New TV

[Greg H]

I am in the market for a big screen TV.
I was going to get plasma or lcd, but was told later this year some new
format will come out better quality and half the price???
Is this true ? can someone tell me more about this latest format ?
Thanks kindly

 

[Phil Allison]

"Greg H"

I am in the market for a big screen TV.
I was going to get plasma or lcd, but was told later this year some new
format will come out better quality and half the price???

** Was told - by whom ?

Some fat prick in a fairy costume with a wand ????

Is this true ?

** Ask the fat prick.

Post his reply in detail.

Ought to be good for a BIG laugh !!

can someone tell me more about this latest format ?

** The fat prick can - you gullible DOPE !!

Thanks kindly.

** Fark off.




.......... Phil

 

[David L. Jones]

I am in the market for a big screen TV.
I was going to get plasma or lcd, but was told later this year some new
format will come out better quality and half the price???

Nope but prices on LCD and Plasma are dropping faster than you can
walk into the next shop. Production yields and display quality is
improving all the time. Although the recent inclusion of integral
STB's seems to have upped the prices a bit of late.
Plasma still gives the best bang-per-buck for large screens (42" or
greater).

Is this true ? can someone tell me more about this latest format ?

Not a chance. They have been saying this for many years, but there is
no technology that is even close to being production ready to beat LCD
and plasma.

It certainly won't be laser TV that is (or was) being spruiked by this
mob:
http://www.arasor.com.au/

Dave.

 

[James]

Having repaired a lot of different TVs, I must admit that pretty much all
of them are crap. Some are crappier than other.
I am not talking picture quality, but reliability and quality of
build/design.

IIn my opinion, CRT are still have better reliability than other types.
For large screen ones -- CRT rear-pro may be an option.
If you want "slim" on, i would suggest LCD, but then again depends on
size. At the moment it very difficult to make plasmas less than 42" nd
pretty expensive make large LCD screens. Plasma is pretty bad technology.
LCD are more robust.
I would also suggest staying away from big brands like SONY, Philips and
Samsung (Panasonic seem to be OK, although pricy). Samsung can produce
really good and really bad stuff at same time and generally does not last
long, although not sure about their LCDs. I would suggest LG. At least
repairs are cheaper than other brands.
From the number of companies I do warranty work for, Palsonic seem to be
good value for money. And picture quality is pretty good too.

Yes, laser and SED (I hope I spelled that right) TVs are coming. Not sure
when. I would expect them to be overpriced in the beginning and we will
not kno how good/bad technology is. So, I would recommend not to wait.

Certainly do not buy LCD projection TVs.
DLP projection TVs are better, but lamps cost quite a bit and you get
about 4000-6000hours from one.

And the last word of advise --- especially for plasmas and LCDs, buy
extended warranty for as long as possible!

What do I have at home? 51" Panasonic CRT rear-pro.

Hope it helps,
Rudolf

Good advice Rudolf, but are any retailers still marketing CRT rear
projections, they seem to be all but extinct in stores. Last TV I bought,
~15months ago, was a 43" CRT RPTV, and I dont give a shit that everyone
thinks its old crap technology, the fact of the matter is that it was a
damnside cheaper (then) than LCD or Plasma, and the picture is better
(Iguess thats subjective), plus I can repair it if / when it breaks down
without just board swapping. My parents bought a 51" Panasonic Plasma a few
weeks ago, and to be honest I don't like it, I think it the picture looks
bloody terrible.

James

 

[kreed]

I am in the market for a big screen TV.
I was going to get plasma or lcd, but was told later this year some new
format will come out better quality and half the price???
Is this true ? can someone tell me more about this latest format ?
Thanks kindly

About the only thing I could think of is OLED technology. Looks like
it has its problems, (short life of the LEDs being one) but Sony are
going to trial marketing OLED sets this year (2007?). At manufacture
quantity of 1000 a month, I wouldnt hold my breath waiting for them to
be super-cheap, and the sizes (up to 27 inch) mentioned dont sound a
lot like "big screen" (by modern standards) to me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oled

I think Rudolf's advice is good advice for your purchase, especially
the part about extended warranty .

the aus $ is pretty high at the moment, another good reason to
consider a purchase, in case it drops again

 

[David L. Jones]

Good advice Rudolf, but are any retailers still marketing CRT rear
projections, they seem to be all but extinct in stores. Last TV I bought,
~15months ago, was a 43" CRT RPTV, and I dont give a shit that everyone
thinks its old crap technology, the fact of the matter is that it was a
damnside cheaper (then) than LCD or Plasma, and the picture is better
(Iguess thats subjective), plus I can repair it if / when it breaks down
without just board swapping. My parents bought a 51" Panasonic Plasma a few
weeks ago, and to be honest I don't like it, I think it the picture looks
bloody terrible.

