Originally Posted by J.Mike Ferrara
Have you seen the review in latest issue of Sound & Vision. They really give the set bad marks and speak specifically about the problems with artifacts on all source except Blu-ray.
Haven't read it yet. Still waiting for it to show up on-line. I do generally enjoy and agree with most of their reviews. I find them quite neutral and accurate most of the time. Been reading S&V and its predecessor Stereo Review for too many decades to count. Julian HIrsch was my favorite reviewer. RIP. Told it like it was.
RE: artifacts. Yes, my Sharp 80-632U definitely shows them when the cable provider broadcasts them. But.............so did my previous LCD sets. I've mentioned before that I don't think Sharp's motion enhancements are very good so I tend to leave them turned off, although the 24 FPS judder doesn't agree with my either.
It's not just Blu-Rays that look great. National Geographics Wild (a new channel Shaw broadcasts) is done in Mpeg 4 and even with the wildest and quickest motion, there are no obvious artifacts - typical for MPEG4. My own backup video files (X264) also look uniformly EXCELLENT with no noticeable artifacts or noise (unless in original file).
I've been cursing MPEG2 since the early days of NERO when I was re-encoding DVD's. You couldn't get away with anything. It fell apart so bloody fast. On the other hand, I've actually seen 1080P 2 Hr. movies shrunk down to an unbelievable 2GB using X264 and they looked very very good! I would say that H.264 is somewhere between 5 to 10 times more efficient than MPEG2 and most certainly falls apart much more gracefully than MPEG2.
Last thought - If you have the film mode turned on, you will see occasional noisy distortion around an object in motion and how it interacts with the background (Yes - even with Blu-Rays!) in 24fps presentations.