720p vs 1080p - is there a difference? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 105 Old 06-17-2007, 06:47 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
regular guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sao Paulo, Brazil
Posts: 190
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hello,

I would like to know if you there is a discernable difference between 720p and 1080p when looking at a 42 to 50 inch plasma or LCD.

I ask because the price JUMPS incredibly here in Brazil, depending on which format. I will be using display mostly for cable tv and hi-def tv when it arrives.
Also. occasionaly blu-ray on PS3, but not much as I have an 84 inch screen for my projecter.

I appreciate your honesty. Thanks!
regular guy is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 105 Old 06-17-2007, 06:56 PM
Advanced Member
 
dmaul1114's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 706
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
It really depends on what your watching, how close you are setting, and your eyes.

For 42-50 inches, most people aren't going to notice a distance unless you're inside 8 (maybe 10 for the 50") feet away from the set.
dmaul1114 is offline  
post #3 of 105 Old 06-17-2007, 06:59 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
regular guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sao Paulo, Brazil
Posts: 190
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I will be sitting approximately 9-11ft away.
regular guy is offline  
post #4 of 105 Old 06-17-2007, 07:21 PM
Advanced Member
 
dmaul1114's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 706
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Best thing to do is try to compare some from 9-11 feet side by side in the store and see if you can tell the difference.

To me it wouldn't be worth the extra money as I can't see much difference between the two at that distance, and there's very little 1080p content anyway (though if you're close enough you get benefit of scaling other material to 1080p rather than 768p).
dmaul1114 is offline  
post #5 of 105 Old 06-17-2007, 07:24 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
regular guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sao Paulo, Brazil
Posts: 190
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks for your feedback.

Instead of paying another $1,000-2000 bucks for almost no difference, perhaps I should focus on a kickass 720p display with better contrast????


By the way, it is hard to compare, as most stores do not show 1080p material.

Usually what you see is a standard dvd on both.
regular guy is offline  
post #6 of 105 Old 06-17-2007, 09:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Baccusboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,186
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I've owned 2 TVs, and helped my girlfriend buy a 3rd. One of them was a 42" 1080p LCD. My other is a 50" 1080i Plasma. My gf owns a 1080i model that's 29"

A couple of notes:

A confusing thing is that many 1080i-capable TVs are actually 768p (1366x768). Did you catch that? Not 720p, not 1080i ... they are 768p. They accept a 1080i signal, and downscale it to 768p. My 1080i TV is like that, and many of them are. You're not actually getting full 1080i. you're getting 1366x768 downscaled from 1920x1080. That's not a whole lot of difference from straight 720p, and it's why they often appear the same to most people.

On my TV, I can see a difference between even 1080i and 720p because my set's resolution is 1366x768, and I know what to look for. Again, the 1080i signal (resolution of 1920x1080) is actually downscaled to 1366x768. If I feed it a 720p signal, it has to upscale the image a little bit to 1366x768, and I do notice a slight difference in detail. How much? Enough to make me stick at 1080i -- but remember, there is another level of TV processing involved to make it fit my screen's 1366x768 resolution. Those who have a native 720p TV don't have that extra level of processing to deal with, and might see a slightly better picture.

The details are very slight, but it does "feel" different to me to be at 1080i as well. Show me both in a blind test, and I'll pick out 1080i every time. I can see the difference in very small things, such as the edges of clouds on the Earth shots on Planet Earth, the people's hands/arms/fingers in Nine Inch Nails: Beside You in Time, and when looking at the tiny cellphone numbers on the screen of Bond's cellphone in Casino Royale.

The thing that makes people fight/argue over which looks better is that different sets from different manufacturers impliment different types of scaling, and at varying levels of success. It can vary from set to set... manufacturer to manufacturer. One guy's TV might do a better job of scaling at 720p, compared to another guy's that does better processing 1080i. It's a crapshoot.

There are also issues with processing and abilities over HDMI. I have an LG 50" Plasma. Without a doubt, my LG Plasma looks heaps better over Component than it does over HDMI. Why? Because LG doesn't process-out the banding/false countouring over HDMI (that is my theory). The image over HDMI looks worse, actually, on my LG TV. I have a feeling that LG hasn't perfected HDMI yet. My 1080p LG LCD had HDMI handshaking issues with my PS3 too, and I would have to sometimes turn it on and off to get an image.

I have heard some Toshiba owners say their PDPs look better over component, too. So I go with component.

