| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 97881 | 2009-03-03 00:21:00 | TV: 100 or 50 Hz , Full HD or HD Ready ? | Strommer (42) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 752879 | 2009-03-03 00:21:00 | Has anyone compared a 100 Hz screen with the usual 50 Hz? Side by side at the same time? Notice much difference? I was in HN's yesterday and watched two Sony 42 inch LCD screens side by side, a 100 Hz and a 50 Hz, and could see no difference. The Sony demo DVD that was playing did have people and objects that moved, but not quick moving objects like cars or rugby players. I have heard that 100 Hz (or higher) is best for sports but I wonder if there is much difference? The other factor is FULL HD vs HD READY. I was in DSE and compared two screens, one 1080 and the other HD Ready. While I could see a difference, it was not that much. A Blu Ray demo disk was playing. The way I figure, I won't be getting a Blu Ray player for a long time, will not be getting Sky, and our town will not have HD Freeview for a long time, so why bother paying extra for full HD? Lastly, it seems LCD screens are the way to go. Less power and a lot less reflection from windows, lights or other things in the room. Comments? Thanks. |
Strommer (42) | ||
| 752880 | 2009-03-03 00:28:00 | HD Ready doesnt specifically mean it'll do the Full HD Spec .. en.wikipedia.org Not too sure about the refresh rate, but AFAIK 50Hz is enough for 29.97fps video yes? 100Hz simply displays a smoother transition between the frames from what I understand, but I never really paid much attention to it when we were learning about it at Uni ;) LCD vs Plasma is a neverending debate ... :D |
Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 752881 | 2009-03-03 00:56:00 | We have 200 Hz screens not so long away, UK already has them and we are normally not so long after them. | Bantu (52) | ||
| 752882 | 2009-03-03 02:32:00 | HD Ready doesnt specifically mean it'll do the Full HD Spec .. It is not the technical aspects that I am after but what it actually looks like, how it appears to a person watching. |
Strommer (42) | ||
| 752883 | 2009-03-03 04:37:00 | If the picture is in 1080p, you will need a 1080p television to view it in all it's glory. Seeing as you said you weren't getting sky, blue-ray or freeview HD, then it might be more cost effective to purchase a HD-Ready tv, but remember that according to consumer mag, a tv is a 10 - 15 year purchase, so unless you purchase a new tv regularly, it may pay off in the long run to get a Full HD tv. As for 50 vs 100hz, if you do quite like your sport, get 100hz, otherwise I don't think you'll notice much of a difference. |
davidmmac (4619) | ||
| 752884 | 2009-03-03 04:47:00 | If you're planning to get freeviewHD/sky hd then I suggest you get a Full HD screen, other wise, you'll be fine with HD Ready, 720p. Or, you could get a Full HD monitor now, so you'll be a bit more prepared for what you may add to your home theatre in the future. And the price difference between Full HD and HD Ready isn't too much anyways |
Blam (54) | ||
| 752885 | 2009-03-03 05:02:00 | We have 200 Hz screens not so long away, UK already has them and we are normally not so long after them. You can already buy them from DSE. Sony do a 200Hz one, and I believe there is also a 400Hz one coming soon. |
robbyp (2751) | ||
| 752886 | 2009-03-04 04:27:00 | Whats the main diff between the refresh rates? How would it be visible? | Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 752887 | 2009-03-04 05:43:00 | Whats the main diff between the refresh rates? How would it be visible? I think it's just how fast the transition between frames is. I doubt, unless you were watching fast paced sport (eg nascar) on 2 tv's side by side (one 50hz and one 200hz) there would be much of a difference. |
davidmmac (4619) | ||
| 752888 | 2009-03-04 05:43:00 | In sports, or fast action movies. Faster refresh rate means less blur/lag |
Blam (54) | ||
| 1 2 3 | |||||