1. Join Now

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

Is 100 Hz really that good?

Discussion in 'Televisions' started by patwestlake, Jan 29, 2003.

  1. patwestlake

    patwestlake
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2003
    Messages:
    129
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Cardiff
    Ratings:
    +6
    Hi,

    Been looking at the PL1 and PL10 (32" flavours) and have struggled to see the reason to shell the extra £150. OK, so both have been on display in specialist shops and Currys, but both "look" the same - do you only spot the advantages once properly set up, or is it just personal choice (and I don't mean the wife or bank manager!)

    I guess that this question is across manufactureres rather than just panasonic, and have considered the LS35/60 from sony and the phillips versions as well. Tosh is just too damn ugly!

    Your thought please!

    Pat
     
  2. Rookies

    Rookies
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2003
    Messages:
    4,894
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    103
    Ratings:
    +344
    It all depends how good your eyes are and how sensitive you are to flickers.

    I would never go back to a 50hz tv now as i can see the flicker very easy now after having my 100 digital plus tv
     
  3. Kevo

    Kevo
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2001
    Messages:
    5,354
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    86
    Location:
    Manchester
    Ratings:
    +144
    Yes it really is THAT good and yes, you will appreciate it more once set up properly in your own home.
     
  4. Will Hunting

    Will Hunting
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    my friend has a panasnoic and its not very good. he had some problems. i wouldnt buy panasonic.
     
  5. p306

    p306
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    100 Hz reduces the flicker but produces annoying side effects.
    They can be taken care of but how succesfully depends on the design. Present designs look pretty primitive and hardly worth the price. Computer monitor set to 100 Hz is sort of equivalent to 100 Hz television that uses progressive scan. Dscaler sofware that is free of charge produces much better results than any tv design I have seen so far.
     
  6. deckard

    deckard
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2002
    Messages:
    425
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    leicester
    Ratings:
    +0
    I've got a TX32PL1 and cannot notice any flicker.

    However, I seem to remember reading somewhere on this esteemed forum a post from a knowledgable member that not everyone is sensitive to 50Hz flicker - I guess I'm one of those lucky souls!

    The key therefore is in looking yourself, if you can't see the flicker, save yourself some dosh!
     
  7. drummerboy

    drummerboy
    Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    90
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Location:
    Leics
    Ratings:
    +5
    patwestlake

    Some 100Hz sets are better than others, obviously.
    I've also been looking at the Panasonics, and I tend to agree with you. The 50Hz sets are as probably better when it comes to a sharp looking picture.
    From what I've seen over the last 6 months (and I've looked at a lot of sets) the current set of Panasonic 100Hz sets are not as good as they should be, and this is backed up by the mag reviews of them.
     
  8. p306

    p306
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Europe will begin to broadcast high definition tv signals in the beginning of year 2004 see http://www.euro1080.tv/
    Most likely they will use 1080i/50 Hz standard!
    It will be time to move to LCD and Plasma displays and leave CRTs behind. Goodbye to tv monsters!
     
  9. Fouldsie

    Fouldsie
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Messages:
    10
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Location:
    Swindon
    Ratings:
    +0
    I wouldn't touch a 100hz TV if you paid me.

    I recently bought a Panasonic 100hz and called the store back the next day as the picture was awful - pixilation, 'Ready Break' effect, blocking, etc, etc. They changed the set for a Philips 9527 pixel plus and although the picture was better it still had the 'Ready Break' effect, football was unwatchable with juddering ball and blurred images on panning, and blocking on some images.

    I've been back into the store this morning and they're changing it for a Panasonic PL1 which is 50hz and should making viewing a pleasure rather than a chore.

    When 100hz is good it's brilliant but when it's not, which is more often than not, it's unwatchable. Give me 50hz any day:D
     
  10. Rookies

    Rookies
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2003
    Messages:
    4,894
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    103
    Ratings:
    +344
    May I ask how far were you sitting from your tv that you did not like??
     
  11. Fouldsie

    Fouldsie
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Messages:
    10
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Location:
    Swindon
    Ratings:
    +0
    Rookie

    I'm probably closer than recommended at about 7 feet but even so the 100hz picture should still be watchable. It is in the same place as my old 50hz and that was never a problem.
     
  12. Rookies

    Rookies
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2003
    Messages:
    4,894
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    103
    Ratings:
    +344
    That fine,

    Just that Most of the time on my FX66 the picture is great even looking 2 feet away, But when i do get bad picture which is mainly BBC 1 and BBC2 and some shopping channels when sitting back it about 8 - 10 feet away it great just when you look close you see it.

