• 10-30-2005, 05:21 AM
    JLA1
    When To Buy 60 inch DLP/LCos TV?
    I live in Asia (no HDTV broadcasts) and I have a 4-year-old 55-inch CRT rear projector Toshiba television with the traditional 4:3 aspect ratio. I am still happy with it (I have a progressive scan DVD player) BUT since I use it mainly for DVD viewing, I feel that I ultimately should change to a wide-screen 16:9 TV.

    I would like to buy either a 60 inch or so Sony or Toshiba or Samsung DLP or LCos (3 LCD) set but have noticed that the locally available sets all have resolutions of around 1366x788. The newest Sony XBRs abroad, for example, have a native resolution of 1,920x1,080, or 1080p, which means they should be able to resolve every pixel of 1080i material albeiy at a cost of about US$500.00 higher.

    Thus, the TVs I can buy locally wlll fully resolve a 720p HDTV signal BUT all other input resolutions, including 1080i HD signals, computer and standard video sources, are scaled to fit the available pixels.

    My question is this -- should I buy the available TVs now or wait to get a true 1080p TV maybe in about a year when I believe this will be locally available? Is there a huge/palpable difference? Even if such sets will be available earlier, introductory prices are usually very high then get much lower after a few months.

    One other consideration though is that if I purchase the TV now, I can still sell my old Toshiba quite easily and get a fairly decent price. I do not know how this will be if I wait for a couple of months to a year

    Thank you.
  • 10-30-2005, 06:43 AM
    edtyct
    To me, the first consideration is that you don't have HDTV yet. Do you know when you will have it? New sets are exciting purchases, but HD-capable fixed-pixel units don't always manage standard definition well without help from a good, dedicated processor. Chances are, your 55" standard-definition CRT from four years ago will display DVDs and regular television better than a non-CRT microdisplay will. It's a shame that your current set isn't 16x9. On the assumption that widescreen is important to you, nevertheless, we can pursue the matter further.

    First of all, prices will fall. LCoS, which I believe to be the class of the new digital field, is relatively new. JVC, which stuck with it when other companies (Philips and Intel, for two) were dropping out because of initial manufacturing difficulties, has already achieved reasonable pricing (with only one recall to date). As the technology develops, the prices for offerings from Sony and other companies that join the market will continue to plummet, and pressure from developing technologies, notably SED, will also have influence on relative costs.

    As for the 1080p sets, few of them, if any affordable ones, can actually accept a 1080p signal; they can only scale to that format. According to Sony, the reason is that copy protection is not yet secure for 1080p. Be that as it may, the only legitimate 1080p input source at this point would come from an expensive deinterlacer/scaler, which not many people have or need at this point. But, as I brought up in another thread recently, anyone with a 1080p display who wants signal processing for 1080i sources that's as good as, or better than, what's been available at the lower formats, could benefit from 1080p input from such a processor even before any authentic source material exists at that resolution. Thus, the lack of 1080p input is not just a meaningless complaint. Eventually, 1080p input will show up in the mainstream, and people who bought into early 1080p may be left in the cold (depending on their need to be state of the art) if they don't upgrade.

    As for the difference in PQ between 1080i/720p and 1080p, you can't take anything away from higher pixel counts--the more the merrier. However, the extent to which the difference will be evident in any one installation depends on situation. A large front-projection screen will benefit from as fine a fill factor as a display device can accommodate. But on smaller direct-view and RP TVs, the visibility will depend literally on how close you sit. The eye can't resolve tiny pixels at what would be a reasonable seating distance for a 40 to 50" panel. If you sit near it, you'll probably be able to notice better pitch, but if you sit back, it may well be lost on you. Remember, that 480p and 1080i/720p become indistinguishable with distance, too. Many owners of 34" HD CRTs have probably run across this phenomenon. If you get a big display (at least, say, 60 to 70"), as you intend, you stand the best chance of getting real-life benefit without having to change what might be comfortable, or unalterable, viewing habits.

    The other important matter is scaling and deinterlacing. If you think that scaling to a progressive variation of even 720 can look bad, how bad do you think that it can get when you have to go to 1080p, especially when the current schemes for doing so are rudimentary? Often the high resolution of 1080 itself can hide a multitude of sins, but not always. This is a consideration that you'll have to weigh for yourself.

