The has a fairly basic design, but no design elements that make it look ugly.
The stand of the has a high-gloss and no swivel. Even though it is a little annoying to have to physically move the entire set to reach the back, at least it's not nigh-impossible to do.
The physical controls of the are located on the right side of the TV set, with unlit buttons that are somewhat difficult to tell which function they perform in the dark.
The included remote control of the is very light in the hand, and fairly balanced with a light grip. The buttons so have a slightly long key travel though, but nothing that would significantly slow operation of the TV set.
The comes packaged with batteries, remote, assorted documentation, cable management system and power cable.
The recorded a black level of 0.09 cd/m2 in our lab, which isn't earth-shattering, but is pretty good all things considered. We typically look for a level that is under 0.1 cd/m2 at least, so the squeaks in here. More on how we test black level.
The has a peak brightness of 359.19 cd/m2, while not the 400+ cd/m2 claimed by Philips, is still impressive. When watching TV in a brightly-lit room, you need around 200 cd/m2 of brightness, so the level of the should be more than you'll ever really need in this regard. More on how we test peak brightness.
Due to the decently low black level and the respectable peak brightness, the has a pleasantly wide contrast ratio of 3991:1, which gives it a distinct advantage over a good chunk of its competitors. More on how we test contrast.
As you can see from the chart below, the had only minor issues displaying a consistently low black level depending upon how much area white took up on the screen. More on how we test tunnel contrast.
The 's performance in white falloff was a little disappointing, given that whites tend to darken if they are surrounded by a large area of black on the screen. More on how we test white falloff.
Overall, there weren't too many issues with the 's screen uniformity, save for a couple flares on the edges of the screen when it is displaying an all-black picture. More on how we test white falloff.
When we test greyscale gamma, we look at two aspects of our charts before scoring a TV’s performance: the smoothness and slope of the line. The smoothness of the line tells us whether or not there were certain values of signal intensity that the TV simply couldn’t produce, or if they were produced incorrectly. Ideally, the slope of the line should lie somewhere between 2.1 and 2.2, but depending on a TV’s performance, this may vary. If it does vary, that means it doesn’t quite produce the ideal values along the greyscale, which can result in lost detail, especially in shadows.
The 's gamma response was surprisingly bad. In addition to several issues in the darkest end with a jagged line (meaning detail will often be lost in shadows), the slope of the line was 3.01, which is far outside our ideal range for slope. If you own this TV set, you may notice loss of detail in shaded areas often. More on how we test greyscale gamma.
The 's color temperature error was so bad our scoring algorithms would not award it even a single point. Looking at our provided chart, you'll see that it has a significantly bad warming problem as the screen's signal intensity darkens. You will absolutely notice this problem in darker scenes. More on how we test color temperature.
The 's RGB curves were mediocre overall. You'll notice that at the beginning of the curves, the red response pattern shows a dip in the line, then a correction. This means that there were a few values of red that the TV simply could not reproduce accurately. Similarly, the lines for each response were a bit jagged and uneven, which means that this problem persisted throughout the entire test, though not as badly as it was with the big dip at the beginning. Be wary of color banding in your picture, especially in shadows or gradients. More on how we test RGB curves.
Below are linear representations of each RGB curve as compared to the ideal response and that of the three other comparison models.
Overall, the motion performance of the was thoroughly uninspiring, as pictures in motion lose a lot of detail. There was also no additional video processing to help handle film content, but luckily it handles 24p media decently, without much to note in the way of problems. More on how we test motion performance.
The handles film content well without any additional video processing, without any strobing or jitter in high-frequency patterns. More on how we test 3:2 pulldown and 24fps.
The has a native resolution of 1080p, but not all content out there will be broadcast in a 1080p signal, so your TV set will be forced to rescale the signal based on its original format. Below is how the handled each NTSC resolution. More on how we test resolution scaling.
The lost 2% of its image vertically, and 3% of its image horizontally to overscan, but did not suffer from any other setbacks while displaying 420p content.
The suffered the same amount of overscan as the 420p content, but also started to show signs of issues with high-frequency patterns and legibility in this resolution.
The has a native resolution of 1080p and can display all standard NTSC resolutions.
The viewing angle of the is disappointingly tiny, as the set only maintains more than 50% of its contrast ratio when it is viewed within 15 degrees from center. As you can see in the chart, this is small, even for other TV sets of its relative size.
LCD screens are not typically as bad as plasma screens in reflectiveness, and the is no different. In fact, it does a decent job of minimizing reflection angle and annoyance when a bright light is shone directly into the screen.
This is the part of the review where you'd normally see a summary of the efficacy of the video processing features of the . Instead, you will only read that the has none, really. Nothing more needs to be said here.
The is very straightforward to calibrate, with only a few options for the user to mess around with, and no additional video processing. The downside to this is that there is no way for the user to manually adjust the backlight setting, as it is stuck permanently on one level. Using movie mode as a starting point, we calibrated the as follows:
All of our calibration is done in conjunction with the DisplayMate software.
The has a handful of video mode presets, each altering the settings to your TV to suit certain viewing environments.
The back of the is home to the interesting array of connectivity options, many of which are becoming more and more rare on newer televisions in 2011, like the dual S-video ports. In addition to the aforementioned S-video ports, there is 1 composite video port, 1 component video input, 2 HDMI ports and a cable/ANT input port. Also available are analog and digital audio output options, if you would like to spare yourself the experience of the twin 3-watt speakers.
On the side of the set lives the lone USB port, a third HDMI port, another composite video input, and an s-video port.
