SD format on Wide Screen HDTV

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Thu, 8 Sep 2005 19:36:29 -0400, "Bishoop" <none@none.none> wrote:

>Is there any technology coming down the pike that will provide a decent to
>excellent SD programming display on a wide screen HDTV. Something as good
>as my Sony 4X3 32" CRT. All the ones I've seen so far are marginal at best.

Something called SED is reportedly coming and will rival CRT picture
quality.

I've looked at SD on all the various bigscreen technologies and the
Panasonic and Pioneer plasmas look closer to my 32" Panny HD tube
than LCD flat panel or the various Rear Projection TVs. So i bought
a Panny 42PX50U and the SD PQ on analog and digital cable is about
95% as good as it was on my HD tube TV. I do get a very good signal
from TWC so that has a lot to do with it. If you have a poor signal
then any bigscreen will look poor.

There are some SED topics on avsforum.com but i don't read em
cause i live in the now :-)

Randy

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Bishoop wrote:
>
> Is there any technology coming down the pike that will provide a decent to
> excellent SD programming display on a wide screen HDTV. Something as good
> as my Sony 4X3 32" CRT.
>
> All the ones I've seen so far are marginal at best.

I had a 27 inch Sony Flat Screen Wega that I loved. But decided to go
HDTV and got a Sharp 37 inch LCD Aquos flat panel. I watched them both
side by side for a few weeks in my home (mostly with SD on cable TV) and
calibrated both of them using the Avia DVD.

IMHO the Aquos was much better than my old trusty Wega for several
reasons. First, the Sony would always show reflections on the screen
from windows or lights in the room. Aquos almost completely removes (or
absorbs) them. (BTW plasmas won't do that). This makes it much easier
on the eyes.

Next the Aquos provides line interpolation to give a more smooth, movie
screen like image... no visible scan lines. (Most hdtv sets will do that
too). This also is easier on the eyes.

The Sony and the Aquos were close in picture quality for most of viewing
material. Viewing angle was larger on Sony but LCD was good but not as
good as mfgr claimed. Blacks were slightly deeper on Sony but not enough
to notice in a normally lighted room. Aquos was much brighter without
blooming on high lights.

Botton line... I shipped the Sony to my sister in Florida. She loves
it, and I love my Aquos. BTW, don't trust the pictures you see in most
stores. Find a store that specializes in HDTV and spend a few hours
looking at well adjusted sets side by side.

George

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Dave Gower (davegow-spamblock@magma.ca) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> I don't deny that bigger screen means bigger pixels, but last evening I
> visited a friend who had just bought a 50 inch Sony 620 RPTV. It isn't
> calibrated yet and he doesn't have HD. I was watching an SD cable signal on
> full zoom, and mentally comparing it to my 6-year old 36 inch Trinitron with
> satellite feed at home. His set was definitely better than mine.

That makes sense. It's only a 41" 4:3 picture, so it's not much of
step up in size from 36", and it is newer technology.

It's the people that go from good 32" 4:3 CRTs to "OK" 65-70" 16:9 HDTVs
that notice the drop in SD quality a lot more. Even with my 38" 16:9 set,
I prefer to watch HD, although SD is as good as the source.

--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/Dilbe [...] ssword.gif

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 14:04:19 -0400, Jeff Rife <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote:

>Dave Gower (davegow-spamblock@magma.ca) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
>> I don't deny that bigger screen means bigger pixels, but last evening I
>> visited a friend who had just bought a 50 inch Sony 620 RPTV. It isn't
>> calibrated yet and he doesn't have HD. I was watching an SD cable signal on
>> full zoom, and mentally comparing it to my 6-year old 36 inch Trinitron with
>> satellite feed at home. His set was definitely better than mine.
>
>That makes sense. It's only a 41" 4:3 picture, so it's not much of
>step up in size from 36", and it is newer technology.
Not at "full zoom."
Thumper
>It's the people that go from good 32" 4:3 CRTs to "OK" 65-70" 16:9 HDTVs
>that notice the drop in SD quality a lot more. Even with my 38" 16:9 set,
>I prefer to watch HD, although SD is as good as the source.