[nbaker]

Hi,

I am looking to buy a 28" Widescreen TV and would like to know do widescreens suffer with the 50Hz flicker more than a standard 21" TV? Can't say I have ever noticed any flicker on my Panny 21".

Also wanted to know if the 100Hz is worth the extra money.

I have short listed down to the following 3 sets:

Panasonic PS1 - 50HZ
Panasonic PS12 - 100HZ
JVC 28R25EKS - 50HZ


Regards

Nige.

I never noticed any 50hz flicker on my previous set (Panny 28" Widescreen, 50hz)

And every 100hz set looks awful- pixellation, juddering, sparkles, etc..

I do see 50hz flicker on my 42" RPTV (50hz set) but only on Region 2 PAL DVD's (which are 50hz), but my DVD collection is purely Region 1 NTSC (60hz) and no flicker.

No flicker in normal TV watching either.

I would really do lengthy viewing of 100hz sets, try fast moving camera pans, vertical/horizontal credit scrolling as these bring out 100hz nasties.

[Christ]

Originally posted by nathan_silly

And every 100hz set looks awful- pixellation, juddering, sparkles, etc..

Absolutely clueless..

Why do you think the 50Hz sets are entry level, with the more expensive models being 100 Hz?

I think you've spent too long looking at Tv's in showrooms with a poor source 1 foot away from the screen...

Rant over, just getting sick of your predictable replies when someone mentions 100 Hz or Sony..

Chris

Yeah OK I've seen 100hz with DVD as a source, still pixellate.

Go and spend time comparing. Just because something is "new" doesn't mean it's better.

Oh dear because I've said Sony are poor quality you feel offended. Boo hoo.

And the 100hz sets couldn't even keep up with a slow camera pan, lots of pixellation- Toshiba picture frame 100hz TV, Toshiba DVD via scart RGB.

[Christ]

Offended, do you really think so?? You perhaps need to get out more..

All I was meaning was that I personally spent months looking at just about every type and manufacturer of 32" Tv in my price bracket, and feel that it the best way for someone to buy a tv (coupled with advice from here of course!). Some of your "Opinions" (for want of a better word), in my own opinion, dont always necessarily point people in the right direction..

My advice to Nige would be to take a look at 100Hz sets himself, as I (and many others on here) did, and am more than happy, pixellation on DVD's.. Really??!!

Chris

The problem with 100hz sets (if) there is a problem, usually 100hz cannot be totally disabled, not like flicking a switch and flipping between a true 50hz and back again.


The main problem is video memory- if there isn't enough memory buffer during a fast pan something has to give. Either it stops working, or the video processor drops resoultion.

Some 100hz sets are better than others.

The scene I used was Antz, in the picnic scene, R2. A slow camera pan. Plugged into the Tosh 100hz PF, pixellates- even my brother noticed it (and he's never seen 100hz sets going before- said "What the hell is that?", and the sales guy even noticed it. Put over to a 50hz set, no pixellation.

I would rather have a slight shimmering from PAL 50hz than the image breaking up into pixels, roughly 3cm x 3cm.

The disc was clean.

And did I not say to the OP to compare 100hz sets?

[MartinImber]

I'm a 50Hz fan

I guess if the source is natively 100hz- ie a PC video card, then having the display at that refresh is the best way of doing it.


However having the source at 50hz and trying to make the display 100hz by interlopating is a inferior way of doing it.

The only solution then is replacing PAL & NTSC with PAL 100hz and NTSC 120hz (say doubling the currrent system) say should then help TV engineers just use the native input refresh, not trying to design the internals of a TV to increase a lower refresh source.

I'd never go back to a 50hz tv, that's how good I think 100hz is. Rock solid stable picture and DVD quality is fantastic, never seen any pixellation at all.

Currently using a Tosh 28zd26 (DVD via component/Sony ns900v). Looking to upgrade soon to PF2 or the new Panny PD30 series - both of which are 100hz sets, so 100hz is preferable for me.

Many 50hz tvs also reduce features being "entry level" and all...

[fatbob]

Hi Nige,

If you havn't noticed 50hz flicker on your 21" then you shouldn't really notice it on a 28" widescreen, although I would audition both 50hz and 100hz sets with a decent source, such as an RGB connected dvd player, before making a final decision.

