The 32W5500’s strengths have been a carbon copy of those noticed on the 32E5500. But sadly the same goes for its weaknesses. And so the picture still loses intensity quite badly if you have to watch from the side. Also, the 32W5500 displayed exactly the same curious blue smearing problem over certain – thankfully rare – dark image elements noted in our review of the 32E5500.
With less bitching about price to distract me than I had with the 32E5500, I also noticed that while the MotionFlow system reduces judder nicely on the 32W5500, motion still tends to look a little blurred, presumably because the screen’s inherent response time isn’t all that great.
Sonically, the 32W5500 is slightly above average, meaning it’s able to handle a potent action movie scene with reasonable authority and clarity, but doesn’t have enough bass or power range to rival the very best audio performers.
As expected, the 32W5500 performs pretty much identically to its much more expensive 32E5500 sibling, and so represents an enticing prospect. What’s more, when the 32W5500’s pictures are good, they’re really very good indeed, making it a truly attractive proposition for Sony die-hards.
The only problem for the 32W5500 is the existence of Samsung’s 32B650 which, while not sounding as good, offers slightly more consistent pictures, a considerably more attractive design and a superior Internet service for roughly the same amount of money.