All of the above.... Picture still better than most TV's in its class, which is THE reason why you buy TV..... Also, I think that JVC R & D folks acctually read those postings, since I noticed number of improvements for 2003 models, (16:9 settings, etc.) Kudos for R & D ...

Remote..... Still need to look up when in need for other function other than cha. skip or volume.. Needs to be more ergonomic

This is my second set. I got my first set on Dec. 2000, was thrilled with what TV had to offer; Year later I thought , it's time to check out if something better on market; Sold my TV, got almost 90% of what I paid and went hunting for a new, better set; Well , guess what ? I end up with 802, since nothing in 27" could compare with I'Art, period; Again, Picture that beats every Sony or Panasonic within the price range, "Theathre " colour setting that is close to NTSC standard ( 6500K ), which is option that you have to pay extra,which is, by the way,recomended, since living in North America. I have used TXH certified DVD's to set piture on my set and found almost no difference than theathre mode.. Number of inputs/ outputs, HD TV's still very expensive in this class and not worth of spending extra $$$. Somebody has mentioned that sound on this TV is thin..... Sound of TV ?? Other than watchng local news or weather chanel, where you really don't care about sound, who will watch DVD's or any other material with only TV's own audio ? Don't forget , this is TV, not your sound system.

Similar Products Used:

To many. Used to make my living selling audio/video and such....

Price, looks, picture quality, component video inputs (2), CompuLink, compact size (not too deep)

Weight!

I bought this on closeout from Crutchfield - can't beat that price for a brand-new, in-box TV delivered to your door. This is the crown in my JVC system - 5.1 receiver, DVD, VCR, cd-changer, all connected with CompuLink. It's brilliant - pop in a DVD, hit play, TV and receiver automatically turn on to correct inputs and pre-determined settings. Picture seems great on DVDs, but has anyone actually calibrated it? Any recommendations for settings? Overall features are good, but wish it had some of the software features of my dad's old JVC from 10 years ago - why can't I name my channels?

Flat Screen 2 Sets of Component video inputs Front S video and sound hookup Price at Sears (Model discontinued) Remote controls my Hughes satellite (not very well though), Panasonic VCR and DVD BBE Sound Looks great with DVD and Video Camera, very sharp and clear picture with no scan lines visible.

Sound is a little thin, lacking bass but very clear. Not as many menu controls as the Sony No White balance, way to turn on or off VM scanning, (always on), No warmth or white balance control, no 16.9 adjustment or tilt adjustment like the Sony and my geometry is a little off at the bottom of the screen. Thank goodness picture is near perfect and not many adjustments needed. WOuld be nice to have more flexibility in the menus though.

Great high end TV and worth every penny of the $450 closeout price I paid at Sears. Much better than the WEGA's I had. Both had noisy yokes and drove me crazy during quiet parts of movies and TV broadcasts. Better picture though has fewer adjustments than the WEGA line though. (Not much to adjust though, picture clear, sharp and great color)

Similar Products Used:

Sony WEGA 27SV17. 27SF13, Panasonic 27SF37

Features (2-tuner PIP, awesome digital filter, 4 inputs w/2 RGB inputs), excellent picture especially with DVD, looks great too with side-mount speakers that you only get on the more expensive sony models

Those side-mount speakers! They're a tinny joke, but if you just use a reciever for the sound instead then you're set!

Good Picture, good uniform geometry, bought after a Sony 27" Trinitron that went askew and couldn't be satisfactorily repaired, so I wanted a new identitcal replacement, but ALL of these - yes ALL of them are at a slight angle that becomes easily noticable when you look for it, AND they reduced the warranty from 2 to 1 years, versus the standard 2 on the JVC, so I shelled out for the flat JVC becuase of weak Sony warranty & poor customer service both at retailer (Sears told me never to buy a TV from them again because whatever I bought from them obviously wasn't up to my stanards [referring to inherent fault] so that was it for me and Sony, and the start of me and JVC (incidentally, the Bay threw in additional 2-year warranty too). Summary: bad Sony means that I am now a very happy JVC owner

Similar Products Used:

Sony Trinitron 27" (BIG-TIME built-in problems!)

on/off switch!

