1920x1080 and SD

[admin_exported]

Hi All, I have 2 questions here, so please be patient with me, this will be my first HD screen...

I'm a little worried... 80% of all the TV you watch is SD, and as you walk round watching all these HD and Full HD screens in the shops, all they want to show you is HD material....

Could somebody please put my mind at rest...

The screen I really want is the Sony 40W3000... is the SD signal comming through my Virgin Media Box, going to look worse on that screen than my 28" CRT I currently have.. as it has to upscale it to Full HD

How will I tell the wife that were spending £1500 on the television and the picture we get is going to be worse.... ??
Secondly, I'm having a a dilema between the 428xd Pioneer and the Sony... will the SD picture on the Pioneer be far better? as it only has to upscale a smaller amount... ? I realise you've been saying for the last few months magazines that teh pioneer 428xd is far and away the best screen, but I have a problem, I realise the black are better and the contrast is far superior, but I can't get this gremlin out of my head saying "more pixels must make for a better defined picture", how can 1024x768 on the Pioneer give a better HD picture than the Full HD Sony.... can somebody explain, in laymans terms.... Please... to relieve me of this nagging doubt.. Cheers and sorry for the long post

 

[Anonymous]

not going to go into long detail but i thought the sony and samsung lcd were awful with sd, the pioneer 428 which i ended up buying is so much better. i held off on buying a big telly until the picture got nearly as good as my old pana 32" crt, well the pioneer is very nearly as good and stunning with hd. i had the same situation with my girlfriend as you have but now shes happy, which is a minor miracle.

demand to view sd material on any set you're looking at. the only time i've felt dissapointed with my sd performance is watching the rugby on itv recentley, close ups are fine but long disance shots look pants and lack detail, then again itv are renowned for their lousy quality and that's not the tv's fault.

p.s. and at 40/42" you dont need full hd anyway.

R

 

[Anonymous]

Glad to see somebody else has encountered this before, I'd really hate to spen all that cash and have the missus on my case about how I spent the nest egg only to get a worse picture,,,, lol

so looks like I may have to go for the 428xd then...... but that gremlin in my head is still shouting, "1080 must be better, it has more pixels"

 

[Gerrardasnails]

Namgaws! Stop....wait!!!!!!!

I have the Sony KDL40W2000 (the LCD before the one you are looking at). From what I've read they have improved the set to give it 3 hdmi inputs and 24fps etc. Right, my point. In SD on Sky my Sony gives a brilliant picture. I cannot fault it at all. When I watch something on the HD channels are on my upscaling DVD player, yes the picture is amazing but I noticed a massive improvement from my old CRT to my new LCD and the one you are chewing is even better! I agree with you that 1920/1080p must be the best out there at the moment. I also look at the fact that Plasmas don't last as long as LCD and your set would be future proof to the tune of a good 8 years I would have thought. Go for the LCD mate!

 

[D.J.KRIME]

LCD over the Pioneer Plasma..... now that is funny!

 

[Anonymous]

Yup. Got to say buy the Pioneer.

 

[Anonymous]

[quote user="Gerrardasnails"]I also look at the fact that Plasmas don't last as long as LCD and your set would be future proof to the tune of a good 8 years I would have thought. Go for the LCD mate![/quote]

No - whatever you do - don't do this - you will probbly regret it for much longer than 8 years!