    That why i ask so it appears looking at what you had 7 feet away you can see dots on people etc? That is not acceptable No, but like i said on mine sometime there are dots when you look a feet or 2 away but if you sat 8 feet away it hard to see them. it all down to poor transmitting, end of the day it the tv that too good for the poor signals
     
  13. Rookies

    Rookies
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2003
    Messages:
    4,894
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    103
    Ratings:
    +344
    Also one day broadcaster will have to improve there work by sending higher bitstream and do less compression to the MPEG.

    Also the Sony FX66 seem to cope very well at the moment once you have the settings correct
     
  14. Robert

    Robert
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I have a philips 32Pw 8717 100Hz model and a Grundig 29" Megatron 4:3 50hz TV. The Grundig both Terrestrial Transmission and DVD Performance is Excellent, even if you stay glued to it, no pixelation or any quirks ETC.! While the Philips, Terrestial Vision is Hopeles, filled of processing and pixellation, the only concern is that the the broadcast is transmitted to 4:3 ratio and the quality transmited is not that good! So the philips has to widen up the pic. loosing on detail and magnifying low quailty broadcast. While when viewing DVD's the Philips Picture is superb, seems 3 dimensional!

    So I have determined that, 100Hz Processing has not been really mastered by several manufacturers and manufacturers need to spend more time in perfecting the picture. While 50Hz TV's is a safe bet! I think if I had the chance I would have gone for the 50Hz model in Philips Range!
     
  15. drummerboy

    drummerboy
    Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    90
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Location:
    Leics
    Ratings:
    +5
    Robert
    I Agree. I had this set for 2 months from Oct. last year (although ended up getting a refund due to NTSC replay issues) and came to exactly the same conclusion.
    B T W, have you tried switching 'Digital Scan' off in either Widescreen or 4:3 mode ? Detail levels actually increase, making DVDs look even better than before, most of the time.
     
  16. raZorfish

    raZorfish
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Even if 100 Hz TVs aren't really that great, it doesn't mean that standard 50 Hz (interlaced) is the best alternative.

    The most attractive alternative in my opinion is 50 Hz progressive scan TVs, especially when the signal is fed through a PAL progressive DVD player (which is now starting to become available after the Macrovision issue was sorted out just recently).


    raZorfish
    ;)
     
  17. patwestlake

    patwestlake
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2003
    Messages:
    129
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Cardiff
    Ratings:
    +6
    OK guys,

    so the vote seems to be favouring 50hz....

    I have a Limit 9900SE which has progressive scan and a really sharp picture onn JVC 4:3 23" CRT.

    So which widescreen do i go for...???

    Cheers so far for the contributions!

    Pat
     
  18. Robert

    Robert
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    What were your issue's with NTSC replays? I will check the menu, but I have already set any processing within the Picture menus as off, and sharpness set to zero! The first Set that was deleivered had a problem with switching on and off continously, and the last model delived have the black bars issue when using the front AV's which i have reported to the supplier. But overall, I have bought this TV to watch DVD's and on Ext1 RGB and Ext S-Video the picture is immaculate.

    But as I said in the above post, in my opinion 50 Hz is a much safer bet than 100hz. As the picture shows that it is being processed or filtered by some sort of digital processing, mostly when viewing low quality transmission. There is a model in the Philips range, i think its the 32 Pw6515, its a 50 Hz real flat screen model with Crystal Clear 3 Processing and people buying a new wide screen should give it a look!
     
  19. Robson

    Robson
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Back onto the subject of 100hz, but why can't a TV display an image at 100hz without all the processing artifacts?
     
  20. patwestlake

    patwestlake
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2003
    Messages:
    129
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Cardiff
    Ratings:
    +6
    Do 100hz and 50Hz TV's process in the same way, ie decode the signal and then display, or is the 100 hz actually the 50hz picture PLUS additional information?

    Cheers
    Pat
     
  21. raZorfish

    raZorfish
    Guest

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

    For standard 100 Hz TVs, the signal resolution is the same as for 50 Hz only the pictures (actually fields or half a frame) are shown twice as fast to avoid area flicker. Because 100 Hz introduces other problems, high-end 100 Hz TVs will have various fancy digital processing schemes (including increasing the video signal resolution) for making the picture look as good as possible.

    I will post some info on what I think are the top 32" 16:9 candidates later in the evening.

