HD television quality for normal channels?

[kalongbat]

Hi all

I have been considering buying a full HD TV, but have a question before going for a purchase.

When I view the normal SD channels playing on the HD TV's on the shop floor, the quality of the picture shown is terrible when compared to CRT - the picture is fuzzy, choppy, blurry. I checked several stores (Game, Dion Wired, etc) but the picture quality shown there is just as bad, irrespective of brand. The only time the picture looked good was where a Blu Ray was being played.

Since by far most of our channels is still SD and by default this is what I will be viewing most of the time, is it normal for SD channels to look so bad compared to CRT? Or is it as I suspect just crappy picture quality/tuning in the stores, and at home proper tuning eliminates this problem?

I don't want to make a purchase for something that makes the quality of SD programmes worse than what I see on my good ol' CRT television

Thanks!

 

[Jola]

Since by far most of our channels is still SD and by default this is what I will be viewing most of the time, is it normal for SD channels to look so bad compared to CRT? Or is it as I suspect just crappy picture quality/tuning in the stores, and at home proper tuning eliminates this problem?

The quality in the stores is usually very bad. They are not always connected optimally.

But YMMV. Some of the SD channels (eg Sky News) look very good on an HD display, but others do look cr@p - it just depends on the channel. Same applies to the HD shows, some are not up to scratch.

HD looks much better than on an old TV - but not all HD LCD's are the same - some show some ghosting with fast action.

Makro Woodmead has a nice display at the moment, about 10 Full HD displays showing Avatar in HD, quite nice for comparative purposes.

Some of those displays are seriously cool, I couldn't believe my eyes - feel like throwing my 5 year old plasma out ! And it's no slouch !

And they are not all expensive, there were some quite reasonable displays doing very well !

 

[dotVIBE]

The reason why a lot of the DSTV channels look so bad is because of Multichoice's compression. Some of the channels, like Mnet and MM1 etc are not too bad, because they get a lot of bandwidth allocated to them, while your Action8 and TCM etc get compressed quite a lot and will look a lot worse on an HD tv. I usually find that for TV watching plasma is better than LCD.

 

[Uli]

it boils down too if you are willing to watch everything on tv with bad quality then get a HD tv, or wait untill all channels are provided in HD.

 

[skusku]

Another thing is the companies use a splitter for all the tv's from 1 source(dvd,blu ray etc). Just ask them to unplug the splitter and couple it directly to the tv you are interested in and the picture might look 10 times better.

 

[KromozIII]

Get yourself a decent name brand, like a Sony, Philips or Samsung. They have technology on board that will overcome weak RF signals, composite combing and everything else.
I have a Sony W Series, and it's Bravia Engine definitely gives me a better picture on the SD channels than I ever had on a CRT.

 

[greg_SA]

CRT TVs are very forgiving to low quality SD sources... also, typically the screen is quite small. With an HD LCD, typically the screen is a lot bigger (say 40" compare to a 74cm/29" CRT) and this makes it easier to see the compression artifacts (as mentioned before). The up-scaling and other processing required on these LCDs/Plasmas can also degrade the image quality significantly.

One other factor to consider is that CRTs are 4:3, just like 90% of the TV channels in SA, so a widescreen LCD has to use pillars on the sizes or stretch the image to fill the screen. It is also worth noting that most channels on DSTV are still broadcast in 4:3, even when a TV show shows a 16:9 image is displayed in a letterbox on your old CRT - i.e. it won't be proper widescreen on your new LCD.

It really is a crazy situation with DSTV... so it really depends on what you use your TV for... just TV? DVDs? (which are nice in widescreen) a gaming console? PC Monitor, Etc.

For 90% TV viewing, I still feel that a CRT works well in South Africa. If you use many widescreen and HD sources then an HD screen may be a good choice.

Also, HD only really "comes into its own" with a large screen (significantly larger than an typical SD TV screen) - for a typical lounge around 50" or bigger. The problem is that if you have a nice big HD screen and sit relatively close, so that you get the benefit of a large screen, you will enjoy watching HD material, but then, if you sit in the same position and watch an SD material, it will obviously look significantly worse! However, if you sit at a distance (or have a smaller screen) which makes SD material look good, then when you watch HD, if won't look much better as the extra resolution is a waste

One bonus, from a DSTV point of view, is that the HD channels will at least have a better image quality than the typical SD channels, so those will look good on any screen.

