 2: I got a LC37D5U last year for $950 (local TV shop...couldn't pass it up at the time). Although it's 37" 720P it's a dang nice picture...

Yeah, what convinced me to go for this one when I already bought the Westy were the consistent reports of the stunning image quality of the AQUOS units. I'm very eager to see what's in store...plus the glossy black bezel just makes it look damn sexy IMO.

Pic (The guy didn't have 1:1 enabled at that point, note the icons out of the screen area)

Pic

Pic

Pic

I think $1200 is a decent price for the gamer's version. I managed to find the non-gamer's model for just a bit over $1k and it's the same panel minus the Vyper Drive technology and the extra inputs. It may be worth considering; who knows when these will be down in the $800-$900 range. It's definitely something that would benefit from the use of a coupon if you could find one!

 

[allies]

Man that monitor looks dang nice. Looking forward to you getting yours so we can see more pics.

 

[KeithP]

I am so tempted by this display. It will be interesting to hear your thoughts on it. Be sure to report back.

The only thing that bothers me about it is that it is still a 60Hz refresh rate display. When I first heard about this unit it was mentioned along side some other new Sharp LCDs with 120Hz refresh rate so I assumed the GP1U would be 120 as well. Alas, that is not the case.

-Keithp

 

[Fallen Kell]

Been happy with my LC-46D92. Which even after being out since Jan 31st., is still not listed on the www.SharpUSA.com website. Go to www.Sharp.ca (Canada) to see the info on it. 1080p with 120Hz refresh, although the refresh is an internal multiplier, (i.e. you can not send it a 120Hz refresh from a connection, it up-samples to 120Hz internally. Sharp, being Sharp, still shafts computer users like they have always done, first it was no 1080p from input, then the forced "computer" mode, then the DVI-A only connection, and now the no 120Hz input. They seem to always find a way to have us complain. I mean, I wouldn't complain if it only accepted a 60Hz refresh if it only had a 60Hz screen. But it doesn't have a 60Hz screen, it has a 120Hz screen, so put the electronics in there to let us use it damit!).

That said, it isn't a bad screen at all. Has some mild banding, only noticible when looking at panning scenes with a dark gray (black it doesn't exist, or bright colors, just the darker shades of gray, in the 10%-30% range in terms of brightness level).

 

[TourGuide]

I really like all these big panels, but 1080p (1920x1080) I just couldn't live with. It isn't really the 1980 - rather the 1080. After having run 1600x1200 for so long now, I just couldn't take the reduction in area. If anything, I'll be checking out one of the 30 inch panels (IPS probably) at the next upgrade.

 

[allies]

Originally posted by: TourGuide
I really like all these big panels, but 1080p (1920x1080) I just couldn't live with. It isn't really the 1980 - rather the 1080. After having run 1600x1200 for so long now, I just couldn't take the reduction in area. If anything, I'll be checking out one of the 30 inch panels (IPS probably) at the next upgrade.

I somewhat agree with you - All the computers in my labs at school are 20" 1600x1200. I have a 22" 1680x1050 - and I can definitely notice the vertical difference. However, it's pretty easy to get "re-used' to the reduced amount of vertical pixels IMO.

 

[TourGuide]

Originally posted by: allies
I somewhat agree with you - All the computers in my labs at school are 20" 1600x1200. I have a 22" 1680x1050 - and I can definitely notice the vertical difference. However, it's pretty easy to get "re-used' to the reduced amount of vertical pixels IMO.

Yeah, I know I could probably get used to it. My problem is, I just want more work area. When I am doing video editing, I want to be able to size my thumbnails up to the point where I don't have to squint. 2560x1600 would enable that and more stuff too. My goal with each monitor upgrade has been greater usable realestate with each successive change. So far I've accomplished that, but if I went with one of these it would be the first time I've reversed that trend. I just don't think I could go with a solution that was 'less'.

 

[liquid51]

If the LC-32GP1U is supposed to be the "gaming" model with viperdrive, why does Newegg list the LC32D62U as having a faster response time at 4ms (says 6ms for the 32GP1U)?

But seriousely, 3 HDMI inputs, an HD tuner, lower pixel pitch than the 37s, a 10,000:1 dynamic cr (2,000:1 native), 4ms/6ms response (clarification?) and $1,199 on newegg... I may have finally found the lcd I've been looking for .

Oops. Just realized that viperdrive is an input lag thing. but why on earth would they lower the response time? Doesn't make sense for the more expensive, gaming version.

