Philips SDV2210-17 UHF-VHF-FM-HDTV Indoor Antenna
December 16, 2009 | Posted by admin 
- Receives channels 2 through 69
- 34″ VHF dipoles
- UHF element with 180-degree tilt radius
- Includes 75-300 Ohm indoor transformer with attached 6-foot coaxial cable
- 12-position fine tuning for a more highly defined signal
Product Description
The Philips SDV2210 Indoor Antenna is UHF, VHF, FM and HDTV compatible. This antenna features a UHF flat-panel array that has a 180-degree tilt radius that offers improved reception over conventional loop antennas. The flat design of the antenna concentrates the signal for better reception. This antenna also has VHF/FM dipoles, allowing you to receive TV programs broadcasted on the VHF and FM spectrums. This antenna comes with a 75-300 Ohm transformer and attached 6… More >>
Categories: Indoor Antenna | 
Tags: Antenna, Indoor, Philips, SDV2210/17, UHF/VHF/FM/HDTV | 
5 Comments »
Although this is not a high-priced antenna by any means, I was expecting a heck of a lot more from it than what I got. The Phillips is no better than the no-name, 10 year old rabbit ears I have been using on my HDTV. I figured anything would be better than those old things but turns out, I was wrong.
The Phillips will not bring in channels 5, 7, 8.3, and often looses the signal for 12 and 61. I am so frustrated with it, I don’t even use it anymore. It is going back to the store asap.
The only thing I liked was the sleek design. Just another pretty face?
Rating: 1 / 5
I’ve been purchasing antennas for the last 30 years. I’ve seen some great antennas and I have seen some that work no better than a coat hanger. I bought this thing at Walmart earlier tonight. I’ve been fooling around with it for the past 5 hours. To say that I am frustrated would be an understatement. If it wasn’t 2:30 in the morning I would be getting in my car to bring this piece of garbage back to the store right now. You get what you pay for. I wasn’t expecting a miracle for $10 , but I was expecting something that would pull in a few more channels on a little TV I have in my home office. The small size appealed to me since this was just being used for a secondary TV. I knew this antenna wouldn’t be great. But I was just looking for sufficient. Something that was going to be better than nothing. Well guess what. I think I was happier with nothing. Tomorrow I will either get something better (which won’t be difficult) or I’ll just stick a safety pin in the antenna jack. I bet you that the pin gets me more channels than this stupid antenna did.
Rating: 1 / 5
This antenna was advertised as “HDTV” ready. I connected it to the Phillips digital converter box I had and it did not work well at all! No digital stations were tuned in. In fact, the old dipole antenna on the back of the TV did a better job. Turning the tuning knob did absolutely nothing to improve the picture in digital format.
I connected the antenna directly to the TV to receive analog signals and again it was bad (snowy, distorted picture) and the turning the tuning knob did not improve the picture.
Rating: 1 / 5
I bought this antenna because it had more good than bad reviews. I already had a cheap (about $10) Arista antenna, but it is sensitive, and you have to adjust it just about eveytime you change channels. I got this antenna, hooked it up, and it’s worse than the $10 antenna. I can’t even get all of the channels with the Philips antenna, so it’s back to my $10 Arista. Oh, and I live in the city, so it’s not like I’m 50 miles away from the TV stations.
Rating: 1 / 5
Bought this antenna at a great low sales price for 2 old TV’s that each needed a digital conversion box and a new antenna. Sleek antenna design. But this antenna will not capture CBS (Channel 2) at all. A couple other stations get shaky reception. Although the product accomplished most of my objective, I should have upgraded to an antenna that can get all the channels, including CBS Channel 2. Won’t CBS advertisers get mad if a lot of other people have the same problem? Why can’t a major channel like CBS just send a stronger signal?
Rating: 2 / 5