HD TV checklist

86 replies [Last post]
Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005

Q1.
Are there inputs other than HDMI that are used for HD input that I should be looking out for when buying a HD TV?

Q2.
I don't currently have all the following video sources, but I need to allow for:
-Sky hd (or other satelite receiver) input
-PS3 hd input
-input for whatever cable/telephone service may be coming along
-external (dvd or hard drive) video recorder input (SD & HD)

So, several HDMI inputs, usual composite/scart needed plus any inputs defined in Q1.

I'll also need to check:
- Plasma versus TFT - contrast.
- Good upscaling ability for sd input (and do they come with updateable firmware?)
- Inbuilt freesat receiver
- G'tee duration

Any other features I should be checking for?
(excluding insurance!!)

DAVE M
Offline
Joined: May 17 1999

size?

there's a cut off point where LCD and Plasma cross in terms of best choice

Alan Roberts
Alan Roberts's picture
Offline
Joined: May 3 1999

Q1 : all HDTV will connect via HDMI. On many decoder boxes, that is the only way you get the signal from it (this is to ensure that HDCP encryption protects the content).

Q2 : the only 32" Panasonic panel I know of has 2xhdmi, but my PZ81 has 3, 2 at the back, one at the front, plus 2xSCART and the usual array of phonos.

Get my test cards document, and cards for 625, 525, 720 and 1080. Thanks to Gavin Gration for hosting them.
Camera settings documents are held by Daniel Browning and at the EBU
My book, 'Circles of Confusion' is available here.
Also EBU Tech.3335 tells how to test cameras, and R.118 tells how to use the results.

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005
DAVE M wrote:
size?

there's a cut off point where LCD and Plasma cross in terms of best choice

Cheeky. You've picked a cold day.;)

32-37"
Unlike some on this board I don't have room for a drive in movie!

Thank-you Dave.

mooblie
mooblie's picture
Offline
Joined: Apr 27 2001
Dave R Smith wrote:
Q1.
Are there inputs other than HDMI that are used for HD input that I should be looking out for when buying a HD TV?

Yes: Component (YPbPr).

Martin - DVdoctor in moderation. Everyone is entitled to my opinion.

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005
Alan Roberts wrote:
Q1 : all HDTV will connect via HDMI. On many decoder boxes, that is the only way you get the signal from it (this is to ensure that HDCP encryption protects the content).

Q2 : the only 32" Panasonic panel I know of has 2xhdmi, but my PZ81 has 3, 2 at the back, one at the front, plus 2xSCART and the usual array of phonos.

Thank-you Alan.

Q1. Is HDMI the input being used for those using PS3 with HDV as data file?
Q2. Any reason why you specify Panasonic, apart from choice of inputs?

LG frequently do well for spec/price and few complaints so I'll check them out.

I also need to check out display diffferences of 1080p and 720p.

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005
mooblie wrote:
Yes: Component (YPbPr).

Cheers Mooblie

Alan Roberts
Alan Roberts's picture
Offline
Joined: May 3 1999

Q1 : Can't confirm that directly, but I'd be amazed if PS3 wasn't HDMI.
Q2 : I mentioned Panasonic because I have one and therefore can get the facts right. Also, there's a fairly well held belief that Pan are ahead of the field in HD at present, and my casual testing confirms that. You really do get what you pay for.

The YPbPr inputs work at HD and SD automatically, but few HD receiver boxes will output analogue these days, forcing you to use HDMI and thus succumb to HDCP for protection reasons. The first generation Sky HD boxes had analogue outputs so that early adopters could use their panels that didn't have HDMI, but I think that's all been stopped now.

Get my test cards document, and cards for 625, 525, 720 and 1080. Thanks to Gavin Gration for hosting them.
Camera settings documents are held by Daniel Browning and at the EBU
My book, 'Circles of Confusion' is available here.
Also EBU Tech.3335 tells how to test cameras, and R.118 tells how to use the results.

Chris.
Offline
Joined: Nov 5 2000

You mention inbuilt Freesat Dave.

Some Panasonic sets have that, I don't know about other manufacturers yet.

