1. Join Now

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

NEC 42 XR3 - what's the downside?

Discussion in 'Plasma TVs' started by Sulis, Jan 4, 2005.

  1. Sulis

    Sulis
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2004
    Messages:
    574
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Bath
    Ratings:
    +1
    So far I haven't heard a bad thing about this monitor. Given that it has at least the possibility of doing 720@50Hz (apparently), has every connection you could imagine, great reviews from the 2 people who appear to have actually seen one – what's the downside?

    The Pioneers are too big for the space I have available, the Pannies are horribly compromised by the HD thang... what choice do I have?
     
  2. UglyMoose

    UglyMoose
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2004
    Messages:
    28
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    Basildon
    Ratings:
    +1
  3. Loada

    Loada
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2003
    Messages:
    585
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    31
    Location:
    Guisborough, North Yorkshire
    Ratings:
    +48
    I too and looking seriously at this screen and am also waiting for a bit more feedback (thanks MAW btw). I think I read that one (minor) potential niggle is that the display will not support its native resolution @ 50hz via DVI (putting a spanner in the works for PAL pixel-mapping via a scaler?). MAW or one of the other resident experts can probably confirm this.

    I'd be interested to see what can be achieved via the VGA socket tho. Maybe the 50hz thing can be worked around using 100hz or something...
     
  4. 406lx

    406lx
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2004
    Messages:
    895
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Nottingham
    Ratings:
    +27
  5. Andyuk911

    Andyuk911
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2004
    Messages:
    413
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings:
    +9
  6. peezee

    peezee
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I find the 1024x768 resolution to be somewhat a "bastard" one.

    Let me explain: it doesn't correspond to any TV resolution, neither SD (720x576 for PAL, 720x480 for NTSC) nor HDTV (1280x720 or 1920x1080). In addition it doesn't even have square pixels which is good for PC application (via DVI as a matter of fact).

    At least the 852x480 SD panels have square pixels (and native NTSC definition btw).

    At least the 1366x768 HD panels have square pixels

    At least the 1024x720 panels have 720p HDTV vertical resolution

    But 1024x768...? :confused:
     
  7. grahamtriggs

    grahamtriggs
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2002
    Messages:
    779
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +33
    Depends on the PC application. Clearly the resolution and aspect ratio are out according to usual practise, but that doesn't necessarily matter, if the software takes account of the aspect ratio, or for that matter 'simple' text displays - such as timetables, etc.

    A 1024x768 resolution has the advantage that it is supported by all video cards that are currently on the market, and without the addition of extra software.
     
  8. peezee

    peezee
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    graham, you understand exactly what I mean. :rolleyes:

    Whatever the source, PC or DVD or STB or... some vertical and horizontal scaling MUST be done by the screen (unless you have an external scaler, which does... the scaling anyway :rolleyes: ), meaning additional processing for video and softness for most PC applications (blurry text et all...). Which many other screens do avoid, at least partially.

    That's all, nothing too terrible, just a fact, these 1024x768 plasma screens have originally been designed for applications other than 16:9 Home Cinema, and it shows...

    except that circles appear oval and squares look rectangular then... :rolleyes:
     
  9. Likvid

    Likvid
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2004
    Messages:
    489
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings:
    +9
    There are no plasmas today that complies to the HDTV standards of 1280x720 or 1920x1080, they are also compromises and you are the only one who can decide if it's worth it or not.

    There are always the excellent DLP TVs with native 1280x720 and HDMI inputs ready for Sky HD and such services when they begin.

    I am sure the plasma manufacturers will eventually release native 1280x720 or 1920x1080 panels once, either you live with the drawbacks plasmas have today or you go the fuill mounty and buy a DLP based TV which in my opinion have superior black levels and depth of the picture.
     
  10. Andyuk911

    Andyuk911
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2004
    Messages:
    413
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings:
    +9

Share This Page

Loading...