1. Join Now

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

Is 480 pixels really enough (PW6)

Discussion in 'Plasma TVs' started by johnmreynolds, Sep 23, 2004.

  1. johnmreynolds

    johnmreynolds
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2004
    Messages:
    33
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Ratings:
    +5
    I've decided it's finally time to get a flat screen TV. I'm primarily going to be using it for displaying PAL DVDs, but also need to show Sky, NTSC DVDs, consoles and PC output (for video only, not PC applications).

    After reading these forums for a while, I had decided on the Panasonic 6 series Plasma as it is consistenty recommended for its image quality.

    However, I'm now having second thoughts. Is 480 pixels really enough for a good picture from PAL sources? Presumably it must downscale even standard definition PAL signals? Does this add significant blur? Is this particularly bad for console games?

    I'm now tempted by the Sharp LC37HV4E as this can be got for £2500 including a three year warranty offer from Sharp. This isn't much more than the Panasonic once you add the cost of a stand and the warranty. It also has a much higher resolution.

    Unfortunately, I've not seen that many authoritative reviews of the Sharp screen with regards to picture quality.

    Does anyone have any better suggestions in this price region?
     
  2. ReHaBWales

    ReHaBWales
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Messages:
    112
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +0
    Not sure about the price of a stand ...but a warranty with Richer sounds is £169.99 for an extra two years on top of the standard year.
    After veiwing several Plasmas including ones with Higher resolutions I found the PW6 to have the best picture....but I guess this depends on what you're using it for. If you have HD sources then you might be better off with a screen with a higher res.
    I went through the same process a few weeks ago but I decided that given the lack of HD material and the fact that I will be watching SKY aor DVD's then a SD screen is the better option anyway. SD is actually closer to the resolution of DVDs so there is less conversion with a SD than with a HD. A HD screen has to "fill in" the picture information that is missing. I haven't seen one HD screen that does this very well. In fact the best I've seen is the Panansonic PHD and even that doesn't look as good as the PWD with a SKY broadcast.
     
  3. oreoboy13

    oreoboy13
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    If you can afford a scaler aswell - get the PHD6 or wait for the PHD7
     
  4. Tonester

    Tonester
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Don't go purely on number of pixels - have a look at some TVs in the flesh before deciding I'd say.
     

Share This Page

Loading...