[shadowspawn]

Hi there,


If anyone feels so kindly, I'd really appreciate some advice about choice of 42" versus 50" for plasma. I've read the FAQ, I tried searching several ways (without much success), and I've paged back quite a few pages through old posts, but haven't seen anything that really helps me make a decision.


I suspect that I might actually be in a 42" situation, but I'm trying hard to rationalize a 50" purchase, so some hard-nosed advice would be helpful to me.


The setup of the room is such that the "preferred" seating is about 12' from the wall that the TV will be mounted to (which is not necessarily 12' from the TV, depending on how the mount works). We watch probably 80% DVD's and about 20% non-digital cable programming; digital cable is available here, but I've never been strongly motivated to get it with our 32" CRT TV. I have an open mind about upgrading to digital cable or satellite, but DVD is the REAL passion for TV quality in this house.


We're the sort of people who sit about 2/3 of the way back in theaters. We don't like to have to look around to see the whole picture, and we hate the visible artifacts we see and the unnatural "in your face" sensation that we get when we sit too close.


However, we REALLY want an "immersive" TV experience with a plasma TV, especially when watching DVDs.


I'm considering both Fujitsu and Panny models, in 42" and 50".


Given all the above, and just the above, would you recommend a 42" or a 50" plasma TV for our situation?


Now, to complicate things slightly.... The couch is "L-shaped", so there are an additional couple of viewing positions that are 8' - 9' from the wall that will hold the TV, and are at a slight angle. If I bought a 50" plasma TV, would these seats 8' - 9' from the wall be un-usable or unpleasant for the people sitting there?


Should I really be planning to get a 42" TV, perhaps with an articulated wall mount that will let it swivel out into the room to get it closer to the 12' seats?


Or can you help me rationalize a 50" TV for this situation?


Thanks in advance for your hard-nosed comments -- I want a reality check if I need one....

 

[elRey]

I was sold on a 50". Our view distance is 8' (nearest) - 14'. Most viewing

will probably be at 11'. I also wanted to be able to see it from the

kitchen/breafast room which is directly behind about 21'.

Then I realized we watch 85% - 90% DVD's and the rest OTA DTV and

whatever shows are broadcast in HD. Then consider what resolution

DVD's are (currently 480) and the resolutions of the panels.

~768 for 50" and ~480 for 42" (with exceptions of course)

A DVD image has to be scaled up (stretched) to fit the 50".

You know what happens to a digital image when it is scaled up.


Eveytime I went out to view plasmas I loved the PQ on most of them.

But they always had a HD feed. Of course the 50" looked great.


Then I set out to view DVD source on all the panels. BIG difference.

IMHO DVD look terrible on most of the 50"s I saw, which were:


Pio 5030HD

Pio Pro1000 Elite (roughly 503CMX)

Sony KE50XBR900

Philips 50FD9955

Fujitsu P50XHA10US

Panny PT-50PHD4-P (I believe)


Now MOST were terrible.

the Fujitsu was alright.

And the Panny 50" was the best (again IMHO)


I spend about 30 min looking at the Panny 50" and 42" EDTV

next to each other on the same DVD feed trying to convince

myself of the 50". It was close. But the difference in PQ and

price swayed me to the 42". I just couldn't get past the evidence

of the upscaling. Again, the Panny 50" did the best job doing so.


Looking at my long post, I'll get to the point.

I went with what was the closest to DVD resolution a 42" non-HD

b/c we watch DVD's like crazy. And any feed higher than 480 will be

scaled down which to me is way better than being scaled up.


Rey

 

[Pardalis]

Faced the same choice and made the same decision. It was between the Fujitsu 50" HD and the Panny 42" ED (the Panny 50" HD was not in the running because of the lack of HDCP; if I was going to spend that much money I wanted the DVI connection, etc. for peace of mind). Ultimately, 80%+ of my viewing is DVDs and the rest is SD television with the odd HD program (which on Time Warner is 1080i anyway). With DVD, the 42" Panny ED was the smoothest looking picture. I miss the extra viewing area (I am scaling down from a 60" RPTV), but until there is a better quality source out there, I couldn't justify the money for the little HD programing available today. By the time the content catches up to today's display technology, I figure I will be able to buy a 1080p screen for less than the Fujitsu would cost me today.


Content is everything -- that is why I still have my record collection and recently spent $11,000 to upgrade my turntable. It will be a long time before the 1950's EMI's are re-released on SACD

 

[shadowspawn]

Thanks so much. A little light bulb already turned on, which I think is telling me that I am focusing to much on just one end (the TV end), and not enough on the source end. And perhaps my preferred sources don't justify a 50" HD TV.