So how much does this matter when comparing 1080p and 720p? Well, to be honest, I would go with 1080p any day. You can see more detail, but it's always on small details. The differences at 42" are too small to be concerned with, IMHO. At 50" and above, then 1080p should be your purchase, if prices are within a few hundred dollars. There is also the issue that some 1080p TVs will allow for 24fps display, which can help reduce judder. That is another caveat which 720p, and even 1080i don't offer, but is another whole thread to argue over.

"Any reviewer that didn't rail against this [Young Guns Blu-ray encode] should be sued, and Lionsgate should be ashamed of themselves. " - msgohan
Baccusboy is offline  
post #7 of 105 Old 06-18-2007, 06:10 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
regular guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sao Paulo, Brazil
Posts: 190
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks baccusboy.

In a nutshell, 42inch, save the $$$ and go with 720p. Perhaps buy a kick a$$ model, older model.

Bigger than 42inch, say 50, bite the bullet and go 1080p.
regular guy is offline  
post #8 of 105 Old 06-18-2007, 07:00 PM
adb
AVS Special Member
 
adb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: central texas
Posts: 2,640
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Personally I can't tell a great deal of difference.
adb is offline  
post #9 of 105 Old 06-18-2007, 07:02 PM
Member
 
junior LA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 187
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by regular guy View Post

Thanks baccusboy.

In a nutshell, 42inch, save the $$$ and go with 720p. Perhaps buy a kick a$$ model, older model.

Bigger than 42inch, say 50, bite the bullet and go 1080p.

I'm not sure that your eyes will be able to discern the difference between a 720/768p and 1080p resolution at distances in excess of 9 feet, even on a 50" panel. There's a thread on this somewhere.

Then you're trapped in your lovely nest, and the things you used to own, now they own you.
~Chuck Palahniuk, Fight Club
junior LA is offline  
post #10 of 105 Old 06-18-2007, 07:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
creemail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,087
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Read my signature below. These are listed from most important to least important in terms of picture quality. Again it goes back to what you watch. For everyday HD 720p will be more than enough. dmaul1114 mentioned seating position. That will factor into getting 1080p. Lastly are you connecting a PC and Blu-Ray player. You said that you will occasionally watch Blu-ray discs from your PS3. Again if you don't have a large collection of Blu-Ray discs, 720p will be the best option. Save the money and go 720p for right now.

Chris
MountAVision.com
creemail is offline  
post #11 of 105 Old 06-18-2007, 07:26 PM
Advanced Member
 
someguyinhb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Orange County
Posts: 572
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I've come to the conclusion that most people who have the 1080p sets claim they can see a difference...as where most people with the 768p sets claim they don't notice much of a difference (if any) at all. One of the things thats drawing me to the 1080p sets is that in a few years when 1080p becomes standard and when the cable/satelite companies use the 1080p feed, I don't want to feel left out. Some may buy a new set by the time that happens, but I plan on using mine for at least the next decade.

I went to a fight the other night and a hockey game broke out.
someguyinhb is offline  
post #12 of 105 Old 06-19-2007, 07:52 AM
Newbie
 
psxnation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
ive been considering the toshiba regza models which are 720p native but accept a 1080p input. Is there really a benefit there to having the tv accept the 1080p signal which will be downscaled? im mainly concerned with it accepting my playstation 3's 1080p signal or would i pretty much get the same quality picture off other lcd's just sending a 720p signal?

brian
psxnation is offline  
post #13 of 105 Old 06-19-2007, 08:35 AM
Senior Member
 
Zinthar's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 303
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by someguyinhb View Post

I've come to the conclusion that most people who have the 1080p sets claim they can see a difference...as where most people with the 768p sets claim they don't notice much of a difference (if any) at all. One of the things thats drawing me to the 1080p sets is that in a few years when 1080p becomes standard and when the cable/satelite companies use the 1080p feed, I don't want to feel left out. Some may buy a new set by the time that happens, but I plan on using mine for at least the next decade.

That really wouldn't matter if you're not sitting close enough to the TV to notice the difference...
Zinthar is offline  
post #14 of 105 Old 06-19-2007, 10:16 AM
Senior Member
 
nmcnair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 227
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
http://www.carltonbale.com/wp-conten...tion_chart.png

Its simple. Take the TV size versus the distance you will sit from it and figure out if you will notice a difference in different resolutions.

A 42" screen at your distance would be stupid to get a 1080p set. At 50", you are right on the boarder between 720p and 1080p. You might tell a difference between the two, but it wont be huge. Its up to you if a slight improvement is worth the extra money. I cant answer that for you.

