Nighthawk

I am on the hunt for my first flat panel TV for DVD playback. I have
measured up my lounge and accordingly I am looking for a 32" or 37".
Armed with a very good quality DVD I went around various places:

I looked at a Panasonic LX800a 32" at 1366x768 (100Hz). The salesman
connected a Pioneer 1080p upscaling DVD player, first with component,
then with HDMI. While the latter was visibly better I can't say the
picture was better or even as good, as the picture I get on my 19" CRT
computer monitor, which upscales flawlessly. I was a little
disappointed with the picture quality.

Then I went elsewhere and got them to demonstrate a Samsung full HD
32", 1920x1080. This time they used a Sony player. The
interlacing-type picture flaws around the edges of moving elements
surprised us. Then the salesman switched the HDMI lead to the
Panasonic LX800a next to it, the same model I had tried previously.
This time it came up clearly better, even though it was a lower
resolution.

Then I went and tried out a Panasonic 37" Plasma, 1024x720. They
connected a Pioneer 1080p upscaling DVD player, via HDMI. The picture
quality was mediocre. Disappointed, I went elsewhere. I came across
a 42" Panasonic Plasma, 1024x768, with a Panasonic player connected
via HDMI. That had the best picture overall. Not the sharpest or
detailed, but the least flawed.

One thing seems apparent to me: Pioneer players are not a good match
to Panasonic TVs. The Sony worked better but a Panasonic player gave
the least visibly flawed result.

What other combinations of player to TV work well?

GDS

"Nighthawk" <nighthawk@allo.com> wrote in message
news:7gffb490d6mbht1tflehubvvmq5rog4fna@4ax.com...
>
> What other combinations of player to TV work well?

I honestly think it comes down to lowering the resolution and nothing else, the extra
resolution(1080p) only serves to highlight the LCD flaws.

Laser TV seems to have finally passed the *testing* stage
http://laser-tv.org/laser-tv-launch-date/ but it's still a couple of years from affordable


*If* (better f*cking not!) my TV was to die tomorrow I'd replace it with the biggest and
best CRT within my budget. Whilst my friends 52" Bravia looks awesome(!!!) playing 'Call
of Duty 4' I prefer my lame 100Hz CRT for movies. Well that's not entirely true, I
couldn't justify the purchase price for the very slight increase in quality. If size was
everything, then yes, but it's not, so no. If the overall quality shat on my current setup
I'd be on it in a heart beat, the simple truth is LCD is average and Plasma is costly to
run, projection on the other hand can be kinda tops, but it's a bit too dedicated for me
and my needs.

G.

Nighthawk

On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 21:210 +0930, "GDS" <fake.mail@ii.net> wrote:

>
>
>"Nighthawk" <nighthawk@allo.com> wrote in message
>news:7gffb490d6mbht1tflehubvvmq5rog4fna@4ax.com.. .
>>
>> What other combinations of player to TV work well?
>
>I honestly think it comes down to lowering the resolution and nothing else, the extra
>resolution(1080p) only serves to highlight the LCD flaws.
>
>Laser TV seems to have finally passed the *testing* stage
>http://laser-tv.org/laser-tv-launch-date/ but it's still a couple of years from affordable
>
>
>*If* (better f*cking not!) my TV was to die tomorrow I'd replace it with the biggest and
>best CRT within my budget. Whilst my friends 52" Bravia looks awesome(!!!) playing 'Call
>of Duty 4' I prefer my lame 100Hz CRT for movies. Well that's not entirely true, I
>couldn't justify the purchase price for the very slight increase in quality. If size was
>everything, then yes, but it's not, so no. If the overall quality shat on my current setup
>I'd be on it in a heart beat, the simple truth is LCD is average and Plasma is costly to
>run, projection on the other hand can be kinda tops, but it's a bit too dedicated for me
>and my needs.
>
>G.
>
Recent experience with various players, even the well-regarded 1080p
upscaling Pioneer players, I have been seriously wondering if
connecting the TV to a PC might be the best option. I have had a 26"
LCD monitor with 1920x1200 resolution connected to my PC and the
actual video quality from DVD was without flaw though the monitor was
far from optimized in its settings. The PC, going through an ATI
Radeon video card, seemed to do upscaling better than anything else I
have seen.