Put another way, the 50" unit would have more of the immersive experience that we seek, but we'd be immersed in something contaminated by scaling artifacts? (Although Fujitsu does have really good scaling....).


What does anyone who owns a 50" TV think?

 

[jflegert]

elRay,


I believe you made the correct decision. You picked the TV that looked best to you and made the most sense for your viewing habits.


That being said, I think you are making two much out of the scaling. I have a 43" 1024x768 plasma and DVDs look great. As far as your statement "And any feed higher than 480 will be scaled down which to me is way better than being scaled up" doesn't make sense to me; If you are "scaling down" you are losing information, if you are scaling up, you do not lose information. When you watch a DVD on an ED plasma, does the scaling bother you?


I would have to take exception with your statement that "now MOST were terrible". I had the exact same experience as you when I looked at 95% of the plasmas in the stores (it didn't matter what brand they were). But if you look at most people's opinions on this, they would chalk it up to a bad setup, and I would definitly agree with this.


I would say the only down side to 50" over 42" is that at the same viewing distance, the 50" will show more imperfections because it is bigger.

 

[DonBerg]

With the Fujitsu 50" you won't have scaling artifacts - it has the best internal scaler on the market! At beyond 9feet - you need the 50" plasma.

 

[Sunnyman]

Go to the stores with a tape measure and see what looks best. When I did this, I found that 8' was best for the 42" screen and about 12' for the 50". Any closer and you start to see too much detail.

 

[elRey]

jflegert


Correct, when an image is scaled down detail (information) is lost. Same thing happens when you increase the view distance. Your eyes cannot pickup the smaller detail, hence the detail is lost. But this is only an issue for HD content, which he does not currently view. So no loss. Correct again, when scaling up detail is NOT lost. That's not the problem. It's when artifacts are added during scaling up that bug me with 50"s + DVD's. The panel's scaler has to fill all the pixels beyond a DVD's 480 with information. How good that scaler is results in the PQ differences between most 50"'s and the fujitsu and panny 50".


ALL 50" so far show scaling artifacts including the fujitsu. I stared at them myself. However, I didn't veiw it from the correct viewing distance (i'm guessing 12'+). I was about 6' out. The others I did view correctly and the artifacts were still very apparent.


Again, only the panny required me to oncentrate in order to see

the artifacts.


For the set-up issue, I had every panel set to the correct aspect/zoom

setting. Beyond that, there's no effect on scaling, which is the issue here.


So to recap. Have scaling issue with 100% of his viewing - 50"

Or NO scaling with 70% of his viewing (80% - occasional 2.35:1 DVD) - 42" (480)


Like others said, go view the panels at your viewing distance with few DVD's in hand.


Rey

 

[elRey]

Get the 50" and this little puppy

Faroudja NRS-DCS


and have the best of both worlds (I'm assuming since I have not witness

this combo)


Rey

 

[shadowspawn]

I came here looking for some wise advice, and I feel like I've found it.


I did try all the usual stuff (like taking a tape measure to the store and looking at TV's), but this was not helpful for a couple of reasons: the store did not accurately reproduce my environment, and the store sources did not accurately reproduce my sources.


I really do need to sleep on this (for a week or two) to make a wise decision, but the feedback I've gotten so far really made some things click in my head that had not clicked before. Hearing someone else's experience and advice sort of cleared my thinking.


If I had to decide tomorrow, this is what I think:


1. My room setup is right on the edge between 42" and 50".

2. My sources are kind of sucky (480 I/P DVD and cable TV).

3. Even if I upgrade to digital cable and HDTV tuner, there's not a lot of programming available yet.

4. The 42" is more forgiving of my sucky sources.

5. The 50" is more punishing to my sucky sources.

6. The Panasonic ED unit does a "decent" visual job with higher res material.


Given these things, if I had to decide tomorrow, I'd


1. Get the Panasonic 42" ED unit (not the HD), and use it to really enjoy my sources for a few years.


2. Get an articulated wall mount that would allow the plasma screen to swing out 24" - 28" into the room, or be flush against the wall, to adapt to the seating positions and the source material, and make the room "smaller" or "larger" as needed.


3. Revel in the fact that I bought something at the lower end of the price scale, and so saved a lot of money.


4. In a few years, when better sources and programming are readily available, and plasma technology is probably a whole lot cheaper, get a much bigger unit with much higher resolution.


5. Enjoy life in the meantime.


Does anything seem unwise to anyone about this course of action?

