Goodmans LD2667D 26in LCD TV - Goodmans LD2667D

John Archer

By John Archer



Our Score:


The HD Ready badge is sealed and delivered by a native resolution of 1,366 x 768, but this is unfortunately joined by a claimed contrast ratio of just 700:1. Compare this with the Toshiba's 30,000:1 claim, and you can see the extent of the problem. Companies' claimed contrast ratios can't be trusted, of course. Everyone knows that. But it's hard to believe that a gulf in figures as great as the two we've just given doesn't point to some pretty major performance differences.

The low nature of the Goodmans' figure also shows that unlike its Toshiba rival, the LD2667D doesn't employ any kind of dynamic contrast system, whereby the backlight output is reduced when dark scenes are detected in order to make black colours look less grey. This is definitely a concern, since provided a dynamic contrast system doesn't cause the image to look too unstable, TVs that use them tend to deliver much more dynamic, believable pictures than those that don't.

Heading into the LD2667D's onscreen menus is a pretty depressing experience. For while the onscreen menus aren't bad - they're clean looking and sensibly organised - the remote control is horrible. Partly because it feels so depressingly plasticky, and partly because it's horrendously laid out, with far too much button crowding and not enough weight given in terms of size or position to the most important keys.

Not surprisingly given its decisively budget ambitions, the LD2667D is pretty low on features. In fact, there's really nothing noteworthy enough to bother covering here, other than mentioning that the set's Standard factory preset is quite sensibly calibrated compared with the OTT nonsense many big-brand TVs ship with.

Much more important, though, is stuff the TV doesn't have, such as a backlight adjustment, 100Hz, or indeed any video processing at all beyond a basic scaling engine necessary for converting both standard and high definition sources to the native 1,366 x 768 resolution.

To be honest, spending time with the LD2667D's pictures is quite an illuminating experience - and not in a particularly good way. For the bottom line is that while watching them I felt like I'd stepped back in time at least a year or two.

The screen's black level response, for instance, is a classic throwback to an earlier time. For wherever there's supposed to be something approaching blackness, all you get instead is greyness, with all the depth-reducing, detail-hiding, colour-muting side effects that entails.

While watching the end credits of In The Night Garden on BBC HD with my young daughter, for instance (!), the supposedly night sky looked more like dusk, so extensive was the amount of unwanted or at least uncontrolled light still pouring through the LCD panels.

What's more, while the lack of a dynamic backlight system means that dark scenes do at least look stable, with no flickering or brightness jumps, there's a different kind of inconsistency on show. For the backlight just doesn't look even across the whole screen, leaving some parts of dark pictures looking brighter or darker than others. In particular, there's an obvious (albeit very narrow) strip of leaking light along all four of the image's sides. Yikes.


February 16, 2009, 9:41 pm

@ ian - I think you hit the nail on the head here. For most people 'good enough' is all they're after and budget sets fit the bill. They watch the programmes rather than study the picture.

And those that do splash out on a decent 'brand' rarely know what they are watching. Before I bought my TV I was at a friend's house with a newish 40" Sony TV and he thought he was watching HD when he wasn't, presenters were a lovely glowing orange color and the brightness was at retina burning levels. And he loved it.


February 17, 2009, 2:29 am

@basicasic - Haha! Those last two sentences are priceless! Sums up consumer mentality. My neighbour got a cheapo LCD panel TV with a TN panel, and the thing is unwatchable unless you're sitting straight on. Blacks are grey, and the thing looks as high-tech and visually appealing as a plastic milk bottle. LCD TV tech may be affordable, but at what cost?

Modern CRT TVs were simple to set up, problems only came when we switched to widescreen broadcasting and half the population were sometimes watching stretched images without even knowing/caring about it. Now we've added HD and different HDMI standards etc. into the mix, and sudddenly people need their techie friend to point out how badly set up their TV is. Oh dear...


February 18, 2009, 5:08 am

"but I sometimes wonder if TR reviewers are too much more demanding than the average consumer".Qte Ian.

Thank God they are ! precisely the reason for reading reviews at sites like TR, there were issues that related to the usability of this TV and the not inconsiderable matter that for ten quid or so, the consumer/viewer can find much better value, I really could not give a toss what the Tesco purchaser does, as long as he doesn't write the reviews or ask Panasonic to market groceries.

I am absolutely baffled why anyone reads this sites' content, then quieries why a writer reviews a product in a thorough manner, a bit like boarding a bus and then asking the driver to go somewhere different to the advertised route.

There are no doubt many circumstances where a cheapie of something is usful as a bridge until what we want becomes available, nothing wrong with something to tide one over but the point here is that for ten quid more you can get something that is far better.

Just what anyone should want in a review.


February 18, 2009, 8:10 am

"the traditional budget brands are really struggling to be necessary any more".

Always agreed with this. Any kind of cheap product should be avoided. This doesn't mean that expensive ones are always good, usually they are crap too.

I have seen many cases like yours too, basicasic. No cure.


February 18, 2009, 8:50 pm

@basicasic: Yes, I know EXACTLY what you mean. It's that kind of voluntary self-inflicted torture through... a lack of knowledge that we're trying to eliminate at TR.

@GherkinG: Indeed. Good old CRT, RIP. Our lives were easier, but our eyes and backs sorer, and our consoles looked so much worse than high-res PC games. I think the gain's been worth the pain, though it does leave many people at a loss.

@Frank: Couldn't have said it better myself, mate.


July 4, 2009, 11:50 pm

Hi I am looking at buying a 26 lcd for around £250-£300 for use with my XBOX 360, I read your article and I'm now stuck between this and the toshiba, one question I have regarding both is that alot of xbox 360 games require a television that requires 60hz picture frequency support, I was hoping you could tell me if either or both of those do or don't, thankyou

comments powered by Disqus