Confused.. a little help?

Hi people,

I've been a little slow in getting in the big-screen revolution - so far, just been happy with my 28" direct view TV.

Have been thinking long and hard about plasmas - will be watching about 95% DVD - 5% TV, and will be partnering it with either a Pioneer 868 or a Pioneer 668.

Firstly, will the two DVD players really offer anything different in PQ (don't care about DVD-A, CD playback etc) - their specs seem identical, both are Pal Prg and offer HDMI?? Price difference is about £250!

Secondly, am not sure whether to go for a 42" Panny/43" Pioneer or 50" Panasonic / 50" Pioneer. The money for 50" is stupid, but the thing that is tempting me to save up longer to get a 50" rather than a 42" is the higher number of pixels. Is the increase in the number of pixels going from 42"/43" -> 50" enough to compensate for the loss in quality due to the screen being bigger?

Finally, if HD standards are 1920px across, then am I right in thinking that none of these TVs are really HD standard. I understand that they'll playback HD signals, but won't I need to wait until manufacturers can squeeze more pixels onto the screen in order to get the full benefit of HD res? Or am I being stupid?

A little help... pretty please?

 

1, if u dont care about cd then get the cheaper one and....
2, put the cash into a 50 inch screen(bigger is better)
3, sorry ive no idea

 

HD - well, currently as far as I'm aware there's really no sources for HD video (although I think there's one satellite somewhere which I think does, but it's not Sky or Freeview or DVD). So is HD required? It would be nice to have the ability to use this in the future, but you'll also have to consider the resolution of the screens. If it's got fewer pixels than the HD signal, you're not showing the full picture.

Both Panasonic and Pioneer do excellent plasma screens. As for which size to opt for, other than financial considerations, you'll have to consider the viewing room you've got. You don't want to be sitting too close to the screen, but if you've got a larger living space, then 50" is tempting.

Not sure about the DVD players, but since you're going to be viewing these 95% of the time, pick the better one.

All the best,

Dr John Sim.

 

Joe, John and Mikedown,

Thank you all - Joe, you're 868v668 was particularly helpful.

Have definitely decided on the 868, but am now not sure whether I should get a plasma (prob 43" 434 Pioneer) or a 36" CRT TV (prob Tosh or Phillips). Will be looking round demo rooms etc., but am just cautious about plasmas for two reasons:

1. Will I be happier with a 36" screen and more money in my pocket.
2. Possible PQ issues of plasma, although this should be a great setup of HDMId 434 with 868!
3. Screen burn (minor issue as long as I'm careful).

These points I'll have to decide for myself I suppose, so thanks for all your help.

 

A 36" TV doesn't have the same "Wow" factor as a plasma! Picture quality is different from CRT, but that's mainly because everybody has grown up with a CRT TV. It's the same if you looked at front or rear projection solutions, they're all different than CRT. Certainly, go and have a look at plasmas at your local specialist, but also take on board that they may not be demonstrated at their best! Also, you're looking at two of the best manufacturers - Panasonic and Pioneer. The lower end plasmas tend to look as if you've taken cling film and wraped your Panasonic/Pioneer screen up!

Screen burn continues to be a concern for many, but as you say it's a minor issue. General rule of thumb seems to be that you should be careful in the first 100 hours, and afterwards ensure that you've not got static images displayed for extended periods. I've not noticed any burn on mine, and I view a variety of programs.

All the best,

Dr John Sim.