All JVC i''art have nothing to compare to another Flat tube mark. expensive for a sh*t

the jvc are near to be the best flat screen. smooth color,smooth sharpness,less details the tube are too dark. expansive for a dual tuner tv''s

outlook Design but none for a respectable flat screen

The colors are definatly not as vibrant as other manufacturers sets. picture looked too dark, loss of details in shadows, etc. prices?

The picture is softer and subdued compared to Toshiba''s. Some say this set produces a very natural color but I just couldn''t get it adjusted to my satisfaction. The colors are definatly not as vibrant as other manufacturers sets. To me it seemed kind of dull & lifeless compared to what I was used to. Softer picture than the Toshiba''s, less detailed. This is appealing to some, I tend to like a more detailed, sharper look. I also couldn''t get flesh-tones to look good no matter how I adjusted the controls. Most of the time faces looked washed out, when I adjusted the contrast & brightness to make them look acceptable the rest of the picture looked too dark, loss of details in shadows, etc. This set is expensive for a 27" model, for the price I think the sound should definatly be better. The picture is really kind of subjective & may appeal to some. The contrast problems might have been bad low level adjustments at the factory on the particular set I had, but I really didn''t want to take that chance on another one. The poor sound really clinched the return. For what you get the regular price on this is expensive.

Similar Products Used:

picture like RCA,zenith

Detailed bright picture, smoothness, number of inputs (like 2 sets of component input, remote add some additionnal function to JVC own DVD one! , 3D sound effects, nice grey look, choice of 3 picture status presets, black level is deep and natural

Sound is a little bit thin if exceptionnaly clear. A little bit on the red side.

I really thing JVC has a winner here. Nice looking flat TV with enough features and input to serve well.

Picture quality compares well with competition sometimes at a cheaper price.

I gave a try to this innovative move from JVC and I am not deceived: image quality is very good and natural. At best with DVD (sorry, no HDTV yet!). Cinema mode is really smooth, near 35mm quality.

Some adjustment are to be made to make it at your own taste, but this is the fun! And you can change your mind too!

Really a 5 star!

Similar Products Used:

Sony Wega, Panasonic Tau, Samsung Tantal

Lots of inputs, bright colors

heavy, doesn't say sony on it

This television is pretty sick. I have to say that if I had to choose between a wega or this JVC, I would choose the JVC. They are about the same price, but i payed almost 100 less because i got sales and stuff. There are plenty of inputs 2 s-video, 2 composite, 4 video inputs all together.
I highly recommend this tv to any one with a fine taste is high tech electronics.

Similar Products Used:

none

amazing tuner, most advanced comb filter, scan lines are not as apparent, dual comp. inputs, see below for more

lack of "16 : 9 enhanced" feature, see below for more

Before getting into the details of the TV, I would like to account the trials and trials and tribulations of my first high-performance TV purchase, as an illustration of the type of mistakes that people may make when they are misinformed.

Last week, while looking at the Sony WEGA 27FV16 and the JVC 27F802 on the store shelf, my father and I agreed that upon first impressions JVC seemed more impressive. It benefits from being a newer model (the Sony was 8 months old), the scan lines on it appeared less pronounced, and its exterior design --resembling a sleek, gray picture frame-- was more modern. We bought it on the spot, without the benefit of reading any reviews or without its specs being in any of my buyer's guides.

We brought it home, hooked it up, and I was truly shocked at the stunning picture quality of local channels over our $20 indoor antenna. While doing some more research on the set, I was upset at not finding its specs at the JVC site, and that only one review of it was posted in audioreview.com. Lacking these information, I nevertheless advised another prospective TV buyer in the Techtalk forum that this JVC model is one of the best 27" models available under a grand.

My post ellicited several attacks --many of them from ardent WEGA owners-- who claim that the 27FV16 was the best. They pointed out that the JVC lacks the "Enhanced 16 : 9 mode", or "anamorphic squeeze" in which anamorphic dvds are shown with more of the vertical resolution. As I read more about the Sony, my resolve and confidence on the JVC melted away. Sony's site listed a long list of features for their model. WEGA's large following of reviewers ecstatically recommended this TV. I went to the store, but have been unable to see demonstration of the "enhanced 16 : 9" feature from an anamorhic dvd on the Sony. However, I was bought by Sony's more intuitive interface (Sony designs the best on-screen menus). Suddenly, the JVC did not seem so impressive at all.