I LOVE my Panasonic plasma, it's gorgeous, I've had it for a couple of months and it can still make my jaw drop

infocus
Offline
Joined: Jul 18 2003
Dave R Smith wrote:
32-37"
Unlike some on this board I don't have room for a drive in movie!

I bought one just under a year ago, and will second all the comments about Panasonic for displays. You won't go far wrong if you get the same as Alan got. (I got basically the same, but it was before Freesat tuners.)

Secondly, my experience is that you can get away with a far bigger screen if it's flat and wall mounted than a CRT on a stand. I'd say 50% bigger is a good rule of thumb.

We went from a 32" widescreen CRT, to a 42" wall mounted plasma, and I slightly wish I'd gone for 46" now.

All I'm waiting for now is the Humax Freesat PVR........ :)

Bob Aldis
Offline
Joined: Mar 7 2001

In the early TV days with 405 lines etc the majority of people tried to get the set as far away as possible to enable clear viewing and I think it has become part of our culture.

Certainly when contemplating a plasma screen initially I tried to work out how to fit something like that at one end or the other of my narrow through lounge and gave up the whole idea. One day wandering around in Comets I sat down in the little area that they set out and watched the screen for a minute or two until it dawned on me that the distance I was sitting was less than the width of my lounge. Problem solved and that was not HD either.

I bought a 42" Plasma and when I upgrade to HD if finances allow I will buy a 50".

Several people who originally raised an eyebrow at my setup and thought it was overwhelming have now got similar if not bigger setups.

We go to the Imax theatre and are impressed with the screen size and then come home and try to get as far away as possible from our TV sets.

I blame this "get as far from the set as possible" mentality for the situation now when we have compromised the quality of High Def and as it looks like on another thread blu-ray is not taking off. What chance ultra high def?

Bob Aldis

Smithnc
Offline
Joined: Oct 26 2002

Yes the PS3 uses HDMI input.

I went for a Philips LCD last year, at the time it was the only 37" 1080, although some of the 40" aren't that much bigger because of the surround. I wanted 1080 to get the maximum resolution, although my wife can see the sharpness she is not overwhelmed!!

I was worried about the size, but I agree with the above, I realise I could habve gone larger. I've wall mounted it, its usually kept nearly flat in the corner but can swivel out for a proper viewing angle.

Nick

drgagx
Offline
Joined: Dec 1 2001

Can confirm that PS3 has hdmi out and LAN socket for internet/PC connections. Sony have done a good job of updating the PS3 via the internet. It is now possible to access more formats from a connected hard drive.

Alan Roberts
Alan Roberts's picture
Offline
Joined: May 3 1999

I went from 28" crt to 42" plasma. It dominated the room when placed where the crt had been, but moving tyhe furniture round a little has found a much better home for it, and I could easily have got a 46" in. At the time I bought it, I reckoned that 42 was the biggest I could smuggler past my wife, but with the furniture shift, she now doesn't say it's too big. But I'm very happy with what I've got.

Get my test cards document, and cards for 625, 525, 720 and 1080. Thanks to Gavin Gration for hosting them.
Camera settings documents are held by Daniel Browning and at the EBU
My book, 'Circles of Confusion' is available here.
Also EBU Tech.3335 tells how to test cameras, and R.118 tells how to use the results.

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005

Wow.
Thank-you for all the feedback guys.
I'm going to take some Sky recorded DVD's (SD) to test upconversion along with other items on the check list you have helped me build.

I share the sentiment of the flatness being less intrusive and like Bob have a long thin lounge.

Infocus - funny you mention a scaling factor of 50% plus.
Instead of counting sheep last night I was trying to calculate the increased surface area from 23 inch to 37 inch (and presumably no/little overscan). So 2 to 2.5 * in this example.Translating your diaganol of 50%+ becomes 1.5*1.5=2.2.5 bigger on area - so your theory holds good for my own example.

I was talking to a commercial printer yesterday about resolution of bill boards etc and we touched on big screen TV's. He reckoned there was a formula/guide of viewing distance to avoid seeing the pixiels, but couldn't recall it. Gadget show yonks back concluded that biggest suffer from this and I think Alan echoed this sentiment around the same time (or maybe that was his wife speaking;) ).