    Gotta go.


    raZorfish
     
  22. patwestlake

    patwestlake
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2003
    Messages:
    129
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Cardiff
    Ratings:
    +6
    thanks all

    My primary viewing is the old sky box (panny for the record), with DVD when the mood takes us. Given the criticisms throught the boards of the way 100hz TVs handle, say, footbal or the BSB banners (flickering and "can't keep up" type comments) when am I likely (its subjective of course!) to spot the difference and therefore value of 100hz?

    Is the choice of make and refresh rate (50 / 100) somewhat down to what you intend to watch / source?

    Cheers, Pat
     
  23. Ian Maurice

    Ian Maurice
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    There's not much point in 50Hz progressive scan. De-interlacing is the key stage (where the artefacts come from) and once you have done that you might as well display it at a high frequency.
     
  24. Zacabeb

    Zacabeb
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2002
    Messages:
    474
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    21
    Ratings:
    +9
    The answer as to why 100Hz TV's have so many problems lies in their fascinating internal design. They've got more bottlenecks than a bar counter on fight night.

    Here's the stuff you will typically find inside of a modern 100Hz set.
    [​IMG]

    I'm not joking.
     
  25. raZorfish

    raZorfish
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Ian Maurice wrote:

    There is nothing wrong with 50 Hz progressive scan TVs as long as you feed it a PAL progressive signal from a capable DVD player (having either a Faroudja or a Silicon Image de-interlacing chip onboard). This is because the de-interlacing chip in TVs is of inferiour quality compared to those in mid to high-end progressive DVD players.

    Artefacts, as you talk about, are associated with interlacing not vice versa!

    In fact, it is not possible to get a better picture from the DVD format than with a PAL progressive signal and if the TV can't perform 50Hz progressive scan to begin with you cannot feed it a PAL progressive signal and hence fully utilise the DVD format. ;)

    You talk about higher frequency after de-interlacing(?). This is not possible due to limitations in the design of most CRTs. A 625p/50Hz signal implies a horizontal frequency of 31.25 kHz. This is in fact the same frequency as that of a 625i/100Hz signal and represents an economical upper range!

    If you read the thread "The ultimate CRT-based PAL TV?", you will perhaps realise that the dream TV would be the one that could process 625p/75Hz (forget 625p/100Hz!). There is a reason you know that Philips Pixel Plus TVs are limited to 75Hz (i.e. 833i/75Hz: 0.5*833*75 Hz = 31237.5 Hz = 31.24 kHz).

    So just don't go around making silly statements like that and let other believe it, because you don't know what the hell you are talking about (or I must have misunderstood you completely :confused:).


    raZorfish

    :lesson:
     
  26. jim.rae

    jim.rae
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    My 100Hz Samsung is just fine...

    No worries, no probs, except it doesn't have auto WS switching, which is a pain...
     
  27. Ian Maurice

    Ian Maurice
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    raZorfish
    :eek:
    I think we are talking about slightly different things.
    If we start with an interlaced video on a DVD or live broadcast, then de-interlacing will always introduce artefacts. If we start with a 24/25fps film then de-interlacing should ideally recover the 25Hz original -- and the important artefacts have their source elsewehere as you say. What I was really saying that it was best to avoid large-area flicker by increasing refresh rate aboove 25Hz -- as is done in the cinema. I can display 100Hz progressive scan on my computer monitor but I guess I was rather lax in my terminology -- confusing Progressive scan 100Hz
    and what televisions describe as Progressive scan displayed on a a "100Hz" television. I'm sorry for any confusion caused.
    :rolleyes:
     
  28. raZorfish

    raZorfish
    Guest

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

    My sincere apologies! :blush:

    Artifacts from de-interlacing shouldn't really be a problem though since using the progressive scan mode for interlaced material is not good practice, neither is the use of the internal (usually proprietary) de-interlacer chip. Agree?

    Progressive scan is ideal for movies on DVD in order to re-create the original movie sequence (well strictly 50 fps instead of 48 fps).

    Personally, I prefer TVs which have both a 100 Hz interlaced and a 50 Hz progressive mode (with support for PAL progressive over component) so that I'm able to choose the optimum solution for a given signal source.

    TVs with the Sony DRC-MF technology is one example, although in Europe DRC-progressive (625p@50Hz) is not supported, only DRC-1250 (1250i@50Hz) and DRC-100 (625i@100Hz).
     

Share This Page

Loading...