I wish DSTV had a clear roadmap that confirmed what channels would be available in HD in the future!

 

[Jola]

My SD quality also improved when I got the HD Decoder, with the same plasma display, it seems that the SD from the HDMI output of the HD PVR is way better than the composite SD output from my old decoder (which was pretty old).

 

[satanboy]

Get yourself a decent name brand, like a Sony, Philips or Samsung. They have technology on board that will overcome weak RF signals, composite combing and everything else.
I have a Sony W Series, and it's Bravia Engine definitely gives me a better picture on the SD channels than I ever had on a CRT.

I agree.

 

[Lupus]

The TV's on display at those shops mentioned are not directly connected to the source via an HDMI cable, so watching the DSTV signal through them will never show you the true SD quality of a TV. I've had 3 different LCD TV's and most of the time if you have a good source your SD signal will be fine, especially if you have an HD PVR with the HDMI cables plugged in the SD quality sky rockets. I've even had a 42" plugged into an aerial for a bit to test it out and it wasn't as deplorable as the shops signal..

 

[TYR]

Hi all

I have been considering buying a full HD TV, but have a question before going for a purchase.

When I view the normal SD channels playing on the HD TV's on the shop floor, the quality of the picture shown is terrible when compared to CRT - the picture is fuzzy, choppy, blurry. I checked several stores (Game, Dion Wired, etc) but the picture quality shown there is just as bad, irrespective of brand. The only time the picture looked good was where a Blu Ray was being played.

Since by far most of our channels is still SD and by default this is what I will be viewing most of the time, is it normal for SD channels to look so bad compared to CRT? Or is it as I suspect just crappy picture quality/tuning in the stores, and at home proper tuning eliminates this problem?

I don't want to make a purchase for something that makes the quality of SD programmes worse than what I see on my good ol' CRT television

Thanks!

Don't just look at LCD's ... a good plasma is very forgiving on low quality video ... I have two plasmas, 42 and 50 .... SD material look excellent on both.

 

[WGS]

Also, HD only really "comes into its own" with a large screen (significantly larger than an typical SD TV screen) - for a typical lounge around 50" or bigger. The problem is that if you have a nice big HD screen and sit relatively close, so that you get the benefit of a large screen, you will enjoy watching HD material, but then, if you sit in the same position and watch an SD material, it will obviously look significantly worse! However, if you sit at a distance (or have a smaller screen) which makes SD material look good, then when you watch HD, if won't look much better as the extra resolution is a waste

Ok, my problem, dont know whether a 42" or 50" plasma is better for me?
Viewing distance from screen is 3mtrs (small lounge 4mtrs x 4mtrs).
Big mistake, took wife with to the shop to see screens, she wants 50"..................
After reading this, not sure which way to go
Any advice?
Thanks

 

[AstroTurf]

If you can afford the 50" get it.
Personally happy with our 42"

Normal aerial SABC looks terrible on a HD tv (with the horrible reception at our house anyway).

With TopTV it looks good, as does most of the channels.

 

[greg_SA]

Also, HD only really "comes into its own" with a large screen (significantly larger than an typical SD TV screen) - for a typical lounge around 50" or bigger. The problem is that if you have a nice big HD screen and sit relatively close, so that you get the benefit of a large screen, you will enjoy watching HD material, but then, if you sit in the same position and watch an SD material, it will obviously look significantly worse! However, if you sit at a distance (or have a smaller screen) which makes SD material look good, then when you watch HD, if won't look much better as the extra resolution is a waste

Ok, my problem, dont know whether a 42" or 50" plasma is better for me?
Viewing distance from screen is 3mtrs (small lounge 4mtrs x 4mtrs).
Big mistake, took wife with to the shop to see screens, she wants 50"..................
After reading this, not sure which way to go
Any advice?
Thanks

Hmmm... Are you going to use it for mainly normal TV? DSTV? It might be a good idea to go to a shop, and measure your viewing distance from the screen, and watch a 42" and 50" with some normal standard definition DSTV, and see what you think.

My lounge is also quite small (also around 4m long), and I'd probably go with the 42" because I still watch a lot of SD material. The idea would be to move that into the bedroom one day, and get a 50" for the lounge when HD is more widely available (ie. more HD DSTV channels, easier access to Blu-ray at video shops).

Have a look at this graph: http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.html
It shows you the relationship between screen size and viewing distance.