So a 96inch flat but convex screen to fit the bay window and show Imax films?

infocus
Offline
Joined: Jul 18 2003

Most average UK rooms are pretty close to 3metres square as a vast generalisation. I'd say when wall mounted 42-46" is probably about optimum, perhaps 40-42" if on a stand. But just as some people found a 26" CRT just too big, the same may apply with flat screens.

Tony Neal
Offline
Joined: Oct 27 2006

Bigger is better with HD, and I wish I'd gone for 46" or 50" rather than a 42" Tosh LCD for our biggish lounge.

But to make the most of HD you have to sit closer. I have good eyesight and sit at around 6-8 feet (the wife disapproves !) which is far enough away not to see the LCD pixels but close enough to see the extra HD resolution, although it does depend on the quality of the HD content you're watching.
(If you want to see HD at maximum resolution you should get hold the BluRay disk of the old Cinerama movie 'How the West Was Won' - the amount of detail in it is way beyond anything else I've seen on BluRay or Sky HD - could have done with a curved LCD though !)
Beyond about 12 feet it becomes difficult to tell if you're watcing SD or HD. A bigger screen would allow me to sit a bit further back (and let the wife see as well).

The PS3 has got HDMI and has an ethernet connection for web browsing and upgrading etc. although it also works very well with a wireless router. With the new v2.5 upgrade you can even watch the newsclips on the BBC news website, although the Beeb haven't released an iPlayer for the PS3 yet.

One other feature I think is essential is an 'Exact Scan' setting that switches off all picture scaling, giving you a pixel for pixel correspondence between the input signal and your LCD panel, eliminating any scaling artifacts.

drgagx
Offline
Joined: Dec 1 2001

For a really big screen, try projection. I have a 6ft wide screen (82" diagonal at 16:9) and it transforms the experience of watching films. Just wish I had more room on the wall for a wider screen.

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005

Thank-you Tony and Drgagx and Infocus.

Just back from a couple of shops, without being able to do much testing of upconversion.
At present, most of my viewing at home is SD.
Many models on display were obviously networked and non HD signals looked really naff.
It was difficult to tell how much of this was down to poor upconversion or a weak / networked signal.
I saw HDMI cable £85 for 3m.
My current set up is hifi/surround sound & sat receiver in one corner, TV in opposite, so a set up with shorter connection distance to TV may be better financially and for quality reasons.
If I bought Panasonic for it's HD freesat capability, it would need a dish but I believe I can't run of same dish cable as sky receiver.

So, quite a bit to think about.

Infocus - I agree with you in sizes, in so far as wall space can aesthetically accommodate bigger screen easier than floor space.

infocus
Offline
Joined: Jul 18 2003
Dave R Smith wrote:
If I bought Panasonic for it's HD freesat capability, it would need a dish but I believe I can't run of same dish cable as sky receiver.

You may need to upgrade the dish, but I believe Freesat and Sky are on the same satelite?

It's also normal nowadays to have such as a quad LNB on the dish, (with four cables running down to receivers) as Sky+ or the Humax PVR need a double feed. To record one channel whilst watching another needs two tuners, and therefore two LNB outputs via two cables.

I can easily see a setup with a Panasonic TV with inbuilt Freesat tuner, and a Humax PVR for Freesat timeshifting. You'll need one LNB o/p + cable for the first and two of each for the second - hence fitting a quad LNB. And if you're running three cables, why not four?

Alan Roberts
Alan Roberts's picture
Offline
Joined: May 3 1999

The limit of human visual acuity (i.e. the smallest thing you can tell from it's neighbour) subtends an angle of 1 minute of arc at your eye. That's the internationally agreed value for normal human vision (I can see 0.7 minutes). So, if you want a display such that you can only just not quite see the pixels, you get one that subtends an angle of 1 minute for the pixel size.

Now, 1 minute of arc is 0.509,054mm at 3.5m. So a 1080-line display can be up to 1080x0.5=540mm high. And the width would then be 16/9x540=960mm, and the diagonal would be 1.1015m=43.36". Bigger than that (or closer) and you might start seeing the pixels, smaller and you lose sharpness.