 

[john doran]

man, i must be lucky enough not to have any idea what "scaling artifacts" are, 'cos i certainly can't see anything wrong with the PQ on my fujitsu P50, even if i concentrate on the image. i sit about 11 feet away and it really feels like i'm looking through a window...


must be one of those things that once you've been made aware of it that's all you can see.


anyway. if you see them, you see them, i guess...


- jd


ps. don't tell me what to look for, either. that's all i'd need - to see "scaling artifacts" everywhere i looked ...

 

[jflegert]

Quote:

Originally posted by elRey ... So to recap. Have scaling issue with 100% of his viewing - 50" Or NO scaling with 70% of his viewing (80% - occasional 2.35:1 DVD) - 42" (480) ...

Well, since the original viewer said 80% DVD and 20% non digital, I believe scaling would be involved 100% of the time. The only time no scaling would be involved is if the plasma was fed it's native resolution.


Also,

Quote:

Correct, when an image is scaled down detail (information) is lost. Same thing happens when you increase the view distance. Your eyes cannot pickup the smaller detail, hence the detail is lost.

I don't mean to nitpick, but I would disagree with the statement "Same thing happens when you increase the view distance.". They may produce a similar effect, but they are very different.

 

[ransome]

It is real simple,if you can afford a 50 get one.The extra real estate is well worth the price.I originally bought a 42",took it back, bought a 50' and have never regretted my choice.

Did the 42" have a better picture,slightly yes.But so what.The 50" looks great on my wall.I would get a 60 inch if I could swing it.

You could make an argument that a 37" has a better picture than some 42" sets.How small are you willing to go to get a perfect picture,my friend has a panny 34" HD direct view tube and it has a fabulous picture,will I trade in my 50" plasma to enjoy the better picture...no.

Ask the people who have larger plasma,almost no one would go smaller.

 

[BruZZi]

If you have the money get the 50".


Eight feet is not too close for 50" Display IMO

Twelve feet is too far for a 42" Display IMO.

 

[mbpg]

shadowspawn


You really need to sit down in front of a 42" for an hour or so at the intended distance and watch something you would most likely be seeing at home. If you can't do that in a store, try a friend's house. It even doesn't matter if you can't hear -- just see. That will confirm whether 42" is big enough or not.


This discussion is too abstract -- the only thing that matters is how you feel at that distance. This is even more critical given your requirement for "immersion".


Michael

 

[djs]

Quote:

Originally posted by mbpg You really need to sit down in front of a 42" for an hour or so at the intended distance and watch something you would most likely be seeing at home. If you can't do that in a store, try a friend's house. It even doesn't matter if you can't hear -- just see. That will confirm whether 42" is big enough or not.

Good advice. Keep in mind that everyone's vision and perception are different. Some people are very sensitive to motion artifacts, some have the acuity to see pixel structure from a distance others can't. So it's important for YOU to check out your prefered displays from your estimated viewing distance - use other people's thoughts on this as a guide, not as an absolute.


Example: remember the days of interlaced PC displays? Some people would go absolutely nuts, and would use a lower resolution rather than suffer interlacing. There's a guy in my office currently runing 1280x1024 interlaced which he has no problem with - drives me nuts. Each to his own.

 

[rmcgirr83]

Quote:

Originally posted by shadowspawn I came here looking for some wise advice, and I feel like I've found it. I did try all the usual stuff (like taking a tape measure to the store and looking at TV's), but this was not helpful for a couple of reasons: the store did not accurately reproduce my environment, and the store sources did not accurately reproduce my sources. I really do need to sleep on this (for a week or two) to make a wise decision, but the feedback I've gotten so far really made some things click in my head that had not clicked before. Hearing someone else's experience and advice sort of cleared my thinking. If I had to decide tomorrow, this is what I think: 1. My room setup is right on the edge between 42" and 50". 2. My sources are kind of sucky (480 I/P DVD and cable TV). 3. Even if I upgrade to digital cable and HDTV tuner, there's not a lot of programming available yet. 4. The 42" is more forgiving of my sucky sources. 5. The 50" is more punishing to my sucky sources. 6. The Panasonic ED unit does a "decent" visual job with higher res material. Given these things, if I had to decide tomorrow, I'd 1. Get the Panasonic 42" ED unit (not the HD), and use it to really enjoy my sources for a few years. 2. Get an articulated wall mount that would allow the plasma screen to swing out 24" - 28" into the room, or be flush against the wall, to adapt to the seating positions and the source material, and make the room "smaller" or "larger" as needed. 3. Revel in the fact that I bought something at the lower end of the price scale, and so saved a lot of money. 4. In a few years, when better sources and programming are readily available, and plasma technology is probably a whole lot cheaper, get a much bigger unit with much higher resolution. 5. Enjoy life in the meantime. Does anything seem unwise to anyone about this course of action?