When I was in a similar position a couple of years ago, I auditioned both and found that there where pros and cons to both systems.

I finally went for a 50hz set because I found that the benefits of 100Hhz weren't really that necessary on the small screen size (28") that I was in the market for, although had I been going for something bigger I would probably have gone for something with some kind of processing, such as 100hz or DRC, as larger screen sizes tend to make the scan lines which make up the image look very obvious, especially with NTSC dvds.

The "improvement" you get with 100hz isn't the same as going from composite video to RGB, or comparing VHS to DVD, as these are blatent improvements which are obvious to anyone. 100hz seems to be a matter of personal taste, especially on a screensize of 28".......... although I would say that if you do find that you like the look of 100hz, then it would be worth the extra money.

Bob.

Originally posted by crom
I'd never go back to a 50hz tv, that's how good I think 100hz is. Rock solid stable picture and DVD quality is fantastic, never seen any pixellation at all.

Ditto.

nbaker - You might want to expand your shortlist. Panny are not renowned for 'quality 100Hz'.

[MartinImber]

50Hz is not bottom end feature as such - ie 50Hz <> bottom end

It is that 1000Hz costs more so the TVs cost more

My 50Hz TV 3 Scart, 32", twin tuner (DVB-T & PAL) and no waste of money TV surround sound

[nbaker]

Thanks for the replies.

I am edging more towards the JVC 50Hz which also has 3D surround sound which should keep me going till I can afford a proper surround sound setup.

Is the JVC 28R25EKS any good? and is the 3D sound good?

Thanks

Nige.

Originally posted by nbaker
Is the JVC 28R25EKS any good? and is the 3D sound good?

It's not a bad TV but has some major negative points (which is why I sent one back for a refund):

3D sound is not as good as Virtual Dolby and I found the subwoofer caused the image to judder slightly at high volume levels. Speakers also distort sometimes, even at reasonable volume levels. None of this matters if you have/buy separate receiver/speakers.

Biggest problem I had with this TV is that the RGB is terrible - it's just too dark and lacking serious contrast. You can use S-Video instead though - looks very good (but not as good as RGB).

[MartinImber]

Any money spent on 3d sound virtual Dolby ect is a waste - the pennies could be going to a proper receiver/amp

Oh look there is a Sony STR-DB930 for sale for £185 - I have one excellent receiver.

[Christ]

Originally posted by nathan_silly


I would rather have a slight shimmering from PAL 50hz than the image breaking up into pixels, roughly 3cm x 3cm.

Surely you mean mm, even 3mm would be unwatchable..

Nope, whopping great pixellation, roughly 3 cm x 3cm. Played back several scenes, and pixellated.

That put me off 100hz.

[John Jennings]

I'm a 50Hz fan. I went 50Hz even though my budget was more than capable of buying a 100Hz set. I watch plenty of 100Hz, and you just kind of get used to the judders/pixels though. But then going back to 500Hz everything looks that bit more natural. I like it anyway

Worst thing about 50hz is the background whining you can detect sometimes (only if you're an obsessive freak like me). Never there on 100Hz tellys.

Some people have said 100hz buzz louder.. probably depends on your hearing and distance to the set.

Just for the record ...

I have a Sony LS60 100Hz set.

It's vanilla 100Hz.

It's quieter than all the 50Hz sets I had before it.

It doesn't ever pixellate.

It doesn't ever judder.

It delivers a sharper, more viewable image, on still shots than a 50Hz set.

The only side-effect of (vanilla) 100Hz is the very mild blurring you get with very fast horizontal pans or very fast horizontal scrolling text (which happen rarely in viewing anyway).

Any artefacts that are seen on 100Hz sets other than the above are due to the additional processing that takes place beyond vanilla 100Hz (e.g. Sony DRC, Philips Pixel+), but it's also down to the quality of the source and the way each set has been setup. 100Hz sets work better with top notch sources and require more precise tweaking of settings than 50Hz sets (well, after all, they do have more functionality).



Nathan - Your posts are full of sweeping statements and generalisations about 100Hz based on your experiences with particular sets. If you kept your statements relative to the particular sets that you'd had experiences with and referred to the particular settings that were active at the time, fewer people would take issue with your comments