All this is contained in BBC White Paper 092 bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/whp/whp092. But just bear in m ind that the data shown in that paper contains one glaring exception to the norm, me. I'm the one who would rather have 2000 lines, and that's not just because my eyesight (with glasses) is good, but because I've worked in/on HDTV for several decades :D

Get my test cards document, and cards for 625, 525, 720 and 1080. Thanks to Gavin Gration for hosting them.
Camera settings documents are held by Daniel Browning and at the EBU
My book, 'Circles of Confusion' is available here.
Also EBU Tech.3335 tells how to test cameras, and R.118 tells how to use the results.

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005

Infocus - Thank-you. I didn't know that.

Alan,
Did you miss off the concluding distance you would be sat from the screen/pixel in your example calculation?
The link is 'file not found'.

Bob Aldis
Offline
Joined: Mar 7 2001

I think Alan meant 3.5m. I cant get the link either. I always walk close up to HD displays in shops to judge them. I get some funny looks and my family think I am mad. Is that a reasonable way to check resolution.

Alan how did you find your acuity is it something one can do or do we need access to BBC stuff.

Bob Aldis

Dave Jervis
Offline
Joined: Feb 21 2006
Smithnc
Offline
Joined: Oct 26 2002

I do find being up close to a big screen showing an upscaled SD transmission is not very nice though.

Nick

Alan Roberts
Alan Roberts's picture
Offline
Joined: May 3 1999

Second paragraph,

Quote:
Now, 1 minute of arc is 0.509,054mm at 3.5m.

Lots of observational research shows that the average viewing distance at home is 3~3.5m, whatever the screen size. Sorry about the sepling misteak in the url.

I measured my eyesight the easy way. I used a ruler, one of the see-through plastic variety. I taped it to a window (so that it was backlit against the sky), and then moved a long way away. I gradually moved towards it, until I could just see the mm markings. Then I measured my viewing distance, it was 1.4m. Then, simple geometry comes into play, because the mm markings have an approximate 50:50 duty factor, so each mark and/or space is 0.5mm. Simple. I did it with a fair amount of light, to get the lens to stop down. I'd get a different answer if the lens were fully open.

Get my test cards document, and cards for 625, 525, 720 and 1080. Thanks to Gavin Gration for hosting them.
Camera settings documents are held by Daniel Browning and at the EBU
My book, 'Circles of Confusion' is available here.
Also EBU Tech.3335 tells how to test cameras, and R.118 tells how to use the results.

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005
Alan Roberts wrote:
Now, 1 minute of arc is 0.509,054mm at 3.5m. So a 1080-line display can be up to 1080x0.5=540mm high. And the width would then be 16/9x540=960mm, and the diagonal would be 1.1015m=43.36". Bigger than that (or closer) and you might start seeing the pixels, smaller and you lose sharpness.

Alan, I'm having trouble reconciling 3.5m viewing on 43" screen as the limit with the figures in the paper.
From that I understand at 2.7m, 1280 * 720 transmission is good for sets 27 to 50".
Your example of 43" is roughly in the middle of this range.
Therefore transmission of a 1080 line display would enable closer viewing than 2.7m, or bigger screen?

P.S. Typed this before your 10.56 post.

Alan Roberts
Alan Roberts's picture
Offline
Joined: May 3 1999

WHP092 was written to justify 720p. I started the project with the aim of finding out if 4:2:2 makes proper sense (Ken Hacking's original work didn't throw up 4:2:2, and wasn't done in tv terms anyway), but it changed direction after I retired. I disagreed with the conclusions and caused a bit of a furore. The problem is that they used inexperienced viewers in the subjective tests (I was the one who required 2k lines, the sore thumb in the results).

My figures are based on objective measurements of acuity (which agree with the internationally accepted acuity limits), WHP092 bases figures on subjective results for inexperienced viewers (some of whom did not realise that they needed glasses until they took these tests). I've been looking at HD pictures for well over 20 years, so I know what to look for. So does every new HD viewer once they start to get used to it. Also, The EBU was firmly of the belief that tv sets would not exceed 32~37" for at least 10 years, but this year the average size sold has been 42".

