| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 54325 | 2005-02-09 09:26:00 | widescreen tv or not? | herbert (6951) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 322988 | 2005-02-09 09:26:00 | Hello. I'm looking at buying a new TV. I was considering a widescreen lcd or plasma but is it worth the extra cost over a standard 4:3 projection TV if I dont have SKY digital and will not be watching dvds? |
herbert (6951) | ||
| 322989 | 2005-02-09 09:34:00 | I personally prefer it. You soon get used to any distortions, and appreciate the false aspect. Plasma's are being specialled off at present, and if you look at them side by side with LCD, the benefits of LCD are fairly obvious usually. Lifetime of LCD is very good seemingly. Plasma tend to lose 1/3 of their brightness after only 20,000 hours, while LCD seem OK to around 60,000 hours. |
godfather (25) | ||
| 322990 | 2005-02-09 09:37:00 | Price of LCDs and plasmas has come down alot recently. If you go into somewhere live Harvey Normals, notice that they always seem to play DVDs of cartoons. This is to show a crisp, sharp image in the shop. When you take it home, you may be disappointed with the resolution depending on the size of the screen. And then you'll have to put up with a stretched image if you're watching normal analogue TV. If you have sky digital, I think most of the channels are in widescreen? But like godfather says, you'll soon get used to it. Once you go widescreen you'll never go back. And maybe one day digital TV, either terrestrial or satellite, may be the norm and we'll all be wanting widescreens. |
manicminer (4219) | ||
| 322991 | 2005-02-09 09:41:00 | So the tv itself does not adjust to what is playing ? wide or otherwise? Hubby is convinced if and when our telly dies, he wants a widescreen too. Not convinced yet..... will watch this thread with interest. beetle |
beetle (243) | ||
| 322992 | 2005-02-09 10:00:00 | So the tv itself does not adjust to what is playing ? wide or otherwise? most widescreen tellies will have multiple pan and scan options which will allow you to zoom and stretch to your heart's content, and they normally should automatically switch between either aspect, but you'd want to adjust any 4:3 stuff to widescreen, otherwise you're just wasting screen space. some pan and scan is good, some isnt, it depends on the telly itself, so take in a good normal aspect dvd, ask the shop guys to put it on and show you the pan and scanning. What you're looking for is whether or not people's faces appear fatter (acceptable) or whether a fisheye kind of effect happens where the further you get away from the centre of the screen, the more stretched the image is (not ideal) or whether a good balance between stretching and zooming has been struck |
whetu (237) | ||
| 322993 | 2005-02-09 10:38:00 | No doubt about it,wait another 18 months 2 years and you will pay about $1500 for a 30inch LCD ,with a much improved format.Anything bigger is a waste of time with all the rubbish thats on these days. Was going to build a cabinet for my existing 25inch CRT,but will wait for LCD and make much narrower jobbie. |
Cicero (40) | ||
| 322994 | 2005-02-09 18:38:00 | I hate it when I go around to someone's house and they have a widescreen TV. Only to sit there and watch some TV then realise that I'm missing out on like a 1/3 of the picture because it is zoomed in far too much. Can't see the reporters name on the news. Can't see the phone number on the infomercials. |
Jeremy (1197) | ||
| 322995 | 2005-02-09 21:13:00 | That is interesting Jeremy . Anyone else experience viewers deliberately zooming the view as standard? I've done it with a DVD on a normal 29inch CRT because the letterbox format gave too small a picture . I just shrugged at what I was missing around the sides, but it did annoy me . As for me, I'm currently thinking about upgrading to a 32inch CRT . Specifically the Panasonic TX76PW60A . But as Cicero says, should I wait? Or buy a 50hz 32inch for considerably less for the interim . Decisions decisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :( |
Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 322996 | 2005-02-09 21:24:00 | There was a discussion on the pros and cons of widescreen TV here (pressf1.pcworld.co.nz) about 3 months ago. It may help. | Miami Steve (2128) | ||
| 322997 | 2005-02-09 21:28:00 | In the near future most (if not all) of the TV broadcasts will be in widescreen format. A lot of the movies on tv already are and US shows like ER, Third Watch etc are all in widescreen. It doesn't make much sense, if you are looking to purchase a new TV to buy a 4:3 when 16:9 is where it's heading. As mentioned previously a 16:9 TV will have modes to display 4:3 if you wish, it just cuts the sides off and stretches the vertical. I have had my 16:9 for almost a year and you get used to it very quickly. I don't know how people can watch "square" TV, it just looks wrong. Winston001 I have the Panasonic TX76PW60A and it is very good. They seem to be very sensitive to geomagnetic fields though. If you spend some time getting the settings right they look awesome. The Sony 100Hz models also look very good, a bit brighter, but then they are also a bit more expensive. :thumbs: |
Sb0h (3744) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||