View Single Post
Old 11-03-2007, 11:21 PM   #13
Spafon Spafon is offline
Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Experience Points:
4,903, Level: 16
Points: 4,903, Level: 16 Points: 4,903, Level: 16 Points: 4,903, Level: 16
Activity: 0%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
Thanks: Gave 70, Got 13
Posts: 297
Re: Does 100mhz really cure motion blur?

Quote:
Originally Posted by pandamonia View Post
Its the signal not the TV that affects SD, this is why people claim plasma owns??!?!?

its cus they are 720p at most and its bound to look better, SD looks great on 420p CRT.

Try playing 1080p Blu ray movie and then you will see why £1500 is a good investment.
I should have made it clear when I asked the question: my only interest is watching broadcast TV and not games or Blu-Ray.

It therefore really doesn't matter if I'm only watching 720p if it gives me what I perceive to be a better picture on SD and HD than an LCD on 1080i. Whether it's the TV or the signal that causes this doesn't really matter to me.

My experence is that of the big screens I've seen at friends I've preferred plasma over LCD, and certainly I prefer plasma for sport. But on a smaller screen I find LCDs look great for most things, but I've been unimpressed by the blurring while watching football. With the wife not really wanting a 42" I need to look at LCDs that can do football without blurring. Unfortunately the consensus seems to be that at this point the technology isn't up to it.

Even so, the wife might yet win and my desire to watch football without blur may well be over-ruled by her desire to have a TV that "goes" with the room

Thanks all.
  Quote