    The industry will continue to evolve, and it will always make you believe that bigger, newer, etc. are worth your money. In many cases, they are. But just as 7.1 audio is often not feasible, or even sonically superior, to 5.1 in every physical envirnonment, 1080p video isn't necessarily either. Buying something that may not be quite appropriate for your space isn't a life or death situation, but given personal financial constraints, as well as the technical growing pains of manufacturers, it may not be opportune or prudent.

    Anyhow, I hope that this rambling has some value in your situation. To me, right now, a 720p (or 768p) purchase for someone who can take advantage of it, would not be foolish, though it is as hard as ever, if not harder in this accelerated digital age, to fortell when the next wave of product will appeal to that person or what the statute of limitation will be on his or her buyer's remorse.

    Ed
  • 10-30-2005, 09:56 AM
    JLA1
    Thank YOU, Ed!
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by edtyct
    To me, the first consideration is that you don't have HDTV yet. Do you know when you will have it? New sets are exciting purchases, but HD-capable fixed-pixel units don't always manage standard definition well without help from a good, dedicated processor. Chances are, your 55" standard-definition CRT from four years ago will display DVDs and regular television better than a non-CRT microdisplay will. It's a shame that your current set isn't 16x9. On the assumption that widescreen is important to you, nevertheless, we can pursue the matter further.

    First of all, prices will fall. LCoS, which I believe to be the class of the new digital field, is relatively new. JVC, which stuck with it when other companies (Philips and Intel, for two) were dropping out because of initial manufacturing difficulties, has already achieved reasonable pricing (with only one recall to date). As the technology develops, the prices for offerings from Sony and other companies that join the market will continue to plummet, and pressure from developing technologies, notably SED, will also have influence on relative costs.

    As for the 1080p sets, few of them, if any affordable ones, can actually accept a 1080p signal; they can only scale to that format. According to Sony, the reason is that copy protection is not yet secure for 1080p. Be that as it may, the only legitimate 1080p input source at this point would come from an expensive deinterlacer/scaler, which not many people have or need at this point. But, as I brought up in another thread recently, anyone with a 1080p display who wants signal processing for 1080i sources that's as good as, or better than, what's been available at the lower formats, could benefit from 1080p input from such a processor even before any authentic source material exists at that resolution. Thus, the lack of 1080p input is not just a meaningless complaint. Eventually, 1080p input will show up in the mainstream, and people who bought into early 1080p may be left in the cold (depending on their need to be state of the art) if they don't upgrade.

    As for the difference in PQ between 1080i/720p and 1080p, you can't take anything away from higher pixel counts--the more the merrier. However, the extent to which the difference will be evident in any one installation depends on situation. A large front-projection screen will benefit from as fine a fill factor as a display device can accommodate. But on smaller direct-view and RP TVs, the visibility will depend literally on how close you sit. The eye can't resolve tiny pixels at what would be a reasonable seating distance for a 40 to 50" panel. If you sit near it, you'll probably be able to notice better pitch, but if you sit back, it may well be lost on you. Remember, that 480p and 1080i/720p become indistinguishable with distance, too. Many owners of 34" HD CRTs have probably run across this phenomenon. If you get a big display (at least, say, 60 to 70"), as you intend, you stand the best chance of getting real-life benefit without having to change what might be comfortable, or unalterable, viewing habits.

    The other important matter is scaling and deinterlacing. If you think that scaling to a progressive variation of even 720 can look bad, how bad do you think that it can get when you have to go to 1080p, especially when the current schemes for doing so are rudimentary? Often the high resolution of 1080 itself can hide a multitude of sins, but not always. This is a consideration that you'll have to weigh for yourself.

    The industry will continue to evolve, and it will always make you believe that bigger, newer, etc. are worth your money. In many cases, they are. But just as 7.1 audio is often not feasible, or even sonically superior, to 5.1 in every physical envirnonment, 1080p video isn't necessarily either. Buying something that may not be quite appropriate for your space isn't a life or death situation, but given personal financial constraints, as well as the technical growing pains of manufacturers, it may not be opportune or prudent.