Oops again. Vyper that is.

Ok, last edit, promise: looks as though newegg might have had the response time listed incorrectly. 6ms for both I believe.

 

[Imyourzero]

That is correct liquid; I have the 2007 Sharp brochure in a .pdf and both panels are 6ms.

 

[Imyourzero]

Well, it came today. Got it running 1920x1080 in 1:1 mode and it has honestly knocked my socks off. More impressions to come later -- I've only had it set up for a little over an hour and I want to play some more before I have to go to bed. I might have to be late for work tomorrow.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: TourGuide

Originally posted by: allies
I somewhat agree with you - All the computers in my labs at school are 20" 1600x1200. I have a 22" 1680x1050 - and I can definitely notice the vertical difference. However, it's pretty easy to get "re-used' to the reduced amount of vertical pixels IMO.

Yeah, I know I could probably get used to it. My problem is, I just want more work area. When I am doing video editing, I want to be able to size my thumbnails up to the point where I don't have to squint. 2560x1600 would enable that and more stuff too. My goal with each monitor upgrade has been greater usable realestate with each successive change. So far I've accomplished that, but if I went with one of these it would be the first time I've reversed that trend. I just don't think I could go with a solution that was 'less'.

1920x1080 > 1600x1200 in terms of total area...

 

[cheap]

1920x1080 > 1600x1200 in terms of total area...

8% bigger desktop area to be exact but I think he really cares about vertical space.

 

[liquid51]

I'm running 1024x768 on my old viewsonic 17" crt (it loses focus, badly, at 1280x1024).

1920x1080 is going to create a whole ton of extra realestate for me .

 

[allies]

Originally posted by: Imyourzero
Well, it came today. Got it running 1920x1080 in 1:1 mode and it has honestly knocked my socks off. More impressions to come later -- I've only had it set up for a little over an hour and I want to play some more before I have to go to bed. I might have to be late for work tomorrow.

Sweet! Can't wait for the pics

 

[thegimp03]

Man, that thing looks nice. I've been wanting a larger monitor but the new 27" Dell doesn't seem to be the size I want. This 32" Sharp looks awesome though...

 

[5150Joker]

If you guys read the HardOCP thread on this monitor, there's a few users that noted it has issues while browsing webpages with white backgrounds. Something about it automatically adjusting the contrast to where it becomes difficult to read so if anyone is considering using this display as a PC monitor, they may want to take this issue into account. Personally I'd rather get the 37" Westy (which I already have ) instead of this.

 

[Nightmare225]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
If you guys read the HardOCP thread on this monitor, there's a few users that noted it has issues while browsing webpages with white backgrounds. Something about it automatically adjusting the contrast to where it becomes difficult to read so if anyone is considering using this display as a PC monitor, they may want to take this issue into account. Personally I'd rather get the 37" Westy (which I already have ) instead of this.

Can this be turned off?

 

[liquid51]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Personally I'd rather get the 37" Westy (which I already have ) instead of this.

Well that goes without saying.

I would like to hear from a few more people on this though. Automatic contrast adjustment (without the option to disable it) seems more like a bug than a feature, and seems like something that could be straightened out. Every lcd monitor has had it's share of quirks. The increased cr and smaller dot pitch, a fast response time and this vyper drive engine (if it's all it's cracked up to be) make it more attractive to me than the current 37" offerings.

Well, back to the research. I swear I'm never going to have my own monitor. I'll just read about everybody else's for the rest of my life .

 

[Imyourzero]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
If you guys read the HardOCP thread on this monitor, there's a few users that noted it has issues while browsing webpages with white backgrounds. Something about it automatically adjusting the contrast to where it becomes difficult to read so if anyone is considering using this display as a PC monitor, they may want to take this issue into account. Personally I'd rather get the 37" Westy (which I already have ) instead of this.

It's not an issue. Text is definitely not hard to read. And I own both.

As liquid said, every display is going to have its quirks. I'm sorry, but even if there was a 24" display that cost $2000 people on the forums would still find faults with it.

Basically the Sharp has a smaller pixel pitch, better contrast, less ghosting and better black levels. The Westy is slightly larger for around the same $ and has its share of issues so don't let anyone tell you it's perfect. It's great for the money but anyone saying that they would take the Westy over the Sharp without ever seeing the two in person is just trying to justify their purchase.

Both are great displays, I'm sure I'd be happy with either one if I didn't have a choice.