1. Join Now

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

WHAT WOULD YOU GUYS GO FOR 4:3 or 16:9

Discussion in 'Televisions' started by pauljameshooper, May 24, 2001.

  1. pauljameshooper

    pauljameshooper
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Please help me someone, ive got the choice of buying the Panasonic TX28DK2 which is pro logic but has a 16:9 screen size....or a Toshiba 2987DB which is also pro logic but has a 4:3 screen size...whats best or what would you guys go for...can you tell me the plus and minus for each one...thankyou i really appriecate your help.[
     
  2. delta

    delta
    Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2000
    Messages:
    469
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    North East Cheshire
    Ratings:
    +0
    As the main tv channels are broadcasting virtually all of their peak time programmes in 16:9 and DVD's are mainly 16:9, there is only one way to go... 16:9! I reckon you will regret it if you don't. Very few large screen 4:3 tv's are made now. Do you have Ski Digital or OnDigital yet?
     
  3. alternate

    alternate
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I would have to agree about choosing 16:9, however 90% (except for films) of terestrial channels broadcast in 4:3 over analog (which I guess is only of interest if you dont have digital) - also sky dont support widescreen totally with all but one Sky movie channel and Sky one etc. being 4:3

    My reason for always going for 16:9 would be that more and more broadcasts will switch to widescreen and many newer TV's do a great job of processing 4:3 pics to fill the screnn without the old short and fat look.
     
  4. Powerhead

    Powerhead
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    16:9 material drives you nuts on a 4:3 Tv and 4:3 material drives you nuts on a widescreen tv.

    You pay your money - you take your chances....
     
  5. Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    yeah. definately 16:9.

    ok so there are some channels that still broadcast mainly 4:3 but if you get the right set with a "smart" mode you can get it to fake the image to 16:9 which for your every day watching is pretty bloody good.

    Also, as mentioned previously, the vast majority of DVDs are in 16:9 and a lot of the digital stuff is in 16:9 as well.

    The future is widescreen, soon ALL channels will be broadcast in 16:9 so if you buy the 4:3 now you'll only want to replace it in a couple of years time anyway.
     
  6. ISCM

    ISCM
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I would recomend a 32" 16:9 TV, as if you go smaller with widescreen 4:3 broadcasts will be too small. Do no worry about pro-logic from a TV as these sound no better than a Transistor Radio. Just look at the picture and make sure that the Nicam sound is good. Nicam stereo played back through a HI-FI will outperform the built in Dolby-stereo from a TV any day.
    You can get a Philips 32" widescreen for around £600 or less these days and because they are not a high as 4:3 TV's they do not dominate the room so much.
    Remember that the future is widescreen and not 4:3 (especially on DVD). :D
     
  7. ISCM

    ISCM
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Hi Nike.
    When I see a 4:3 broadcast I usually enlarge the picture just a little up to a max of 14:9 which gives me smaller black bars and a larger picture. I too, do not like the distorted modes used to fill 16:9.
    The lesson is to make sure that any widescreen TV that you buy allows plenty of ajustment modes. My TV (a cheap Philips) also auto switches between 16:9, 14:9, 4:3 and amaphoric if the broadcast supports it. :cool:
     
  8. Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Nike

    I always use the smart mode when watching a 4:3 broadcast. my sony kv28fx65 seems to handle it pretty well. ok so its not perfect, but the distortion you speak of is pretty unnoticable.

    It may be that as my set is only 28" its a bit more forgiving but i see no problem with the smart mode.

    Of course I would rather watch it in pure 16:9 but give me the slight distortion over the black lines any day of the week.
     
  9. Nike

    Nike
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2001
    Messages:
    654
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    21
    Location:
    bournemouth, UK.
    Ratings:
    +17
    Thanks for replying:
    ISCM;
    I must admit I do what you do a lot of the time, ie select 14:9. A lot of analogue terrestrial (all I have) is broadcast in this aspect ratio anyway. Even on a true 4:3 broadcast this is not distorting the picture, merely 'shaving' the upper/lower edges.
    lillo;
    We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one! Have you tried changing back to 4:3 from smart and then back again?... second thoughts, don't do it if you're happy with smart :D
    Incidentally, my TV is a KV28something or other so I shouldn't thing the smart setting would be any different to yours.
    I guess this is just a personal thing. just wanted to know how people with w/s tv treat watching 4:3.
    Cheers
     
  10. Mr.D

    Mr.D
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2000
    Messages:
    11,041
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Ratings:
    +1,113
    Really think if you are investing in a 16x9 TV you should pick up some form of digital TV to go with it: either Sky or Ondigital (ITV digital)
     
  11. Nike

    Nike
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2001
    Messages:
    654
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    21
    Location:
    bournemouth, UK.
    Ratings:
    +17
    Mr D,
    You are right, but the reason I bought a w/s tv was to watch DVD movies, I don't really watch too much broadcast material - mostly motorsport which is covered by channels I can receive:
    ITV: F1
    BBC: World/British Superbikes
    Eurosport: MotoGP/Superbikes - (accessed via an ancient analogue satellite system) ;)
    There, now I've completely left the topic of this thread :D
     
  12. loz

    loz
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2001
    Messages:
    13,058
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,796
    with regard to earlier reply about Sony's 'smart mode' stretching things, I find that the best mode on my philips is the one that simply crops the top and bottom of a 4:3 picture to fill the 16:9 screen.

    Now before you all jump up and say - but you are loosing part of the image- then I agree with what another poster said. Namely that the broadcasters seem to be framing their transmissions (new ones at least) in the knowledge that this is happening.

    Do they take a 4:3 source image themselves anyway and simply crop it down for widescreen transmission - hence the framing - or do they have 16:9 cameras? I guess its a mix of both as they make the transision too.
     
  13. Nike

    Nike
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2001
    Messages:
    654
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    21
    Location:
    bournemouth, UK.
    Ratings:
    +17
    My Sony set has 'smart' mode. Do people actually use this? If a program is broadcast in 4:3 I'd sooner have the black bars down the sides, than the distortion produced by this 'stretch' - i.e. things getting wider as they move closer to the edge of the screen.
    It seems wierd to me to fork out for an expensive w/s tv only to distort the picture in this way just to fill the width of the screen.
    I'd be interested in other peoples thoughts on this, as since I've had widescreen I've treated the 'smart' mode as a bit of a gimmick :D
     

Share This Page

Loading...