Hit the nail on the head and didn't even know it.


The facts are, 50" are HD and are >$2,000 to $4,000 than 42" ED's depending on the brand. HDTV is not even a factor yet as most companies and the movie industry can't get together with the major providers (digital cable and/or digital sat, etc.) to provide multi-channel HDTV to 95% of the viewing public (you and me). Just becuase it's 50" does not make it compatible with future copy protection (like the panny 50" HD). Many people in this forum prefer the 503cmx (pioneer) because of the upgrade path, which is fine for them. For me I got the 42" ED Panny (like you hate to wait) and am very, very happy with the view from 11'-12' (just mounted it on the wall this weekend). Granted not the full "immersive" feeling that you are looking for (I moved "up" from a RPTV 50" and have gotten complaints from my neighbors that "the screen is smaller" to which I reply "don't like it? Leave" as I have a kegerator he always seems to stick around staring at the picture and drinking my beer, but what are friends for?), but for saving a few thousand, I do not honestly think you will have any complaints.


Further, as plasmas in general become more and more common place you will start to see (IMHO, withing two to three years) 50" and 60" plasmas going for what 42" plasmas are going for now and they will have all the bells and whistles (DVI/HDCP, built in HD tuners and NTSC tuners, two to three of the same type of input connection, picture in picture, etc.). The problem with plasmas and the "television" audience is that plasmas were originally built, not for the masses, but for businesses (visual impact during sales presentations) and individuals who could afford $20,000 42" plamas (little alone HDCP as well).


If you want an, once again IMHO, excellent upgrade to what you have now (32") you really can not go wrong with a 42" panny or 43" pio. The Pio has a better upgrade path (upgradable card slot) and more "vibrant" colors albeit with lesser dark detail and is HD. The 42" panny (ED) has no upgrade path available for HD, yet is one of the best as far as detail in the blacks of any other plasma being offered today (and offers a 1:1 pixel match on anamorphic DVD's which = outstanding detail and an excellent experience, IMHO, especially with a progressive DVD player, but that is another topic).


As most of my family's viewing is Sat/DVD/Cable (in that order) I decided on the Panny 42" as I believed that to have a better overall PQ based upon our viewing habits.


You sound as if you have researched this enough to know what you need but need support for.....I know I have not answered anything, but any advice is better than no advice.



PS. Get the damned 42" panny ED and forget about it. HDCP will not be even close to matching what "people" are used to getting now within two years (ESPN HD anyone? Not Dish Nor DirectTV, comcast Las Vegas has it (Go figure ). Once all the bickering and finger pointing gets over with between the providers and producers then HDTV will become a daily event. Eventhen your 42" panny ED will look just as good, resolution wise, to a 50" HD at 11'.


Just my .02

 

[shadowspawn]

> PS. Get the damned 42" panny ED and forget about it.


After even more thought, analysis, and viewing (in addition to what I described above), I so think that this is while I will do (and I think I'm at peace with it). Two new factors have entered in that were decisive.


First, I did something I didn't do before, which was to visit the store and have them hookup a standard NTSC signal to the displays for a while(previously I had been looking mostly at DVD outputs).


Now, the HD screens definately look somewhat better to me with DVD's (even with the upscaling that they require), mostly because the pixel structure of the ED screen is visible to me at 8" or less.


However, the standard NTSC picture looked absolutely vile to me in HD, even on the 42" Panasonic screen. It was OK with ED. We still have a lot of NTSC in our future for the next 2 - 3 years at least.....


The second thing is that at dinner Friday night, I had a heart-to-heart discussion with my wife. Completely changing the home theater equipment configuration (getting rid if the "entertainment center" that holds the TV and equipment), moving the (BIG!) Aerial center channel speaker from the top of the entertainment center to a floor stand, making new holes in the wall, etc. is a bit traumatic for her.


She suggested that she thought the 42" would be best, based on both the economics and the impact on the room.


Done... The 42" is the best next-step for her (in my long-term program of a virtual reality entertainment system someday) , and the ED is the best compromise for the next few years until the signal / sources standards and available sorts out.


Thanks everyone, this was really helpful. Could not have made a confident decision without the observations and opinions to help me frame my own thoughts.

 

[rmcgirr83]

You and she will not be disappointed (you could probably even pick up an OTA HD tuner and really WOW her.)

 

[elRey]

Quote:

Originally posted by rmcgirr83 You and she will not be disappointed (you could probably even pick up an OTA HD tuner and really WOW her.)

what he said.


Rey