[Dark-007]

I'm racking my brain, since the prices are finally starting to drop.


I can get the 32" Samsung TXM3281HF at CostCo for $799, or the Samsung TXM3097WHF at Sears for $899.


32" Pros:


Larger 4:3 picture

Converts 720p to 1080i


Cons:


Heavier

5% less 16:9 viewing area

Not Future-proof



30" Pros:


Aesthetic Appeal

Lighter weight

5% larger 16:9 viewing area

16:9 aspect ratio for HDTV


Cons:


Much smaller 4:3 viewing area

480p 4:3 games are stretched to Wide

No conversion of 720p to 1080i



So, thoughts?

 

[MisterMe]

Go with the 16:9 set.


I play a gamecube all the time on a 16:9 set and play it in wide mode. you get used to the 'stretched' look very quickly. There are also a number of games on the Gamecube that have 16:9 options.


J

 

[Segaboy]

Go widescreen!!! You will not regret it when the follow-up to the GameCube comes out in two years and ALL games are 16:9.

 

[Dark-007]

Well, size is an issue as well.


What about split-screen games? Don't you think the 30" is a little small?

 

[Wakey]

Is your TV for gaming only?


If you are going to use it for TV as well, I'd go for the 4:3 TV. In a few years a larger, higher quality widescreen TV will be had for the same money. I have (2 years) a 53" 4:3 HDTV & don't regret it to this day. I use my TV 90% of the time in 4:3 mode so it makes sense for me. I'll upgrade to 16:9 in a year depending on how much widescreen is available by then.

 

[Dark-007]

It's for everything. I game and watch TV more than I watch DVD's. I plan on getting HDTV within the next year, but so many of my games are 480p progressive scan, that I'd hate to stretch them.


I think I'm going to end up with the 32" ever since Mario Kart for GameCube was announced. I can't imagine 4-player split screen on a 30" 16:9.


Besides, the 32" is almost as big as the 30"


But still, I like to hear more opinions, especially from GameCube owners who game on 16:9 sets.


Thanks.

 

[Wakey]

Quote:

Originally posted by Dark-007 I think I'm going to end up with the 32" ever since Mario Kart for GameCube was announced. I can't imagine 4-player split screen on a 30" 16:9

That is the first I have heard about Mario Kart!

 

[Dark-007]

It will support 8-player LANas well.

 

[stovetop]

I play my gamecube on a 53" 16:9 tv.

Stretched is fine.


Nintendo's first party titles have not supported 16:9, with the exception of Star Fox. Being that it's a videogame though, it doesn't really matter when it's based on fictional disproportionate characters anyway.


I would definately go with the 16:9 TV, but without the 720p support, I might just wait till I could afford a 16:9 one with it.


Here are Mario Kart pics
http://www.the-magicbox.com/game042303c.htm

 

[Dylan]

I have no idea why everyone is recommending the 16:9. I think the 4:3 is a better choice assuming equal picture quality and assuming the 4:3 set has anamorphic squeeze for showing 16:9 content without losing resolution. The 16:9 image size is almost the same but the 4:3 image is much larger for the huge amount of game and TV content that is still 4:3.


And I think stretched mode sucks. If it's a linear stretch then everything is short and fat. If it's a non-linear stretch then they're still somewhat short and fat and the speed of objects changes as they move from the center towards the side of the screen.


-Dylan

 

[Jakes]

Quote:

Originally posted by Dylan I have no idea why everyone is recommending the 16:9. I think the 4:3 is a better choice assuming equal picture quality and assuming the 4:3 set has anamorphic squeeze for showing 16:9 content without losing resolution. The 16:9 image size is almost the same but the 4:3 image is much larger for the huge amount of game and TV content that is still 4:3. And I think stretched mode sucks. If it's a linear stretch then everything is short and fat. If it's a non-linear stretch then they're still somewhat short and fat and the speed of objects changes as they move from the center towards the side of the screen. -Dylan

I agree with everything Dylan said. Assuming your facts are correct, you'd be foolish to get the 16:9 set in this instance. The 4:3 is cheaper, has a much larger 4:3 viewing area (which most games are), has a very comparable 16:9 veiwing area, converts 720p to 1,080i (which is a big plus if you get an XBox in the future), and stretching is terrible IMO. I never understood how people could buy HDTV sets, saying they are very into picture quality, and then turn around and stretch images? OAR, ALWAYS!


BTW, why do you think a 4:3 HDTV isn't future proof? All TV will be digital in the future, but all TV will not be HDTV and 16:9.

 

[stovetop]

"I never understood how people could buy HDTV sets, saying they are very into picture quality, and then turn around and stretch images? OAR, ALWAYS! "


I have a Rear-Projection TV, which is why I stretch 4:3, if I could keep the vertical bars up without risk of uneven aging, then I would.


Here is the argument between two people with HD sets:


"I have a 4:3 HDTV set so I can watch SD material fullscreen! But I have a reduced HD picture."

"I have a 16:9 HDTV set so I can watch HD material fullscreen! But I have a reduced SD picture."


Who is losing what here? The 16:9 guys is either streching or putting vertical bars on SD material. Great.. so the crap 480i signal still looks like.. well... crap. What's the problem here? It still looks like crap on the 4:3 HDTV fullscreen.

 

[Jakes]

stovetop, I understand the argument between the two camps very well. However, IN THIS SPECIFIC INSTANCE, I believe the smart money is on the 32" for the above-mentioned reasons. Do you disagree?

 

[Dark-007]

Now, I'm beggining to lean towards the 30"


The games stretched really don't look that bad, and I do like the idea of playing my 16:9 games full-screen, without letter-boxing...

 

[fireshoes]

I'd lean toward 16:9 but wouldn't get the Samsung. I know it's cheap, but it's also cheap! PQ leaves a lot to be desired.

 

[Dark-007]

Uh, I don't think so.


These newer models are excellent. and when you know the ins and outs of the service menu, I can acheive a picture as good or better than most any other tube in the market.

 

[Lee L]

Dark, what parts of the SM can you tweak on the 3097? I have been toying with getting one as well and the sets from that line I have seen had what best can be descibed as a pitiful power supply that allows the image to expand and shrink by as much as an inch depending on average picture level. That might be reduceable by adjusting contrast and maybe some SM parameters but it is hard to make up for a poorly designed PS. I still might get one though, where is some good info about the SM on that set?

 

[Dark-007]

You can adjust the deflection, Gamma, Color drives, Velocity Scan Modulation, PiP, Hue, Black level retention, pretty much everything in the Service Menu.


Head over to ***************.com and the Samsung Forums to get the codes for the Service Menu and more advice.

 

[Lee L]

Thanks. After I posted I went to the SPot and instead of just blindly going to the Mits and a couple fo other forums, I did check out the Samsung forum there and there is a bunch of good info just as in the Mits forum.


Incidentally, and at the risk of sounding like a broken record here, have you noticed the bounce problem I am talking about or have I just seen a couple of bad sets?

 

[Dark-007]

Yes, I noticed the bounce problem. I think it is something I can correct in the SM with either Gamma or contrast. I'll let you know more when I buy one of the sets.