As you can see, for a viewing distance of 10 feet (seems about right for your room), a 35" screen is the limit for perfect standard def (480p).
Also, a 50" screen at your distance is the perfect size for HD (720p) material.
So to me, a 42" is a good compromise. SD won't look perfect, but the screen is big enough that you will see an improvement with HD sources.

 

[WGS]

Hmmm... Are you going to use it for mainly normal TV? DSTV? It might be a good idea to go to a shop, and measure your viewing distance from the screen, and watch a 42" and 50" with some normal standard definition DSTV, and see what you think.

My lounge is also quite small (also around 4m long), and I'd probably go with the 42" because I still watch a lot of SD material. The idea would be to move that into the bedroom one day, and get a 50" for the lounge when HD is more widely available (ie. more HD DSTV channels, easier access to Blu-ray at video shops).

Have a look at this graph: http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.html
It shows you the relationship between screen size and viewing distance.

As you can see, for a viewing distance of 10 feet (seems about right for your room), a 35" screen is the limit for perfect standard def (480p).
Also, a 50" screen at your distance is the perfect size for HD (720p) material.
So to me, a 42" is a good compromise. SD won't look perfect, but the screen is big enough that you will see an improvement with HD sources.

Thanks
My ideal setup and plan will be by next week, in time for SWC: Baby HD pvr and plasma
I watch alot of sport and action movies, so ultimately SSHD and Mnet HD will be viewed most of the time but also the other movie channels etc
Was thinking of the Sammy ps50c430 but the ps42c430 was just as clear albeit small.......and if the 42" will give me just as much clarity as the 50" at the same distance, then it looks like i will go for the 42"
Just need to check the price differences and who has stock....
Thanks

 

[Trix]

@WGS Had the same idea wrt viewing for SWC. Good Panasonic range not in the country . Didn't find the new LGs at shops i went to last weekend in CT. When I compared 2009 range of LG vs Samsung Plasmas, imho samsung picture quality was better than LG but LG TV sound was better than samsung. So I decided that Samsung was way to go as you can always get a surround home theatre add on later. The difference in 50" and 42" depends on how far away you gonna be sitting and what you can afford . I think that SD content on 42" will look better than on 50". Didn't get the baby pace pvr, decided to wait for the baby UEC hopefully coming later this year.

 

[WGS]

@WGS Had the same idea wrt viewing for SWC. Good Panasonic range not in the country . Didn't find the new LGs at shops i went to last weekend in CT. When I compared 2009 range of LG vs Samsung Plasmas, imho samsung picture quality was better than LG but LG TV sound was better than samsung. So I decided that Samsung was way to go as you can always get a surround home theatre add on later. The difference in 50" and 42" depends on how far away you gonna be sitting and what you can afford . I think that SD content on 42" will look better than on 50". Didn't get the baby pace pvr, decided to wait for the baby UEC hopefully coming later this year.

Thanks
Sitting about 3 mtrs from screen. Budgeted for 50", just need to see if pic quality is same or better between the 2, cos if 42" will give me same clarity as the 50" then i lean towards the 42"

 

[greg_SA]

Thanks
Sitting about 3 mtrs from screen. Budgeted for 50", just need to see if pic quality is same or better between the 2, cos if 42" will give me same clarity as the 50" then i lean towards the 42"

The clarity for SD will be better on the 42". For HD the 50" has the advantage of being bigger without sacrificing on clarity - but a real life test is definitely the way to go .

 

[pimpassdaddy]

I have the 50" (52 Inch if you insist)... My distance to the TV is around 5 - 5.5 meters... Very comfortable.

Go to a shop like Cats Digital, and ask them to put different size displays on... A TV too big, is also unfcomfortable, as I feel my eyes scanning the monitor while watching.

REMEMBER THIS: TV's look wayyyyyy smaller in the shop because of the space around aspect. My 50" is way bigger than I had imagined, and even a 46" would have done fine, and saved me a couple of bucks. Take your time, and go through the purchase step by step!

Picture wise, yep, the SD pic quality is ***!!!

I still enjoy my old CRT, although it has an "HD" panel... It's wayyyyyy better!

 

[WGS]

The clarity for SD will be better on the 42". For HD the 50" has the advantage of being bigger without sacrificing on clarity - but a real life test is definitely the way to go .

ok
Where will i get the best price?