Im in the boat where at 42" I am right where I want to be for a 720p set.. at 50" I have to have a 1080p set...
nmcnair is offline  
post #15 of 105 Old 06-19-2007, 11:39 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mkoesel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Canton, MI
Posts: 2,343
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
mkoesel is offline  
post #16 of 105 Old 06-19-2007, 12:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
PhilipsPhanatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Rockland County, NY
Posts: 3,027
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Liked: 16
60" set or approximate....12-14' viewing distance...any improvement with 1080p vs. 720p plasma?

BTW, even if you have the 1080p plasma, who's broadcasting in 1080p that it would make a difference? Are the only 1080p sources right now Blu-Ray DVD and PS3 ???
PhilipsPhanatic is offline  
post #17 of 105 Old 06-19-2007, 12:30 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mkoesel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Canton, MI
Posts: 2,343
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilipsPhanatic View Post

Are the only 1080p sources right now Blu-Ray DVD and PS3 ???

In short, no.

Above thread explains all of this and more.
mkoesel is offline  
post #18 of 105 Old 06-19-2007, 01:13 PM
Member
 
msmith198025's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 161
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by someguyinhb View Post

I've come to the conclusion that most people who have the 1080p sets claim they can see a difference...as where most people with the 768p sets claim they don't notice much of a difference (if any) at all. One of the things thats drawing me to the 1080p sets is that in a few years when 1080p becomes standard and when the cable/satelite companies use the 1080p feed, I don't want to feel left out. Some may buy a new set by the time that happens, but I plan on using mine for at least the next decade.


The general consensus is that 1080p will never become the broadcast "standard". To much money tied up into getting it to where it is now, so why spend tons more for a small and sometimes unoticable increase?
msmith198025 is offline  
post #19 of 105 Old 06-19-2007, 01:27 PM
Advanced Member
 
someguyinhb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Orange County
Posts: 572
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by msmith198025 View Post

why spend tons more for a small and sometimes unoticable increase?

I've come to that same conclusion. Unless your viewing your set from a very close distance, 1080p is all but wasted. If you have the luxury of sitting close to your set and have a 1080p, more power to you.

I went to a fight the other night and a hockey game broke out.
someguyinhb is offline  
post #20 of 105 Old 06-21-2007, 09:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dahlsim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,992
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by creemail View Post

Read my signature below. These are listed from most important to least important in terms of picture quality. Again it goes back to what you watch. For everyday HD 720p will be more than enough. dmaul1114 mentioned seating position. That will factor into getting 1080p. Lastly are you connecting a PC and Blu-Ray player. You said that you will occasionally watch Blu-ray discs from your PS3. Again if you don't have a large collection of Blu-Ray discs, 720p will be the best option. Save the money and go 720p for right now.

Chris
MountAVision.com

Your sig says it well and many experts agree. The industry markets resolution 1st because it's easily expressed as a number. 1080 > 720 and p > i People get that, even if it doesn't relect the reality of what their eyes see.

Quote:


Good Picture Quality Attributes
1. Contrast Ratio
2. Color Saturation
3. Color Accuracy
4. Resolution

I can see a slight difference in 1080 vs 720 btw, a slight difference in 'smoothness' of the image from the extra pixel density. Some 720p sets blow away some 1080p sets though.

Family DVD Collection
Insider thread last question? R.I.P.
Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must first be overcome.
Samuel Johnson 1709-1784, British Author
Dahlsim is offline  
post #21 of 105 Old 06-21-2007, 10:22 PM
Advanced Member
 
someguyinhb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Orange County
Posts: 572
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dahlsim View Post


I can see a slight difference in 1080 vs 720 btw, a slight difference in 'smoothness' of the image from the extra pixel density. Some 720p sets blow away some 1080p sets though.

Can you see the difference outside the benefit of the 1080p viewing distance?

I went to a fight the other night and a hockey game broke out.
someguyinhb is offline  
post #22 of 105 Old 06-21-2007, 10:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dahlsim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,992
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by someguyinhb View Post

Can you see the difference outside the benefit of the 1080p viewing distance?

Well if I understand your question I'd say the benefit of more resolution is based on how big the image will be in your field of vision. At a certain distance there will be basically no difference.

I have some pretty large screens but I also have 37" 1080 Mits LCD that I like to sit very close to sometimes to see the detail up and close and for that I'm glad to get the 1080 resolution.

