Discussion in 'LCD & LED LCD TVs' started by bradavon78, Jun 25, 2005.
I'd probably prefer a 32" but for £100 more is it worth paying the extra for only 2"?
You will probably find it is more then just 2". The 32" panels are generally a newer technology/generation than the 30" ones so there could be some major benefits to be had there. Examples may be higher resolutions, better contrast, faster refresh, true 16:9 widescreen, better viewing angle, better blacks. Ocourse, there are always exceptions.
Thanks I didn't know that.
Is 30" as a number being phased out? What do you mean by true 16:9?
Some older generation LCDs have 15:9 aspect ratios. You can tell by the quoted resolution of the LCD. 1280x768 is 15:9, whereas 1366x768 is 16:9. Naturally if your watching a 16:9 widescreen broadcast on a 15:9 LCD, it isnt going to display correctly. It will have to be squashed to fit, or have the sides cropped slightly i think.
Thanks for making me aware of this, yuck.
Both the sets I'm looking at are listed as 1366x768. What a cheek though, who'd want 15:6???
I swear it was something like some lcd's use square pixels, while others use rectangular ones.
I "think" thats plasmas. I havent seen any LCDs as yet use the odd resolutions that some plasmas do. I know Hitachi's 7200 plasma uses 1024x1024, buts its still widescreen because of rectangular pixels.
The 1280x768 LCDs im sure are 15:9 though. Maybe someone else can confirm.
rectangular pixels??? Next I'll see an elephant fly. That sounds like a cheap way to con us!
Separate names with a comma.