I got a 42" Panasonic Plasma last month and I think the picture is
fantastic. I'm seeing detail in my favorite movies I've never seen
before. It has lots of image enhancement technology too, stuff like
contrast enhancement and edge smoothing.

Interestingly, the Panasonic was one of the few that had fan forced
cooling on the top vents, and consequently seems to run very cool. The
other brands and models without the fan forced cooling ran fairly hot
to the touch on the top vents, that can't be good for long term
reliability. The fans on the Panasonic are wisper quiet, can't hear
them at all.

I didn't get the extended warranty, so fingers crossed.

Dave.

 

[David L. Jones]

Good advice Rudolf, but are any retailers still marketing CRT rear
projections, they seem to be all but extinct in stores. Last TV I bought,
~15months ago, was a 43" CRT RPTV, and I dont give a shit that everyone
thinks its old crap technology, the fact of the matter is that it was a
damnside cheaper (then) than LCD or Plasma, and the picture is better
(Iguess thats subjective), plus I can repair it if / when it breaks down
without just board swapping. My parents bought a 51" Panasonic Plasma a few
weeks ago, and to be honest I don't like it, I think it the picture looks
bloody terrible.

It wasn't a standard definition panel was it?
I'm amazed why anyone would buy an SD (720x480) plasma, it can't even
show a PAL DVD or DTV signal in full resolution.

Dave.

 

[James]

It wasn't a standard definition panel was it?
I'm amazed why anyone would buy an SD (720x480) plasma, it can't even
show a PAL DVD or DTV signal in full resolution.

Dave.

No, 1366 x 768, so not really high definition either, in my view high
definition means a native resolution of 1920 x 1080 but that costs megabucks
in a 51" panel There seems to be a lot of artifacts visible even using
the inbuilt HD tuner, noticable at a resonable viewing distance of ~4
metres. Maybe I'm just looking too hard, but my brother also noticed it when
he was watching it & he has a 42" Panasonic plasma & a smaller loungeroom
(closer viewing) & believes his looks better.

James

 

[James]

No, 1366 x 768, so not really high definition either, in my view high
definition means a native resolution of 1920 x 1080 but that costs
megabucks in a 51" panel There seems to be a lot of artifacts visible
even using the inbuilt HD tuner, noticable at a resonable viewing distance
of ~4 metres. Maybe I'm just looking too hard, but my brother also noticed
it when he was watching it & he has a 42" Panasonic plasma & a smaller
loungeroom (closer viewing) & believes his looks better.

James

Sorry for replying to myself, but in contrast, a friend of the family has a
Pioneer 51" plasma and it does indeed look fantastic, I do not recall the
model but I did look up the specs at the time and i think it was also a 1366
x 768 panel.

James

 

[Alex Gibson]

About the only thing I could think of is OLED technology. Looks like
it has its problems, (short life of the LEDs being one) but Sony are
going to trial marketing OLED sets this year (2007?). At manufacture
quantity of 1000 a month, I wouldnt hold my breath waiting for them to
be super-cheap, and the sizes (up to 27 inch) mentioned dont sound a
lot like "big screen" (by modern standards) to me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oled

Wonder how they solved the burn in problems ?
Or is that only certain types of oled ?

Alex

 

[David L. Jones]

No, 1366 x 768, so not really high definition either, in my view high
definition means a native resolution of 1920 x 1080 but that costs megabucks
in a 51" panel There seems to be a lot of artifacts visible even using
the inbuilt HD tuner, noticable at a resonable viewing distance of ~4
metres. Maybe I'm just looking too hard, but my brother also noticed it when
he was watching it & he has a 42" Panasonic plasma & a smaller loungeroom
(closer viewing) & believes his looks better.

