 | | | 
10-01-2003, 12:16 AM
|
#1 (permalink)
| | Guest |  IS 4:3 TVs STILL WORTH BUYING!
I am thinking of buying a 29” 4:3 as they are under £300 for a good one and I like bog TV’s and the equivalent in a widescreen TV is 36” and they are £1400 plus!! Now I have NTL analogue and don’t plan getting digital until analogue is switched off…when is that going to be….do you think I will get my use out of a 29” 4:3??
Thanks in advance for any help here  | |
|  | |
10-01-2003, 12:19 AM
|
#2 (permalink)
| | Guest | Sorry typo
I ment "big" not "bog"
| |
| | |
10-01-2003, 1:30 AM
|
#3 (permalink)
| | Member
Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Glockamorra
Posts: 265
Thanks: Gave 3, Got 5 |
And you meant "are" instead of "is".
| 
| | |
10-01-2003, 1:47 AM
|
#4 (permalink)
| | Guest |
Yes I'm aware of that too; I did write it in a hurry...what about answering the question then smart arse  | |
| | |
10-01-2003, 5:25 AM
|
#5 (permalink)
| | Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 175
Thanks: Gave 0, Got 0 | Re: Sorry typo
Quote: Originally posted by pixel
I ment "big" not "bog" | why not just use the edit feature?
| |
| | |
10-01-2003, 5:29 AM
|
#6 (permalink)
| | Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 175
Thanks: Gave 0, Got 0 |
I think it's around 2006 when they switch off the signal
| |
| | |
10-01-2003, 1:42 PM
|
#7 (permalink)
| | Super Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Somewhere in South Yorkshire
Posts: 9,270
Thanks: Gave 465, Got 946 | Quote: Originally posted by pixel
what about answering the question then smart arse | If you want a meaningful answer, this isn't the way to get one.
__________________
Nigel
Except on matters of forum moderation, the views expressed in this post are my own, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of AVForums. | |
| | |
10-01-2003, 2:57 PM
|
#8 (permalink)
| | Prominent Member
Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Manchester
Posts: 4,409
Thanks: Gave 95, Got 75 |
Do you have a DVD player?
If not, are you thinking of getting one in the near future?
If so then go for a WS TV as most DVDs are in WS.
If not then a 4:3 TV for under £300 seems like a good choice.
| |
| | |
10-01-2003, 4:56 PM
|
#9 (permalink)
| | New Member
Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 3
Thanks: Gave 0, Got 0 | Quote: Originally posted by nigel
If you want a meaningful answer, this isn't the way to get one. | Oh don't be too harsh, I actually quite liked the comment, and LOL'd.
He did put a little smiley face next to it, to signify that it was a jokey comment.
Oh, and in an attempt to answer the question, I'd say that if you're going to be spending a lot of money then it makes sense to buy a 16:9 TV to keep up with the times, and to ensure that your TV isn't obsolete in a couple of years. If you aren't spending too much and prefer a 4:3, then you aren't losing too much. Besides you can still watch 16:9 with the black bars, and at least The Simpsons and Futurama are still 4:3 productions...thats gotta be a bonus.
Last edited by Symm; 10-01-2003 at 5:00 PM.
| |
| | |
10-01-2003, 5:53 PM
|
#10 (permalink)
| | New Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 27
Thanks: Gave 0, Got 0 |
The U.S. don't really use widescreen, they are preparing for HDTV which is nearer a 4:3. Is this the way we should be going?
| |
| | |
10-01-2003, 6:15 PM
|
#11 (permalink)
| | Super Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Somewhere in South Yorkshire
Posts: 9,270
Thanks: Gave 465, Got 946 | Quote: Originally posted by SteveCac
The U.S. don't really use widescreen, they are preparing for HDTV which is nearer a 4:3. | Really? All the HDTVs I've ever seen in the US are exactly 16x9.
__________________
Nigel
Except on matters of forum moderation, the views expressed in this post are my own, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of AVForums. | |
| | |
10-01-2003, 6:23 PM
|
#12 (permalink)
| | Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 175
Thanks: Gave 0, Got 0 |
the next thing will be 47:20 TV's
why can't u get them now, so u can watch 2.35:1 films properly?
| |
| | |
10-01-2003, 6:34 PM
|
#13 (permalink)
| | New Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 27
Thanks: Gave 0, Got 0 | Quote: Originally posted by nigel
Really? All the HDTVs I've ever seen in the US are exactly 16x9. | Now that I've looked I see that most are, but not all of them are 16:9, especially crappy rear projection, but my point was, if you forget 4:3 to future proof for widescreen, will this be lost when we get HDTV.
| |
| | |
10-01-2003, 6:41 PM
|
#14 (permalink)
| | Guest |
You can get 4:3 TVs that have a 16:9 mode to make use of anamorphic transfers and broadcasts, so if you get a 4:3, make sure it has a 16:9 mode.
Not as good as anamorphic widescreen on a widescreen TV though and just think of the huge black borders you'll get on a 2.35:1 movie 
Re HDTV - look at the standard, not just the end products. Widescreen rules there too.
| |
| | |
10-01-2003, 6:52 PM
|
#15 (permalink)
| | Prominent Member
Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Manchester
Posts: 4,409
Thanks: Gave 95, Got 75 | Quote: Originally posted by MackemX
why can't u get them now, so u can watch 2.35:1 films properly? | You CAN watch them 'properly' on a 16:9 TV
What about 1.85:1, 2.00:1, 2.20:1 2.70:1 films?
16:9 is a good compromise and at then end of the day, it's television and NOT hollywood films they are primarily designed for.
| |
| | | |
Linear Mode