Family DVD Collection
Insider thread last question? R.I.P.
Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must first be overcome.
Samuel Johnson 1709-1784, British Author
Dahlsim is offline  
post #23 of 105 Old 06-22-2007, 12:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Baccusboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,186
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by junior LA View Post

I'm not sure that your eyes will be able to discern the difference between a 720/768p and 1080p resolution at distances in excess of 9 feet, even on a 50" panel. There's a thread on this somewhere.

It depends on a person's vision, and their adaptive ability to notice details in objects. We don't all see the same, and we're talking about some very fine details here.

I sit 10 feet away from my 50" 1080i -capable 1366x768 resolution set (768p). I also used to sit the same distance from my 42" LCD which was full HD 1080p at 1920x1080. I can see differences between the two, because I specifically memorized some details in a few shots, and could make comparisons based on memory. Is the difference worth the bother? It depends a lot on the person, and what you're watching.

On things like Nine Inch Nails: Beside You In Time, I found the 1080p 42" LCD seemed much more "lifelike" and detailed, as if I were there watching live. The image was much sharper, and I could see more detail in the crowd -- their fingers, phones, etc. It was shot in video, and LCD at that resolution really makes it seem lifelike. On my 768p 50" it looks more like a TV show or a movie, but it's bigger, and has a different feeling all its own. Not bad -- just different. Part of that is because of the differences in Plasma vs. LCD technology. Another part is the resolution. I prefer different aspects of both.

If I were to go with anything tomorrow, I'd try to get a 50"+ Plasma at 1080p. That would be sweet. The last 2 LCDs I owned had clouding problems and uneven blacks, which drove me absolutely insane.

If you mostly watch movies shot on film, then the difference is not worth worrying about at 50" or less. In this case, definitely go 1080i. Why? Because I found, if anything, that having a 1080p set actually increased the detail on one thing I'd rather not see a lot of on film: GRAIN. Yes, film grain detail is more noticeable at 1080p. That extra resolution really brings out every detail in the grain. Honestly, I prefer having 1080i and not seeing all of the grain details showing all of the time. LCD's and the way they do contrast also seem to make grain pop more than a Plasma, IMHO.

If you mostly watch high-def video/sports, instead of film, then go 1080p LCD. For some reason I can't explain, there is a dramatic improvement in video compared to film when viewing 1080p over 720p or 768p. But here's the kicker: I find that standard def looks so much better on my Plasma than it did on my LCD. Strange we can't have the best of all worlds in one set (not yet).

Again, I would say that 50" is the limit at which I'd bother to change from 1080i to 1080p. I get by fine with this 768p (1366x768) 50" TV, but I sometimes wish it were a 1080p. Other times, when lots of grain is in a movie, I'm glad it's not. Does that make sense?

I don't find 1080p essential at a 10' viewing distance, but I would at 5' though. If my screen were larger than that, then I'd certainly go 1080p (but at the moment, that's some big $$$$ to do so).

"Any reviewer that didn't rail against this [Young Guns Blu-ray encode] should be sued, and Lionsgate should be ashamed of themselves. " - msgohan
Baccusboy is offline  
post #24 of 105 Old 06-22-2007, 12:51 AM
Advanced Member
 
someguyinhb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Orange County
Posts: 572
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baccusboy View Post

I sit 10 feet away from my 50" 1080i -capable 1366x768 resolution set (768p). I also used to sit the same distance from my 42" LCD which was full HD 1080p at 1920x1080. I can see differences between the two, because I specifically memorized some details in a few shots. Is the difference worth the bother? It depends.

On things like Nine Inch Nails: Beside You In Time, I found the 1080p 42" LCD seemed much more "lifelike" and detailed, as if I were there watching live. The image was much sharper, and I could see more detail in the crowd -- their fingers, phones, etc. It was shot in video, and LCD at that resolution really makes it seem lifelike. On my 768p 50" it looks more like a TV show or a movie, but it's bigger, and has a different feeling all its own. Not bad -- just different. Part of that is because of the differences in Plasma vs. LCD technology. Another part is the resolution. I prefer different aspects of both.

If I were to go with anything tomorrow, I'd try to get a 50"+ Plasma at 1080p. That would be sweet. The last 2 LCDs I owned had clouding problems and uneven blacks, which drove me absolutely insane.