Get my test cards document, and cards for 625, 525, 720 and 1080. Thanks to Gavin Gration for hosting them.
Camera settings documents are held by Daniel Browning and at the EBU
My book, 'Circles of Confusion' is available here.
Also EBU Tech.3335 tells how to test cameras, and R.118 tells how to use the results.

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005

Thank-you Alan - I thought there would be a reason for difference.

I suspect the average (UK) home consumers screen size may be less than 42" on average.
Old tube tellys were mainly in the home.
Now flat screens are used extensively in office spaces and for public display in shopping areas etc. When currys sell a unit, they don't know if it's going in the living room or the reception area of ABC Ltd, so this new market also has to be taken into acount in looking at increase in screen sales.

Digital camera sales have also allegedgly seen rapid growth, but the bulk are mobile phones.

Given that most broadcast content is currently SD, my viewing of Sky SD to 37" screens has just been 'ok', no wow factor.

I'm therefore curious as to whether big screen users happily watch SD content on them at full size, use a menu option to shrink the display area, or just watch on another telly?

Alan Roberts
Alan Roberts's picture
Offline
Joined: May 3 1999

Bear in mind that SD, when viewed on a big panel with an integral decoder will look better than on the same panel with an external decoder. Sort of goes against intuition, but I suspect the designers decode directly to HD rather than the SD and then upconvert.

Get my test cards document, and cards for 625, 525, 720 and 1080. Thanks to Gavin Gration for hosting them.
Camera settings documents are held by Daniel Browning and at the EBU
My book, 'Circles of Confusion' is available here.
Also EBU Tech.3335 tells how to test cameras, and R.118 tells how to use the results.

Bob Aldis
Offline
Joined: Mar 7 2001
Dave R Smith wrote:
I'm therefore curious as to whether big screen users happily watch SD content on them at full size, use a menu option to shrink the display area, or just watch on another telly?

Personally if I could watch different programs at different sizes, that would be the ideal for me then I could have a 50" at least and then resize down for other formats. Its not just SD but the varying qualities within SD. Sadly I dont think there is such a set and if there was it would be prone to screen burn.

Bob Aldis

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005

Alan - That's good news.
Bob - When I took my dvd recorded from sky and tested it in shop, it filled about 80% of screen - border all round. Salesman reckoned it could be made full screen.
So maybe you can change - but perhaps not automated.

I don't know if shrunk would burn if frame is the usual black.
Pure black shouldn't but I believe you don't get 100% black, so suppose it could in theory, but would have thought that this would have less harm than the channel name which appears in the corner.

Bob Aldis
Offline
Joined: Mar 7 2001

Yes I know that its possible to change the screen size, perhaps one day when we have all got full wall displays and they realise that they still want to send out old 50s TV series then they will build in some sort of solution.

I think the burning issue (not a pun) is the black doesn't burn but the rest will and show as varying quality. I believe that modern sets are a lot better than they used to be and LCDs are better than Plasmas

Bob Aldis

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005

Bob - I wasn't egg-sucking - I was previously aware you can zoom in, but thought you could only zoom out until a letter box (horizontal OR vertical achieved).

Talking to sales staff (not saturday staff;) it seems accepted that LCD is currently favoured until you get to bigger Tv's - around 50", then it's plasmas.
Currys guy reckoned you need a contrast ratio of 20,000:1 +.
Many TV's are below this (Hitachi was lowest at 800:1), but like many technical specs, there are sometimes other issues which mean contrast ratio is deemed higher than it's technical specs.

Alan Roberts
Alan Roberts's picture
Offline
Joined: May 3 1999

anyone claiming that 20,000:1 is needed is barking, 1000:1 (measured) is far more than you can actually see. What's important is the AC contrast, not the DC contrast. DC contrast is the ratio of the light level (candelas/square metre) that peak white delivers to the light level that "power off" delivers. AC contrast is the ratio of peak white to black level within a frame. Some of the best crt HD displays ever made struggled to deliver more than 1000:1 AC, the best I ever measured was around 3000:1 but I couldn't confirm it because the eht wasn't stable so the brightness kept drifting.