David Barnett

"Nighthawk" <nighthawk@allo.com> wrote in message
news:7gffb490d6mbht1tflehubvvmq5rog4fna@4ax.com...
>I am on the hunt for my first flat panel TV for DVD playback. I have
> measured up my lounge and accordingly I am looking for a 32" or 37".
> Armed with a very good quality DVD I went around various places:
>
> I looked at a Panasonic LX800a 32" at 1366x768 (100Hz). The salesman
> connected a Pioneer 1080p upscaling DVD player, first with component,
> then with HDMI. While the latter was visibly better I can't say the
> picture was better or even as good, as the picture I get on my 19" CRT
> computer monitor, which upscales flawlessly. I was a little
> disappointed with the picture quality.
>
> Then I went elsewhere and got them to demonstrate a Samsung full HD
> 32", 1920x1080. This time they used a Sony player. The
> interlacing-type picture flaws around the edges of moving elements
> surprised us. Then the salesman switched the HDMI lead to the
> Panasonic LX800a next to it, the same model I had tried previously.
> This time it came up clearly better, even though it was a lower
> resolution.
>
> Then I went and tried out a Panasonic 37" Plasma, 1024x720. They
> connected a Pioneer 1080p upscaling DVD player, via HDMI. The picture
> quality was mediocre. Disappointed, I went elsewhere. I came across
> a 42" Panasonic Plasma, 1024x768, with a Panasonic player connected
> via HDMI. That had the best picture overall. Not the sharpest or
> detailed, but the least flawed.
>
> One thing seems apparent to me: Pioneer players are not a good match
> to Panasonic TVs. The Sony worked better but a Panasonic player gave
> the least visibly flawed result.
>
> What other combinations of player to TV work well?

I recently bought a 50" (127cm) Panasonic Plasma TV, and I have 2 Panasonics
connected to it. With my eyesight at the age of 78, soon to be 79,
everything looks more than OK.

However, when I connected my Aldi (ugh) DVD recorder, admittedly the last in
the chain of connections, the picture is terrible; it was OK on my old TV,
Hopefully this morning, I am having more aerial sockets put in, and a
booster = $150 which I hope will remedy the situation.
I do not have HDMI cable connections (yet).
--
David Barnett

Nighthawk

On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 20:538 GMT, "David Barnett"
<dbarnett@nospam.com> wrote:

>"Nighthawk" <nighthawk@allo.com> wrote in message
>news:7gffb490d6mbht1tflehubvvmq5rog4fna@4ax.com.. .
>>I am on the hunt for my first flat panel TV for DVD playback. I have
>> measured up my lounge and accordingly I am looking for a 32" or 37".
>> Armed with a very good quality DVD I went around various places:
>>
>> I looked at a Panasonic LX800a 32" at 1366x768 (100Hz). The salesman
>> connected a Pioneer 1080p upscaling DVD player, first with component,
>> then with HDMI. While the latter was visibly better I can't say the
>> picture was better or even as good, as the picture I get on my 19" CRT
>> computer monitor, which upscales flawlessly. I was a little
>> disappointed with the picture quality.
>>
>> Then I went elsewhere and got them to demonstrate a Samsung full HD
>> 32", 1920x1080. This time they used a Sony player. The
>> interlacing-type picture flaws around the edges of moving elements
>> surprised us. Then the salesman switched the HDMI lead to the
>> Panasonic LX800a next to it, the same model I had tried previously.
>> This time it came up clearly better, even though it was a lower
>> resolution.
>>
>> Then I went and tried out a Panasonic 37" Plasma, 1024x720. They
>> connected a Pioneer 1080p upscaling DVD player, via HDMI. The picture
>> quality was mediocre. Disappointed, I went elsewhere. I came across
>> a 42" Panasonic Plasma, 1024x768, with a Panasonic player connected
>> via HDMI. That had the best picture overall. Not the sharpest or
>> detailed, but the least flawed.
>>
>> One thing seems apparent to me: Pioneer players are not a good match
>> to Panasonic TVs. The Sony worked better but a Panasonic player gave
>> the least visibly flawed result.
>>
>> What other combinations of player to TV work well?
>
>I recently bought a 50" (127cm) Panasonic Plasma TV, and I have 2 Panasonics
>connected to it. With my eyesight at the age of 78, soon to be 79,
>everything looks more than OK.
>
>However, when I connected my Aldi (ugh) DVD recorder, admittedly the last in
>the chain of connections, the picture is terrible; it was OK on my old TV,
>Hopefully this morning, I am having more aerial sockets put in, and a
>booster = $150 which I hope will remedy the situation.
>I do not have HDMI cable connections (yet).