If you mostly watch movies shot on film, then the difference is not worth worrying about at 50" or less. In this case, definitely go 1080i. Why? Because I found, if anything, that having a 1080p set actually increased the detail on one thing I'd rather not see a lot of on film: GRAIN. Yes, film grain detail is more noticeable at 1080p. That extra resolution really brings out every detail in the grain. Honestly, I prefer having 1080i and not seeing all of the grain details showing all of the time. LCD's and the way they do contrast also seem to make grain pop more than a Plasma, IMHO.

If you mostly watch high-def video/sports, instead of film, then go 1080p LCD. For some reason I can't explain, there is a dramatic improvement in video compared to film when viewing 1080p over 720p or 768p. But here's the kicker: I find that standard def looks so much better on my Plasma than it did on my LCD. Strange we can't have the best of all worlds in one set (not yet).

Again, I would say that 50" is the limit at which I'd bother to change from 1080i to 1080p. I get by fine with this 768p (1366x768) 50" TV, but I sometimes wish it were a 1080p. Other times, when lots of grain is in a movie, I'm glad it's not. Does that make sense?

I don't find 1080p essential at a 10' viewing distance, but I would at 5' though. If my screen were larger than that, then I'd certainly go 1080p (but at the moment, that's some big $$$$ to do so).

Well at 10 feet, you are missing the extra detail 1080i/1080p provides on a 42" LCD. Perhaps it looks better due to other factors. Which one of these sets is newer in technology?

I went to a fight the other night and a hockey game broke out.
someguyinhb is offline  
post #25 of 105 Old 06-22-2007, 01:07 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Baccusboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,186
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The 42" LCD was actually a bit newer in technology. The way I came about "downgrading" from a 42" Full HD 1080p LCD to a 1080i Plasma is sort of backwards.

I had multiple problems (mostly clouding issues) with the 42" 1080p LCD. 2 new TVs didn't fix this, so they let me pick out a similar-priced plasma. Plasmas don't suffer from the clouding issues so much. Because 1080p plasmas were/are difficult to get (and much more expensive) I ended up just going with a bigger 50" TV that is 1080i capable (At the time, I didn't know that 1080i TV's sold today are often 1366x768 in resolution).

This Plasma model I own is sort of a model that's been re-vamped and changed for a year or so. It's got a 15,000 to 1 contrast ratio on it, which is a newer thing (my LCD was 5,000 to 1).

So there are good/bad issues with both.

I prefer the look of the 1080p LCD TV on High-Def video/news/sports programming. The LCD looks more "live" at that resolution than anything.

I prefer the 1080i Plasma on movies and standard def TV. The plasma seems to have a more comfortable "film look" to it.

If budget were no object, I'd say go with a 50"+ 1080p Plasma. But if you're into mostly hi-def sports, news, and the like -- go with an LCD.

"Any reviewer that didn't rail against this [Young Guns Blu-ray encode] should be sued, and Lionsgate should be ashamed of themselves. " - msgohan
Baccusboy is offline  
post #26 of 105 Old 06-22-2007, 01:23 AM
Advanced Member
 
someguyinhb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Orange County
Posts: 572
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baccusboy View Post

The 42" LCD was actually a bit newer in technology. The way I came about "downgrading" from a 42" Full HD 1080p LCD to a 1080i Plasma is sort of backwards.

I had multiple problems (mostly clouding issues) with the 42" 1080p LCD. 2 new TVs didn't fix this, so they let me pick out a similar-priced plasma. Plasmas don't suffer from the clouding issues so much. Because 1080p plasmas were/are difficult to get (and much more expensive) I ended up just going with a bigger 50" TV that is 1080i capable (At the time, I didn't know that 1080i TV's sold today are often 1366x768 in resolution).

This Plasma model I own is sort of a model that's been re-vamped and changed for a year or so. It's got a 15,000 to 1 contrast ratio on it, which is a newer thing (my LCD was 5,000 to 1).

So there are good/bad issues with both.

I prefer the look of the 1080p LCD TV on High-Def video/news/sports programming. The LCD looks more "live" at that resolution than anything.

I prefer the 1080i Plasma on movies and standard def TV. The plasma seems to have a more comfortable "film look" to it.

If budget were no object, I'd say go with a 50"+ 1080p Plasma. But if you're into mostly hi-def sports, news, and the like -- go with an LCD.

Which particular models are the LCD/Plasma?

As for LCD being better for sports, I have to disagree there. I owned the Samsung LNT5265F 1080p (52") LCD. I sat 12 feet from it. It had a beautiful picture, when the picture was STILL. If there was any motion, the motion blur would detoriate the picture. And by any motion, I mean like a head turning, an arm moving slowly, the camera moving at a slow pace. I felt it when there was motion, I wasn't looking into a high def picture. I really had no choice but to send it back.