In addition to the basic picture control menu is an audio control menu with a pared-down equalizer. Again, we're not sure why this thing has an equalizer, but it's there if you want to adjust it.
The instruction manual of the is informative and logically ordered, but the total amount of information is a little sparse. Still, this TV doesn't have any internet connectivity or bluetooth, so really there aren't a lot of advanced options available to you anyways.
The has no internet features. If you really need these on your TV, be prepared to hook up a streaming device via HDMI.
Via the USB port on the back of the unit, you can plug in a thumb drive or other USB device to play back JPEG photo files, or MP3 audio files. Sadly, there are no other file formats supported. Still, if you're listening to music, we'd recommend using an external sound system instead of the 's speakers, as they are quite underwhelming.
WIth .jpeg files, the allows you to create a slideshow, and control transitions using a series of somewhat cheesy wipes. Keep in mind that any photo above 1920x1080 will not be supported, and therefore is not viewable on the .
From looking at the menus and the music playback screen, it's painfully obvious that local media playback was more of an afterthought for the . Still, considering that the series seems to be little more than computer monitors paraded around as TVs, it's not terribly surprising that not all of the features that make these units more like a modern TV will be a bit rushed or underdeveloped.
The does not support any other type of media.
The inability to adjust the backlight made our job in the lab easier, but it does mean that your TV will constantly be at maximum brightness. Thankfully, the isn't exactly a power hog, as it draws around 87 watts during normal use. If you stretch that out over a year of normal viewing, you're probably only going to see an impact of $17.12 on your power bill. It's not as much as a plasma would do, but we typically see LCD televisions draw less power.
Below you can see how the stacks up against the competition. You'll see that while it's a little more efficient than the Vizio, it definitely falls behind against the Sony and the Toshiba.
Despite the fact that the Vizio is slightly cheaper, you will get a better TV set in many areas like motion performance, color performance and a slightly better viewing angle if you pick it over the . In addition, the larger screen may make this a better buy for many consumers.
The absolutely trounces the underperforming Vizio in this area, not only by recording a lower black level, but also by out-shining its peak brightness. Still, the Vizio has better greyscale gamma, so this isn't a total landslide victory for the Philips
The Vizio has much better color accuracy almost across the board here, but it does slip a little bit behind in RGB curves, though the performance is fairly close.
The Vizio's motion performance is not as bad as the 's, but don't take that to mean that it's good, either. Neither TV did well here.
Both sets have a disappointingly narrow viewing angle.
While the has more analog audio and s-video ports, the Vizio has, well, nothing that would really give it an edge here. If connections are important to you, stick with the here.
This one's a bit unfair, as the Sony is much more expensive than the , but for that extra money you spend, you'll be getting improved black and white performance, streaming internet content and more connectivity options.
Both the and the Sony did well here, but if you're looking for the best, the Sony did technically do better than the by having a lower deepest black, and higher contrast ratio.
This one is a hands-down victory for the Sony, as it blew the away in every category.
Surprisingly enough, the handles motion better than the higher-end Sony, but neither TV handles motion in a way that we would consider "good."
Neither TV set has a good viewing angle, but the Sony has a slightly larger one than the .
If plentiful modern connection options are important to you, you're going to want the Sony. If for some reason you need the ancient s-video connections, you're going to want the
Another higher-priced comparison, the battles the Toshiba well on some fronts, trouncing it in black and white performance, but falling behind in local media, color performance and motion scores.
The not only has a better deepest black level, but also a higher peak brightness, and consequently, a much wider contrast ratio. Stick with the if contrast is your biggest concern.
Not surprisingly, the Toshiba has a much better color score (given that the scored a 0.00 on color temperature error), and overall leaves the in the dust here.
We hesitate to say that either TV handles motion well, but the Toshiba technically does a better job at handling motion.
Even though it's still relatively tiny, the Toshiba's viewing angle is about twice that of the .
The Toshiba has a lot more modern connectivity options than the , which relies on the ancient relic s-video ports to boost its score.
Overall, you're getting a little less than what you pay for with the , as there are some glaring low points to this TV that might make consumers look elsewhere for a TV set. If you're looking to have a unit that hangs out in the kitchen while you cook or for a bedroom, this TV isn't a bad pickup; however you're kidding yourself if you buy this hoping to build a decent home entertainment center around it.
The color performance of this TV was so wretchedly bad that it lags far behind most of the other 2011 TVs, and if you care about picture quality, the performance fielded by the is unacceptable. Despite its wide contrast ratio, it's prone to detail loss and color banding, and overall it does not perform on par with other models it is meant to compete with. In fact, there's good reason to believe that this television is nothing more than a computer monitor that was pushed into service as a TV at the last minute.
The Philips xxPFL4505D series contains the 32PFL4505D, the 22PFL4505D, and the 19PFL4505D. All three television sets are 1080p, LED-backlit screens with no internet capabilities, but similar connectivity options.
Meet the tester
Staff Writer, Imaging@cthomas8888
A seasoned writer and professional photographer, Chris reviews cameras, headphones, smartphones, laptops, and lenses. Educated in Political Science and Linguistics, Chris can often be found building a robot army, snowboarding, or getting ink.
Checking our work.
We use standardized and scientific testing methods to scrutinize every product and provide you with objectively accurate results. If you’ve found different results in your own research, email us and we’ll compare notes. If it looks substantial, we’ll gladly re-test a product to try and reproduce these results. After all, peer reviews are a critical part of any scientific process.Shoot us an email