If you are basing your test on DTV signal artifacts then that's not
the best way to do it.
Compression ratio and quality varies greatly channel-to-channel and
program-to-program (Channel 7 are notoriously bad).
You aren't actually testing the screen itself this way, you are
instead testing the quality of the tuner and the TV station encoding
being used at that time.

Dave.

 

[Phil Allison]

"David L. Jones"
"James"

If you are basing your test on DTV signal artifacts then that's not
the best way to do it.
Compression ratio and quality varies greatly channel-to-channel and
program-to-program (Channel 7 are notoriously bad).
You aren't actually testing the screen itself this way, you are
instead testing the quality of the tuner and the TV station encoding
being used at that time.

** Gotta agree with Dave on this one.

To compare screens ( also goes for speakers, CD players etc) you must have
source material that is beyond blame.

Outside of digitally generated audio /video test signals on a CD or DVD,
such quality likely does not exist in the commercial world.

Maybe go instead for a recently released DVD of a big budget movie.

Ought to look pretty damn good if played on a good DVD player.

But be aware - true " HD " video is not to be found on ordinary DVDs or
broadcast DTV signals.




........ Phil

 

[Poxy]

If you are basing your test on DTV signal artifacts then that's not
the best way to do it.
Compression ratio and quality varies greatly channel-to-channel and
program-to-program (Channel 7 are notoriously bad).
You aren't actually testing the screen itself this way, you are
instead testing the quality of the tuner and the TV station encoding
being used at that time.

True, but I have found that many plasma (and LCD) TV's seem to accentuate
compression artefacting significantly more than CRT TV's. While it may be
due to the superior sharpness of plasmas, I suspect it may also be due to
the coparitively smaller colour gamut of many panels.

 

[David L. Jones]

"David L. Jones"
"James"







** Gotta agree with Dave on this one.

To compare screens ( also goes for speakers, CD players etc) you must have
source material that is beyond blame.

Outside of digitally generated audio /video test signals on a CD or DVD,
such quality likely does not exist in the commercial world.

Maybe go instead for a recently released DVD of a big budget movie.

The most recent Star Wars is ideal, fully digitally filmed and
produced, so no film grain or any other film tranfer issues.

Ought to look pretty damn good if played on a good DVD player.

Gotta make sure you use your best available interface too. Every
player has component video, and HMDI is now widely available.

But be aware - true " HD " video is not to be found on ordinary DVDs or
broadcast DTV signals.

Most definitely.
Some of the early BlueRay/HD-DVD reviews leave a lot to be desired
too. Some even have worse transfers (or no better than) than the
standard DVD version. No point having a HD version of a film if it was
produced in a hurry to get to market.

Dave.

 

[dmm]

Gotta make sure you use your best available interface too. Every
player has component video, and HMDI is now widely available.


Most definitely.
Some of the early BlueRay/HD-DVD reviews leave a lot to be desired
too. Some even have worse transfers (or no better than) than the
standard DVD version. No point having a HD version of a film if it was
produced in a hurry to get to market.

Dave.

Which plasma did you end up getting?

 

[David L. Jones]

Which plasma did you end up getting?

This is:
http://panasonic.com.au/products/details.cfm?objectID=3127

One of the few models left on the market without a built-in digital
tuner, and priced accordingly.

Dave.

 

[Kim Elve]

I am in the market for a big screen TV.
I was going to get plasma or lcd, but was told later this year some new
format will come out better quality and half the price???
Is this true ? can someone tell me more about this latest format ?
Thanks kindly

Use to be SED, but since that's dead it's now OLED.
Cheers.

 

[atec 77]

Good advice Rudolf, but are any retailers still marketing CRT rear
projections, they seem to be all but extinct in stores. Last TV I bought,
~15months ago, was a 43" CRT RPTV, and I dont give a shit that everyone
thinks its old crap technology, the fact of the matter is that it was a
damnside cheaper (then) than LCD or Plasma, and the picture is better
(Iguess thats subjective), plus I can repair it if / when it breaks down
without just board swapping. My parents bought a 51" Panasonic Plasma a few
weeks ago, and to be honest I don't like it, I think it the picture looks
bloody terrible.

James

Sony do a 70" rpro for 3>4 k