Is Motionflow 200hz from Sony overkill?

[admin_exported]

Sound and Vision in Leeds didnt have the Sony HX703 in stock but said they weren't keen on it because they thought the 200mhz motionflow over-processed the image. I've done a bit of research but don't fully understand the theory behind this - would somebody be willing to put this in simplistic terms? From my understanding, Sony's increased motionflow means there is less blurring of images and a crisper picture, however frames move a lot quicker which is great for things like sport, but maybe a bit overkill for movies (unless they're fast-paced action)? No idea if I'm on the right lines here...I would mainly use the TV for watching sports and lots of TV shows/movies, with some gaming on the PS3 also likely. Budget is a about £1,000 or just a little over. I have seen the Sony EX503 and the Panny G20, both below the HX703 price, but wasn't that impressed by either on Blu-Ray or SD viewing.

 

[TKratz]

A TV signal is transmitted with 50 Hz (or 60 Hz in the US).

Applying a higher refresh rate basically means that the TV needs to calculate and process artificial pictures in between the real pictures. This will create an impression of a smoother picture, but very often also a picture appearing more unnatural. The reason is simply, that the TV needs to 'guess' (based on calculations of course) what the next picture will be. Sometimes these calculations get's it wrong creating artifacts and flaws to the picture.

Personally I stay away from high refresh rates because of this. In my opinion only the Sony and B&O 100 Hz system provides decent results. 200 Hz will introduce 3 artificial pictures every time you have a real one, and I do not understand why anyone is even considering 400 Hz. I haven't seen it yet to be honest, but I can't think it makes the situation any better!