I also used to own the Samsung LNS4065 1080p (40") LCD. I also sat 12 feet from it. I did not notice nearly as much motion blur on this set. That was because it was significantly smaller in size. The bigger set you buy, the more you notice the pictures strengths and weaknesses. To anyone who buys a set 50" or larger, it should be a plasma, whether its 1080p or not.

I went to a fight the other night and a hockey game broke out.
someguyinhb is offline  
post #27 of 105 Old 06-22-2007, 02:26 AM
 
optivity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,907
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by regular guy View Post

I will be sitting approximately 9-11ft away.

Take it from a guy who is seated ~10' away from his 50" display and go with a 60" 1080p PDP, you'll be glad that you did. Especially after the shrinkage factor sets in... it won't seem that BIG anyway.
optivity is offline  
post #28 of 105 Old 06-22-2007, 02:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Baccusboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,186
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by someguyinhb View Post

Which particular models are the LCD/Plasma?

As for LCD being better for sports, I have to disagree there. I owned the Samsung LNT5265F 1080p (52") LCD. I sat 12 feet from it. It had a beautiful picture, when the picture was STILL. If there was any motion, the motion blur would detoriate the picture. And by any motion, I mean like a head turning, an arm moving slowly, the camera moving at a slow pace. I felt it when there was motion, I wasn't looking into a high def picture. I really had no choice but to send it back.

I also used to own the Samsung LNS4065 1080p (40") LCD. I also sat 12 feet from it. I did not notice nearly as much motion blur on this set. That was because it was significantly smaller in size. The bigger set you buy, the more you notice the pictures strengths and weaknesses. To anyone who buys a set 50" or larger, it should be a plasma, whether its 1080p or not.

I never owned an LCD larger than 42", so I can't comment, but I can say that I am enjoying the plasma better for movie watching.

I'm still saying that a 50"+ 1080p Plasma would be the way to go, if you can afford it!

"Any reviewer that didn't rail against this [Young Guns Blu-ray encode] should be sued, and Lionsgate should be ashamed of themselves. " - msgohan
Baccusboy is offline  
post #29 of 105 Old 06-22-2007, 06:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
6SpeedTA95's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Tulsa area
Posts: 2,320
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baccusboy View Post

The 42" LCD was actually a bit newer in technology. The way I came about "downgrading" from a 42" Full HD 1080p LCD to a 1080i Plasma is sort of backwards.

I had multiple problems (mostly clouding issues) with the 42" 1080p LCD. 2 new TVs didn't fix this, so they let me pick out a similar-priced plasma. Plasmas don't suffer from the clouding issues so much. Because 1080p plasmas were/are difficult to get (and much more expensive) I ended up just going with a bigger 50" TV that is 1080i capable (At the time, I didn't know that 1080i TV's sold today are often 1366x768 in resolution).

This Plasma model I own is sort of a model that's been re-vamped and changed for a year or so. It's got a 15,000 to 1 contrast ratio on it, which is a newer thing (my LCD was 5,000 to 1).

So there are good/bad issues with both.

I prefer the look of the 1080p LCD TV on High-Def video/news/sports programming. The LCD looks more "live" at that resolution than anything.

I prefer the 1080i Plasma on movies and standard def TV. The plasma seems to have a more comfortable "film look" to it.

If budget were no object, I'd say go with a 50"+ 1080p Plasma. But if you're into mostly hi-def sports, news, and the like -- go with an LCD.

You're seeing something other than resolution. On a 42 inch tv even with 20/10 vision the human eye can not resolve all of the detail of 1080p at 9 feet much less 12 feet.

If you're displaying 1080p content or 1080i content I would chalk it up to the scaler in the tv. Put some 720/768 content on both tv's and the plasma would probably win (assuming its not some cheap visio plasma).
6SpeedTA95 is offline  
post #30 of 105 Old 06-22-2007, 06:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ssabripo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Plantation, Floriduh
Posts: 6,008
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95 View Post

You're seeing something other than resolution. On a 42 inch tv even with 20/10 vision the human eye can not resolve all of the detail of 1080p at 9 feet much less 12 feet.

If you're displaying 1080p content or 1080i content I would chalk it up to the scaler in the tv. Put some 720/768 content on both tv's and the plasma would probably win (assuming its not some cheap visio plasma).

:hay:
ssabripo is offline  
Closed Thread Plasma Flat Panel Displays

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off