Phosphor burn on plasmas is still a problem. The low-voltage phosphors in plasmas have memory which can be permanent if exposed for long enough at a high enough level. The high-voltage phosphors in crts also have memory, but over a much shorter term. Unless the burn is too severe, simply using the display will gradually eliminate it

Get my test cards document, and cards for 625, 525, 720 and 1080. Thanks to Gavin Gration for hosting them.
Camera settings documents are held by Daniel Browning and at the EBU
My book, 'Circles of Confusion' is available here.
Also EBU Tech.3335 tells how to test cameras, and R.118 tells how to use the results.

Bob Aldis
Offline
Joined: Mar 7 2001

How long before OLEDs kick off? Then we can all start again :)

Bob Aldis

Steamage
Offline
Joined: Nov 11 2003

Has anyone had a chance to view the new Panasonic LCD Freesat sets (32" TX32 LZD81 and 37" TX37 LZD81)? If so, what do you think? As good as the larger plasma sets? I've seen that Amazon lists the 37" version for about £760 + £15 delivery. Tempting...

Mark @ Steam Age Pictures - Steam trains on video in aid of railway preservation societies. Latest release: "Mainline 2012, LMS Locomotives", on DVD or Bluray Disc.

ClaireTall
Offline
Joined: Jan 28 2004

I was at a friends house last night who had just bought a Samsung large LCD screen I couldn't believe how bad it was, unwatchable.

Panasonic everytime for me, well worth giving your right arm as collateral (they wouldn't take my house).

Studio with green screen for hire near Gatwick Airport.
Kit hire facilities on site.
excelsiorstudios.co.uk

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005
ClaireTall wrote:
I was at a friends house last night who had just bought a Samsung large LCD screen I couldn't believe how bad it was, unwatchable.

Panasonic everytime for me, well worth giving your right arm as collateral (they wouldn't take my house).

Do you know if it was just set up bad?
I am not a Samsung fan but to be fair where they using RF feed at SD quality, or did it look bad transmitting HD source.
Bet you didn't tell them it was bad.;)

Steamage wrote:
Has anyone had a chance to view the new Panasonic LCD Freesat sets (32" TX32 LZD81 and 37" TX37 LZD81)? If so, what do you think? As good as the larger plasma sets? I've seen that Amazon lists the 37" version for about £760 + £15 delivery. Tempting...

I gather the Freesat is worth £150. Unless quality is better when Freesat is internal I think I'd be happier with external unit, in case it goes wrong or need to update it.

infocus
Offline
Joined: Jul 18 2003
Dave R Smith wrote:
Unless quality is better when Freesat is internal I think I'd be happier with external unit, in case it goes wrong or need to update it.

Big benefit is one remote control, one unit to switch on etc. I've lived for a few years with a Freeview set top box and found it bliss to have a TV with integrated Freeview - trouble is, I'm now going back to set top box land for Freesat........

If the integrated sets had been out when I bought, I'd have got one.

Steamage - I think the sets you mention are plasma, not LCD, aren't they?

Alan Roberts
Alan Roberts's picture
Offline
Joined: May 3 1999

I can certainly tell you that Freeview, when decoded internally, looks significantly better than when decoded externally. That's my personal experience here at home. I suspect the decoding of Freeview goes direct to 1080p rather than via 576i, or perhaps to 576p and then to 1080p. Either way, the artefacts are significantly less visible than with an external decoder. Can't comment about Freesat though, because the only decoder I have is the one in the tv set.

Get my test cards document, and cards for 625, 525, 720 and 1080. Thanks to Gavin Gration for hosting them.
Camera settings documents are held by Daniel Browning and at the EBU
My book, 'Circles of Confusion' is available here.
Also EBU Tech.3335 tells how to test cameras, and R.118 tells how to use the results.

StevenBagley
Offline
Joined: Aug 14 2000
Alan Roberts wrote:
I suspect the decoding of Freeview goes direct to 1080p rather than via 576i, or perhaps to 576p and then to 1080p. Either way, the artefacts are significantly less visible than with an external decoder. Can't comment about Freesat though, because the only decoder I have is the one in the tv set.

Hmm, I don't think it could be decoded directly to 50p, could it? The MPEG2 data stream is inherently interlaced and so will need to be deinterlaced internally anyway.