    Anyhow, I hope that this rambling has some value in your situation. To me, right now, a 720p (or 768p) purchase for someone who can take advantage of it, would not be foolish, though it is as hard as ever, if not harder in this accelerated digital age, to fortell when the next wave of product will appeal to that person or what the statute of limitation will be on his or her buyer's remorse.

    Ed

    This is so illuminating! Thank you!

    J.
  • 10-30-2005, 01:46 PM
    robert393
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by edtyct
    To me, the first consideration is that you don't have HDTV yet. Do you know when you will have it? New sets are exciting purchases, but HD-capable fixed-pixel units don't always manage standard definition well without help from a good, dedicated processor. Chances are, your 55" standard-definition CRT from four years ago will display DVDs and regular television better than a non-CRT microdisplay will. It's a shame that your current set isn't 16x9. On the assumption that widescreen is important to you, nevertheless, we can pursue the matter further.

    First of all, prices will fall. LCoS, which I believe to be the class of the new digital field, is relatively new. JVC, which stuck with it when other companies (Philips and Intel, for two) were dropping out because of initial manufacturing difficulties, has already achieved reasonable pricing (with only one recall to date). As the technology develops, the prices for offerings from Sony and other companies that join the market will continue to plummet, and pressure from developing technologies, notably SED, will also have influence on relative costs.

    As for the 1080p sets, few of them, if any affordable ones, can actually accept a 1080p signal; they can only scale to that format. According to Sony, the reason is that copy protection is not yet secure for 1080p. Be that as it may, the only legitimate 1080p input source at this point would come from an expensive deinterlacer/scaler, which not many people have or need at this point. But, as I brought up in another thread recently, anyone with a 1080p display who wants signal processing for 1080i sources that's as good as, or better than, what's been available at the lower formats, could benefit from 1080p input from such a processor even before any authentic source material exists at that resolution. Thus, the lack of 1080p input is not just a meaningless complaint. Eventually, 1080p input will show up in the mainstream, and people who bought into early 1080p may be left in the cold (depending on their need to be state of the art) if they don't upgrade.

    As for the difference in PQ between 1080i/720p and 1080p, you can't take anything away from higher pixel counts--the more the merrier. However, the extent to which the difference will be evident in any one installation depends on situation. A large front-projection screen will benefit from as fine a fill factor as a display device can accommodate. But on smaller direct-view and RP TVs, the visibility will depend literally on how close you sit. The eye can't resolve tiny pixels at what would be a reasonable seating distance for a 40 to 50" panel. If you sit near it, you'll probably be able to notice better pitch, but if you sit back, it may well be lost on you. Remember, that 480p and 1080i/720p become indistinguishable with distance, too. Many owners of 34" HD CRTs have probably run across this phenomenon. If you get a big display (at least, say, 60 to 70"), as you intend, you stand the best chance of getting real-life benefit without having to change what might be comfortable, or unalterable, viewing habits.

    The other important matter is scaling and deinterlacing. If you think that scaling to a progressive variation of even 720 can look bad, how bad do you think that it can get when you have to go to 1080p, especially when the current schemes for doing so are rudimentary? Often the high resolution of 1080 itself can hide a multitude of sins, but not always. This is a consideration that you'll have to weigh for yourself.

    The industry will continue to evolve, and it will always make you believe that bigger, newer, etc. are worth your money. In many cases, they are. But just as 7.1 audio is often not feasible, or even sonically superior, to 5.1 in every physical envirnonment, 1080p video isn't necessarily either. Buying something that may not be quite appropriate for your space isn't a life or death situation, but given personal financial constraints, as well as the technical growing pains of manufacturers, it may not be opportune or prudent.

    Anyhow, I hope that this rambling has some value in your situation. To me, right now, a 720p (or 768p) purchase for someone who can take advantage of it, would not be foolish, though it is as hard as ever, if not harder in this accelerated digital age, to fortell when the next wave of product will appeal to that person or what the statute of limitation will be on his or her buyer's remorse.

    Ed

    Excellent information Ed. Your observations are "right on" target.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by JLA1
    .......or LCos (3 LCD) .......

    Don't confuse the 2 different technologies (LCD= Liquid Crystal Display & LCOS= Liquid Crystal on Silicon). Here is a good article that explains the major differences between LCOS to LCD as well as DLP, if you are interested......
    http://www.projectorcentral.com/lcos.htm
    Robert