LCD/Plasma/CRT/DLP - questions

[andrewfee]

It's just a marketing point mainly, same with digital cameras and their even increasing but pointless mega pixel numbers. (try telling the difference in quality between 8 mega pixels and 4 with a compact camera - it's impossible) 1080p only matters on huge screens, simple as that.

As for PS3, very few games run in 1080p anyway, and that isn't likely to change as the GPU simply isn't powerful enough.

Actually, I'm going to disagree with you there, but only on the camera point - if anything the 4 megapixel camera is likely to look better. On a compact camera, the higher the pixel count, the smaller each photosite is, so they end up being less sensitive, and producing higher noise. (grain) 6 megapixels is about the most you want to have in a compact camera, as anything higher and the image quality, particularly in low-light, really starts to deteriorate - even on Fuji cameras with their amazing SuperCCD chips. Their 6 megapixel F20/30/31fd cameras all take noticeably better images than their 8 megapixel F40, despite it having a better lens and a newer image processor.

But yes, you're right about 1080p - it's basically a marketing term for most people.

But if you was playing a video game at 800 x 600 then you up to 1024 x 768 would you notice the difference? If you compare a same size screen 720p and 1080p side by side, you will notice. Granted, it wouldn't be worlds apart but you will notice the extra definition.

That's different though - on a monitor, you're sitting very close to the screen. With a television, most people don't even sit close enough to get the full benefit of 720p, let alone 1080p.

With a 40" 1080p screen, the absolute maximum you can sit and still resolve all the detail in the picture is 5ft. For many people, you will have to sit even closer, as few people have perfect eyesight.



The problem that you have is that lots of people with a 1080p screen come on message boards and say they can see the difference between 720p and 1080p on their screen, and that's true - they will be able to see a difference. However, that difference is not because 1080p looks better, it's just that 720p looks worse on those TVs, as it's having to be scaled up.

If you compare a 720p native panel and a 1080p native panel side-by-side, using an identical signal, I guarantee at least 90% of the people watching wouldn't be able to tell the difference. Even as large as 50" there is hardly any difference that people will see. With the vast majority of games this generation going to be running at 720p (the hardware really wasn't built to cope with anything higher) if anything a 720p native screen would look better. I certainly found my 360 games looking better on the 720p native sets I've owned compared to the 1080p native ones.

The only thing that matters about 1080p is that your television can actually accept a 1080p signal, displaying it natively is far less important.

In order of what matters most to making a good image, I'd put resolution last.

Image Processing, Greyscale and Colour Reproduction, Motion Handling and Contrast are all far more important than Resolution

The only real reason to go for 1080p is if you're either going to be sitting very close to the TV (probably not in a living room environment) or plan on using it as a high resolution PC monitor.

[Pezley]

While back now i saw it, footage was of some hot looking country with palm trees ( test demo sorta disc ) Ill try and find it for you

I'd be interested to hear more about that; what footage were they showing?

[Big N Veiny]

It doesnt work with PAL.

Do i have any options here for converting the signal?

Probably will still take the TV for my dvds, media centre, 360 and wii...

I would sell the TV and get one here. You will probably face a lot of difficulties with PAL signals, converting them isn't something you want to bother with. And any TV you buy here should handle the NTSC stuff fine.

[Kotatsu Neko]

So who would you recommend then in terms of makers?

As long as you avoid any no name brands they're all pretty good now as there are are only a handful of LCD panel manufacturers in the world anyway. (so if you buy a Sony for example, you may end up with a Panasonic panel inside it)

Samsung have a history of using too much image processing so you might want to avoid them, but other than that, just see what looks good to your eyes and compare prices and how many inputs they have.

[Ajay1986]

Ive got a Sharp set and ive had no complaints, image quality is great on the 360 and PS3.

I also think Sharp tv's are some of the best looking design wise as well, tho the new Sony ones look great too.

[Richard.John]

Sharp Aquos panels seem to rule in Japan for some reason. When people think LCD they think Sharp.

[CMcK]

I'm pretty certain Sharp is the leading manufacturer of LCD TV's. They made the first ever LCD TV in 1988. They also own about 40% of Loewe and I would imagine there will be some technology sharing that will be of benefit to Sharp TV's as part of the deal.

[Swallow]

http://www.intekx.com/product_info.php?cPath=17&products_id=106

Anyone have any experience/opinions about this?

Or am I better off looking about for a 2nd hand "premium" brand set? Don't really want to spend much on a tv to be honest, and I'm not really a visual goon - ie, when you chaps who are well into it says something looks like a dogs dinner, to me it will usually look fine...

[sj33]

No experience with that screen specifically, but really do not underestimate how bad the budget no-name screens are.

You could get away with a budget screen on a CRT, but there's a whole lot more going on inside an LCD in terms of image processing, scaling etc.

I would, with 100% honesty, prefer a cheap non-HD CRT to a budget LCD TV, easily. I think you'll be disappointed.

At that kind of budget, I would stick to a normal CRT TV for general use and get a PC screen for HD use.

[Swallow]

Thanks for the quick reply, Shakey

Will have a scout for monitors then, this thread should come in useful.

[arcnas]

A quick question if anyone can help, asumming i can sell my current plasma, im getting a 1080p one, now im thinking the sony bravia X range looks the best, but it dosent offer 1080p through VGA which knackers 1080p form my 360, do any of the others ie samsung offer this.

[Kotatsu Neko]

Don't get too hung up on 1080p. 1080i will look absolutely identical to 1080p for HD DVD as the frame rate is 24-30fps. You'll only see a difference (and it will be very, very small) for 60fps video, which means games and at present there is only one 60fps 1080p game on the 360 anyway. (Virtua Tennis)

[Lyris]

Don't get too hung up on 1080p. 1080i will look absolutely identical to 1080p for HD DVD as the frame rate is 24-30fps.

So long as the TV can do 1080i Film Mode Detection properly. All the ones I've used so far can't so you get jaggies on 1080i movies.

[sj33]

A quick question if anyone can help, asumming i can sell my current plasma, im getting a 1080p one, now im thinking the sony bravia X range looks the best, but it dosent offer 1080p through VGA which knackers 1080p form my 360, do any of the others ie samsung offer this.

There was a trick to make the 1080p Bravia W display 1080p over VGA, dunno if it works on the X.

and at present there is only one 60fps 1080p game on the 360 anyway. (Virtua Tennis)

Well, 2, that NBA one.

/nitpick mode

[Lyris]

There was a trick to make the 1080p Bravia W display 1080p over VGA, dunno if it works on the X.

It doesn't, W-Series only, bleh!