I suspect the benefits are more to do with the signal being kept in digits internally, rather than hitting analogue and back again and so bypassing the cheap DACs and ADCs used in consumer gear.

Steven

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005
infocus wrote:
Big benefit is one remote control, one unit to switch on etc. I've lived for a few years with a Freeview set top box and found it bliss to have a TV with integrated Freeview - trouble is, I'm now going back to set top box land for Freesat........

If the integrated sets had been out when I bought, I'd have got one.

My sky box and TV are controlled by 1 remote and some remotes can do more, such as the one for all of my surround sound amp/minidisc/cd/video recorder etc (all seperates).

Though at my mums house, she can use the telly, but can't use the remote to flick it into sky mode etc. So, yes good point, integrated systems are much friendlier especially if commonly used features are automated and not buried in menus.

Alan,
I had taken on board your previous comments of inbuilt freesat being better in your home experience.

I have some idle thoughts on Freesat/Sky choice..but they've become extended, so I'll put that on another thread.

Steamage
Offline
Joined: Nov 11 2003
infocus wrote:
Steamage - I think the sets you mention are plasma, not LCD, aren't they?

Panasonic's new 32" and 37" Freesat HDTVs are LCD (LZD81 models). The larger ones (42", 46" & 50" ??), which have been out for a few months, and discussed around here at some length, are plasma (PZ81 models). The 37" version should fit in my living room rather well and LCD appears to be rather cheaper than plasma. Does that mean it's also less good, or is it just a matter of size being expensive?

Mark @ Steam Age Pictures - Steam trains on video in aid of railway preservation societies. Latest release: "Mainline 2012, LMS Locomotives", on DVD or Bluray Disc.

Alan Roberts
Alan Roberts's picture
Offline
Joined: May 3 1999

You pay for the square inches :)

Steven, I can't see any reason why a decoder shouldn't be able to make 1080p directly from the data. Of course, it would have to look at the data for several fields in order to do the de-interlacing, but it should be possible. The MPEG data contains the amplitudes of frequency contents, so it should be possible to draw those frequencies into any size output raster. But, I happily accept, and have always pushed, the idea that staying in digits is vital.

Get my test cards document, and cards for 625, 525, 720 and 1080. Thanks to Gavin Gration for hosting them.
Camera settings documents are held by Daniel Browning and at the EBU
My book, 'Circles of Confusion' is available here.
Also EBU Tech.3335 tells how to test cameras, and R.118 tells how to use the results.

StevenBagley
Offline
Joined: Aug 14 2000
Alan Roberts wrote:
Steven, I can't see any reason why a decoder shouldn't be able to make 1080p directly from the data. Of course, it would have to look at the data for several fields in order to do the de-interlacing, but it should be possible. The MPEG data contains the amplitudes of frequency contents, so it should be possible to draw those frequencies into any size output raster.

Wouldn't end up forcing the resolution down to 288p though in places? As I understand it, MPEG2 encodes the video stream as a 25 720x576 frames per second, each frame being constructed from 2 adjacent fields. This is then split into two types of DCT blocks, either an 8x8 block or 2 8x4 blocks (one for each field) depending on which gives the smaller. You can just about get away with deinterlacing the former at a higher resolution, but if you deinterlace the latter (2 8x4 blocks) into 1920x540 fields surely you are effectively just line doubling and not deinterlacing at all?

Quote:
But, I happily accept, and have always pushed, the idea that staying in digits is vital.

Yep and the beautiful thing is that we know with plasma have a system that can be digital from the minute the light hits the CMOS/CCD sensor in the camera till the minute the light is integrated in our retina (due to the temporal dithering used in the plasma to get a greyscale)

Steven

Alan Roberts
Alan Roberts's picture
Offline
Joined: May 3 1999

Agreed that interlace always gets in the way. John Drewery, ex-Kingswood colleague had a njice line for this "interlace always screws you up", a nice scientific term.

And, had I known in detail how MPEG2 works, I'd not have spent so many years working on colour science and cameras. But it doesn't stop me musing :)

Get my test cards document, and cards for 625, 525, 720 and 1080. Thanks to Gavin Gration for hosting them.
Camera settings documents are held by Daniel Browning and at the EBU
My book, 'Circles of Confusion' is available here.
Also EBU Tech.3335 tells how to test cameras, and R.118 tells how to use the results.

