full hd and sky hd question

[ghking3]

i asked before if full hd would make sd quality better than normal hd telly, but nobody replied, so now i want to ask basically the same question, but focusing on hd

after a discussion in a thread of mine about picture quality, i have started to watch sky through hdmi and the image on the none hd channels are somewhat better than scart/av comp, but not great, so was wondering if full hd would make any difference?... i do sit like 2 feet or less away atm, so likely to see the faults in quality aye?

im future thinking here as im going to buy a 2nd tv mid-late this year and debating whether to try full hd or just buy another normal hd set, but on a larger scale(40"-50")

 

[stockyvillage]

You sit 2ft away from a 40 to 50" and you are too close and will not be in recommended viewing range

 

[ntt4]

This is always useful to look at...

 

[ghking3]

40 or 50?

i have a 32, i do intend on buying later in the year a tv in that region, but i wouldnt be sitting that close.

if you happened to came across my thread in the members home cinema section, youd see my setup and why i sit that close

 

[gusjux]

Can only speak from personal experience which is limited but there is most certainly differences in SD quality amongst different full hd tvs so its a fair assumption that this would extend to full hd vs hd ready. Ultimately it depends on the actual tv and whats under the hood and to an extent your perception of adequate PQ. I'm sure there are some hd ready sets out there that do a better job than full hd ones in the SD department but haven't seen any first hand.

If I understand correctly Sky HD broadcasts in 1080i so if you have a HD ready tv there will always be an element of downscaling involved and depending on your tv the results may vary. From reading the forums these past 9 months I have seen so many different opinions on output settings for their tv and Sky HD that I put a lot of things down to personal preference and perception.

Intrestingly I have seen an older Panasonic LCD produce better PQ with SD Sky & Scart than Full HD sets displaying SD content via Sky HD using HDMI. So I am sure there are a lot of people who are disappointed with SD content when they upgrade to Sky HD.

Without knowing what tv you own its hard to tell if you will reap any benefits from a new tv if you are concerned about quality of SD. You may be getting great SD PQ without realising it and you expectations are to high

Comparing the two full hd sets i've owned, LG42LH3000 & Sony 40W5500 the difference is remarkable when watching SD content on Sky HD via HDMI. The LG made most SD channels appear 'blocky', abnormalities in the picture were frequent and magnified to the extent it put me off watching SD content completely.

Thanks to a two dodgy LG's I upgraded to the Sony and was shocked to discover the difference in SD PQ, especially as I only paid an extra £30 for the Sony which is in a different league.

Unless you have money to burn you may have to make some compromises when choosing the right tv for you. I was limited to a budget of £550 which made me go for the LG as this was the best I could find within budget (at the time the Sony was close a grand!). You also have to really think about the main function of the tv and what content you view and take any planned purchases (blu-ray, games consols etc) into consideration. I didn't have Sky HD when I bought the LG and had no intention to do so, I was living in a cable area with "free cable" the PQ with my PS3 was mind blowing and intended this to be the main source for the tv mostly blu-ray and downloaded hd content. Due to the nature of my cable source I just settled for having a picture at all and didnt worry about quality, so there were no probs as far as I was concerned. Then I moved to a non cable area so I took out Sky HD and it was then I started finding fault with the LG especially with Sky SD content.

Now my main use is Sky HD content (Sports then Movies) then Sky SD channels, Blu-Ray (PS3) and gaming (PS3). The W5500 is notorious for lagging issues with PS3 but a compramise I was willing to make when picking a different tv to the LG as the results with Sky HD (HD & SD channels) are fantastic. So if gaming was a big thing for you you may have to be prepared to make a compromise in the SD PQ department and vice versa. I would be surprised if there weren't any tvs where some compromise would have to be made if your budget extends to bottom/mid range tvs and you were using multiple sources. If you solely use SKY HD then it may be easier to find the 'perfect' tv for you.

It a bit unfair to compare the LG & Sony but it does show that you can get get tvs that produce great results with SKY HD SD content for a bargain price. At the end of the day it does all depends on your budget. The best thing to do would be find a decent retailer who allows you to see multiple sources and SD content on their tvs, most of the bigger retailers I've ventured into will insist on only showing you blu ray and say that they are unable to hook their tvs up to Sky probably in an attempt to hide the poor pq when handling sd.

Oh and move your armchair back, 2 feet!!!

 

[deckingman]

i asked before if full hd would make sd quality better than normal hd telly, but nobody replied, so now i want to ask basically the same question, but focusing on hd

after a discussion in a thread of mine about picture quality, i have started to watch sky through hdmi and the image on the none hd channels are somewhat better than scart/av comp, but not great, so was wondering if full hd would make any difference?... i do sit like 2 feet or less away atm, so likely to see the faults in quality aye?

im future thinking here as im going to buy a 2nd tv mid-late this year and debating whether to try full hd or just buy another normal hd set, but on a larger scale(40"-50")

I think in summary, some TVs are better at handling SD material than others. Whether they happen to be HD or full HD has little bearing on this.

 

[ghking3]

lol im on a office chair, my tv unit is directly under my tv which has my 2 pc monitors on amongst my other equipment and since its all hooked up through the receiver, it needs to be this close, but its not too bad, i have to look up most of the time when im on my pc lol, depends how i sit aswell as my bed is next to me so i put my feet up, so im about 2ish feet either angle, only move away when im playing ps3 or if a films on and i focus on that rather than multi-task, i sit no further than 5 feet max unless im in bed.

thanks for the replies anyway, i probly just being picky and expecting too much , alot of the channels look fine, but do get a very slight blurring when people move, like on a game show or something, put it this way, its better than SD through a none hd cable and better after i tampered with settings.

but wish everything was is hd as i certainly see the difference lol.

i have the R88 sammy(sig), i got it in november, wasnt my actual choice, but didnt have the ones i wanted and this looked good, so had this, i didnt have skyhd and wasnt intending to, only got it as im a customer anyways and upgraded my subscription and took their christmas offer of a free box .

anyways the quality seems fine for now, but i need to wait till i get a bigger better model tv to compare to, incase i am just being picky about it

 

[logiciel]

whether to try full hd or just buy another normal hd set

A "normal" TV would surely BE 1080p by now - it won't be long before there's nothing else.

 

[ghking3]

who knows, wont be getting a 2nd tv for awhile yet, so we'll see whats on the market when that time comes .

thinking about it, i shouldve paid more and got full hd given i sit pretty close to the tv for normal viewing which is most of the day every day , only when im in bed i wouldnt notice full hd...

 

[bwfc09]

sky 3d maybe out by time you go for a new tv so a 3d tv maybe an option

 

[ghking3]

funny enough my dad mentioned that to me the other day lol, i dont know though, could be good and could be bad, but ive heard you need to wear the glasses? if thats true then it wont appeal to me as although i like that effect, i wouldnt want it on a regular basis

 

[choddo2006]

who knows, wont be getting a 2nd tv for awhile yet, so we'll see whats on the market when that time comes .

thinking about it, i shouldve paid more and got full hd given i sit pretty close to the tv for normal viewing which is most of the day every day , only when im in bed i wouldnt notice full hd...

I don't think your blurring motion problem is related to the number of pixels.

 

[GasDad]

Just like to point out the viewing distance chart above is for 20:20 vision - many people have better vision than 20:20

 

[ghking3]

the blurring probly isnt related, i dont know, its only very very minor anyways though..

i dont know what my vision is lol, i wear glasses when at home if ive not been out and i wear contacts when i go out, but my subscription for my contacts are improved over my glasses, so my eyesight isnt as good with the glasses.