We decided to exchange the JVC 27F802 for the Sony 27FV16. However, this brought complications, as the original packaging was missing. We gulped and dished out the $230 restocking fee. We are now Sony owners.

Of course, after hooking the unit, I tested the "enhanced 16 : 9" feature which everyone raved about and was the primary reason for exchange. There is no question a difference --a slight increase in vertical resolution. However, this difference was small, and negligible on a 27" screen viewed nine feet away. I looked at the TV's other features.

Finally, here is the portion of my long review where I talk about the products themselves. I have owned both the JVC 27F802 and the Sony 27FV16. I have compared them with the same equipment and source material:

JVC 27F802
Pros:
1) the most advanced comb filter on the market today (the 4MEGA 10BIT 3D Y/C Comb Filter) truly does make a noticably accurate picture. The blacks on the JVC was deeper than the Sony. There was also less ghosting and artifacts on moving objects on the JVC.
2)For some reason, I do not know why, but the JVC's scan lines appear slightly less pronounced than on the Sony.
3) DUAL component inputs is very good if you have a use for them.
4) The tuner on the JVC is incredible. A few of my local channels over my el-cheapo indoor antenna looked like digital satellite feeds. Do not underestimate the importance of the tuner; spoiled by the JVC's clarity, we were upset at seeing ghosting and shadows on our local channels on the Sony set. This advice would not apply to people who do not use antennas.
5) It's newer. My Sony has a production date of July 2000 (it is 6 months old already).

Cons:
1) Lack of " 16 : 9 enhanced" mode (anamporhic squeeze).
2) The JVC lacks tiny details which make owning the Sony a very satisfying experience: the "video label" feature, the tactile feel of the buttons on the remote, the colorful on-screen display, the handles on the boxes to lug it around (the JVC broke our back when we took it back to the store).

Rating: 4 stars for these shortcomings.

Sony 27FV16
Pros:
1) Extremely feature packed. Has Color-temp presets.
2) TWO RF inputs useful if you have both satelite and antenna.
3) the 16:9 mode works, although a bit overrated on a model of this small screen size.

Cons:
1) Picture is not as sharp or accurate as the JVC
2) The Scan lines are apparent even when viewed 9' away --not very good at all.

Rating: also 4 stars for these shortcomings (who said I have to give a five to any one?)

Was it worth for me to have paid the restocking fee to exchange the JVC for the Sony? Of course not. This is not to say that the Sony was not a good unit. They are both the best models, depending on your needs. However, the JVC-even without the Enhanced 16:9 mode- makes DVD's look stunning, thanks to its less-noticible scan lines (the Sony looks worse without this feature). Thus, if you watch a lot of anamorphic DVD's, or if you are buying a 32" or larger tv, go with the Sony FV series for the greater resolution in its 16 : 9 mode. If you watch more television, or if you watch a lot of non-anamorphic dvd's (like Indian films) as I do, the JVC is a better choice because of its better pic quality and incomparable tuner.

Lesson Learned: Trust your own eyes before heeding to the words of "experts". Email me with any questions about these fine units.

Similar Products Used:

Sony KV-27FV16

very clear, crisp picture; excellent colors; excellent TV tuner

sound quality is adequate, not great

I based this purchase largely on the reviews here and in-store comparisons with the JVC AV27F702, Sony 27-inch FV16 and FS12 and Samsung TSK2792.

The TV tuner in this model is incredible, definitely better than the JVC AV27F702's (2 friends have the latter set). Picture quality is "high definition" in that it is clear, detailed, and crisp, giving it a sharp,3D-like quality. T Colors on this set are superb--they are distinct and vivid when appropriate.

The only disappointment is with the sound quality. Both the Sony and Samsung beat it handily in this department. However, I found the JVC to have a more "natural" picture quality. As others have noted, scan lines are more noticeable on the Sonys and the digital Samsung simply doesn't do a good job with NTSC signals. With digital signals, however, the Samsung is stunning.

If you are looking for a very high quality, non-digital 27-inch set with an excellent TV tuner, this is the one to get.