I would say that for large panels HDMI was essential. What
connections are you using? There is a noticeable difference between
the different options, especially when you compare composite to
component to HDMI. I understand that you need the HDMI cable for the
DVD video to be upscaled, which you would need on a 50" plasma.

David Barnett

"Nighthawk" <nighthawk@allo.com> wrote in message
newshchb49srlf7l1og8du7fgil765bpnavhe@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 20:538 GMT, "David Barnett"
> <dbarnett@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>>"Nighthawk" <nighthawk@allo.com> wrote in message
>>news:7gffb490d6mbht1tflehubvvmq5rog4fna@4ax.com. ..
>>>I am on the hunt for my first flat panel TV for DVD playback. I have
>>> measured up my lounge and accordingly I am looking for a 32" or 37".
>>> Armed with a very good quality DVD I went around various places:
>>>
>>> I looked at a Panasonic LX800a 32" at 1366x768 (100Hz). The salesman
>>> connected a Pioneer 1080p upscaling DVD player, first with component,
>>> then with HDMI. While the latter was visibly better I can't say the
>>> picture was better or even as good, as the picture I get on my 19" CRT
>>> computer monitor, which upscales flawlessly. I was a little
>>> disappointed with the picture quality.
>>>
>>> Then I went elsewhere and got them to demonstrate a Samsung full HD
>>> 32", 1920x1080. This time they used a Sony player. The
>>> interlacing-type picture flaws around the edges of moving elements
>>> surprised us. Then the salesman switched the HDMI lead to the
>>> Panasonic LX800a next to it, the same model I had tried previously.
>>> This time it came up clearly better, even though it was a lower
>>> resolution.
>>>
>>> Then I went and tried out a Panasonic 37" Plasma, 1024x720. They
>>> connected a Pioneer 1080p upscaling DVD player, via HDMI. The picture
>>> quality was mediocre. Disappointed, I went elsewhere. I came across
>>> a 42" Panasonic Plasma, 1024x768, with a Panasonic player connected
>>> via HDMI. That had the best picture overall. Not the sharpest or
>>> detailed, but the least flawed.
>>>
>>> One thing seems apparent to me: Pioneer players are not a good match
>>> to Panasonic TVs. The Sony worked better but a Panasonic player gave
>>> the least visibly flawed result.
>>>
>>> What other combinations of player to TV work well?
>>
>>I recently bought a 50" (127cm) Panasonic Plasma TV, and I have 2
>>Panasonics
>>connected to it. With my eyesight at the age of 78, soon to be 79,
>>everything looks more than OK.
>>
>>However, when I connected my Aldi (ugh) DVD recorder, admittedly the last
>>in
>>the chain of connections, the picture is terrible; it was OK on my old TV,
>>Hopefully this morning, I am having more aerial sockets put in, and a
>>booster = $150 which I hope will remedy the situation.
>>I do not have HDMI cable connections (yet).
>
> I would say that for large panels HDMI was essential. What
> connections are you using? There is a noticeable difference between
> the different options, especially when you compare composite to
> component to HDMI. I understand that you need the HDMI cable for the
> DVD video to be upscaled, which you would need on a 50" plasma.

