1. Join Now

    AVForums.com uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

4:3 v 16:9 RPTV

Discussion in 'TVs' started by Bassbin, Apr 26, 2003.

  1. Bassbin

    Bassbin
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2003
    Messages:
    2,395
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Leicester
    Ratings:
    +56
    I bought a Toshiba 43" rptv last year and after a lot of thought went for the 4:3 model in favour of the 16:9 one. I reasoned that the picture is almost as wide as the 42" 16:9 set from the same range but the overall surface area of the screen is much higher. I know 16:9 is more cinematic but does anyone else out there favour the bigger image size of 4:3 for the money?
     
  2. nathan_silly

    nathan_silly
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    For purely 4:3 material then OK I guess. But once you watch 2:35 ratio DVD's the top/bottom bars are huge.. so you're loosing alot of picture size.
     
  3. Bassbin

    Bassbin
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2003
    Messages:
    2,395
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Leicester
    Ratings:
    +56
    That's what I though before I purchased it but when I measured the screens in the store the 42" 16:9 set only gave an image 45-50mm wider so a 43" 4:3 can give the same size WS image as a 40" 16:9 set so the trade off was easily out weighed by the much bigger image for normal TV viewing.
     
  4. CraigKORE

    CraigKORE
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0

    Oh Yes! And infact, I just today placed an order for the new Tosh 43inch 4:3 (43VJ22P).

    The 43inch 4:3 Tosh gives you a widescreen 16:9 picture size of approx 40inch, with the added benefit of 43inch full screen for all 4:3 stuff. On the other hand, if I was to buy, say, a 42inch wide set, I would only get about 2 inch extra for 16:9 material, and drop bloody 5 inches in both directions for 4:3 stuff, since a 42inch widescreen only gives about a 28inch size for watching 4:3 material.

    I have quite a lot of non-anamorphic DVDs, which I find can be a nightmare on a widescreen set, and there is still a hell of a lot of stuff broadcast which is not 16:9 widescreen, I'm not talking about films, but TV shows, music videos ect.. Infact, even a good majority of 'extras' on DVDs still seem to be 4:3!

    I know that if I was buying a TV mainly to watch films, then a 16:9 set would more than likely be the better option, but to someone like myself who has a lot of non-anamorphic disks, disks of old comedies, older films, and watches quite a lot of 4:3 broadcast programmes, then sticking with a large 4:3 set for now is the superior option and the better of both worlds when it comes to aspect ratio compromise.

    To sum up, I will have a nice 43inch screen size for all 4:3 material, and a nice approx 40inch 16:9 size for all anamorphic material. And no need to mess about with different ratio options either, just a simple 16:9 button and thats it. In an ideal world though, I would have one TV for 4:3 material, and another widescreen set for 16:9 material... ;)
     

Share This Page

Loading...