The aerial person arrived yesterday, & put in another socket for my 3rd DVD
recorder, and I did not need that $150 booster
Made a tremendous difference. He thought the pictures I was getting were OK
with all choices of TV & units.
At my age of nearly 79 & associated eyesight I don't think I need HDMI, tho
I might use it in the future; ditto for my wife (10 years younger).
The Panasonic I bought wasn't the higher resolution one.
--
David Barnett

GDS

"Nighthawk" <nighthawk@allo.com> wrote in message
news:7rpfb416a7i63q44uivaqd97qas0qp69oh@4ax.com...
>
> Recent experience with various players, even the well-regarded 1080p
> upscaling Pioneer players, I have been seriously wondering if
> connecting the TV to a PC might be the best option. I have had a 26"
> LCD monitor with 1920x1200 resolution connected to my PC and the
> actual video quality from DVD was without flaw though the monitor was
> far from optimized in its settings. The PC, going through an ATI
> Radeon video card, seemed to do upscaling better than anything else I
> have seen.

It'd also have the benefit of being a file server of almost unlimited size. My mate with
the 52" has his 360, Bluray, DVD and PC all connected and he's recently bought some
external HDDs for the PC because all of the extra video use it's been getting. He's also
going nuts on WoW too I'd love to compare a PC Bluray player vs a stand alone on the
screen.

G.

Snapper

GDS wrote...

> *If* (better f*cking not!) my TV was to die tomorrow I'd replace it with the biggest and
> best CRT within my budget. Whilst my friends 52" Bravia looks awesome(!!!) playing 'Call

One of the advantages of a flat panel display is that it doesn't take up the
room (depth) that a traditional CRT does.

> of Duty 4' I prefer my lame 100Hz CRT for movies. Well that's not entirely true, I
> couldn't justify the purchase price for the very slight increase in quality.

Are you saying that a HiDef screen only has a marginal increase in picture
quality over a 100 hz TV? What about the flat panel displays that are 100 hz?

> I'd be on it in a heart beat, the simple truth is LCD is average and Plasma is costly to
> run, projection on the other hand can be kinda tops, but it's a bit too dedicated for me

Has anyone actually measured power usage and compared LCDs, plasmas and CRT
displays? I've heard or read conflicting stories. Perhaps I should take a tong
tester home and measure the power usage of my plasma.

As for projectors three mates have them. I'm not impressed. For starters, like a
picture theatre it needs to be isolated from ambient light. And the colors all
seemed to be wishy-washy to me. Like the projector globe wasn't bright enough or
something.


--
A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough
people to make it worth the effort.

Snapper

Nighthawk wrote...

> I would say that for large panels HDMI was essential. What

What about SD plasmas? My Panasonic has HDMI. But I don't have any components
that output HDMI, although my wife's laptop has it.

Aren't there different versions of HDMI? If so then my plasma would probably be
"ver. 1", wouldn't it? So how will it go receiving HDMI signals from say, a
current Panasonic DVD/HDD recorder or even from a monitor out from a Yamaha AV
Reciever?

And how much better than component video is HDMI, either for SD or HD plasmas or
LCD displays?



--
ALP Policy - if it's not compulsory then it's banned

Snapper

Nighthawk wrote...

> Recent experience with various players, even the well-regarded 1080p
> upscaling Pioneer players, I have been seriously wondering if
> connecting the TV to a PC might be the best option. I have had a 26"
> LCD monitor with 1920x1200 resolution connected to my PC and the
> actual video quality from DVD was without flaw though the monitor was
> far from optimized in its settings. The PC, going through an ATI
> Radeon video card, seemed to do upscaling better than anything else I
> have seen.

I've never really had any luck doing this. The quality is always blurry. Having
said that recently my wife got a new Dell laptop which has HDMI output. Our
Panasonic SD plasma has HDMI input. So I might see if I can source a cable cheap
enough to try it out.

Of course, being SD there may be no benefit to it other than say, to use the TV
as an oversized PC monitor. Often we might be watching something and we need to
look something up. So it's off to find a PC that's turned on. Having the laptop
nearby (it's on a wireless network connection) and connected to the plasma all
we need to do is to switch inputs, pick up the laptop and browse away.

As for streaming video, some do this using WMP and outputting to the TV
directly. I use an Xbox 360 that is connected to the network and a PC at the
other end of the house runs as a media server. Does an OK job but it's only good
for SD playback.