StevenBagley
Offline
Joined: Aug 14 2000
Alan Roberts wrote:
And, had I known in detail how MPEG2 works, I'd not have spent so many years working on colour science and cameras. But it doesn't stop me musing :)

:) I was mainly asking because I wondered if I'd missed something in my understanding of MPEG more than anything else.

Steven

Alan Roberts
Alan Roberts's picture
Offline
Joined: May 3 1999

I'm sure you know far more about MPEG2 than I do :D

Get my test cards document, and cards for 625, 525, 720 and 1080. Thanks to Gavin Gration for hosting them.
Camera settings documents are held by Daniel Browning and at the EBU
My book, 'Circles of Confusion' is available here.
Also EBU Tech.3335 tells how to test cameras, and R.118 tells how to use the results.

steve
Offline
Joined: Apr 8 1999
Alan Roberts wrote:
I'd not have spent so many years working on colour science and cameras. But it doesn't stop me musing :)

Is that a pun?

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005

Some TV's have SD cardslot and / or USB input (for photo's and mp3).
Photos's via composite input on my SD telly comes out poor due to the conversion to SD video resolution. Presumably both SD slot and usb input mean that a jpg can be displayed at resolution of 1920*1080 and for an jpg 3456 x 2304, this would presumably mean some zooming can be done without quality loss.
So, apart from convenience is there any difference in quality or TV side functionality between viewing via USB or SD slot?

infocus
Offline
Joined: Jul 18 2003
Dave R Smith wrote:
Presumably both SD slot and usb input mean that a jpg can be displayed at resolution of 1920*1080 ..........

Not just stills, but video as well. If you have an AVC-HD camera, recording to SDHC cards, you can take the card from the camera, put in the slot of the TV and off you go - no decks, cables, nothing.

AVC-HD may not be the best when it comes to editing (unless you transcode), but for some "industrial" uses (sport training etc), that ability can be very useful.

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005
infocus wrote:
Not just stills, but video as well. If you have an AVC-HD camera, recording to SDHC cards, you can take the card from the camera, put in the slot of the TV and off you go - no decks, cables, nothing.

AVC-HD may not be the best when it comes to editing (unless you transcode), but for some "industrial" uses (sport training etc), that ability can be very useful.

That's handy.

I'm guessing for stills via the card there will be a slide show function to change photo every x seconds, possibly with cross fade.

For USB connection, I guess the photo change will be instigated camera end.

Returning from trips I often use TV to show photos, but the poor resolution via SD TV's composite takes some of the pleasure away, so for me it's a useful gizmo.

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005

Do you think I would be mad to short list the Plasma 1024*768 Panasonic TX37PX80(various suffixes, don't know if relevant).

http://www.comet.co.uk/shopcomet/product/443034/PANASONIC-TH-37PX80BA/tab/specification

It's only a 1024*768 display rather than 1920*1080 but:
- is 100hz
- plasma won't suffer reduced line resolution in same way as LCD counterpart would
- 39" version would suffer less than it's larger counterparts from reduced line resolution.

I've been offered one for £625 inc 5 year g'tee.
Or.. do you think down conversion of HD 1080 signals renders it an inadequate HD performer?

Chris.
Offline
Joined: Nov 5 2000

FWIW I don't know anybody who bought a set of 42" or less who hasn't expressed the opinion later (having got used to it) that they wish they'd went for a bigger one.

Where resolution is concerned I've compared both 720p and 1080p. Had my computer connected to both types of sets too. Don't underestimate the difference at 1920 x 1080, it's loads better. Photographs benefit enormously.

I do think that you're making a compromise on screen size and resolution.

It's almost as if you're the owner of a 4:3 ratio 15inch PC monitor and are asking "should I buy a £70 19inch 4:3 monitor or a £140 22inch Widescreen"

Bob Aldis
Offline
Joined: Mar 7 2001
Dave R Smith wrote:
Do you think I would be mad to short list the Plasma 1024*768 Panasonic TX37PX80(various suffixes, don't know if relevant).

http://www.comet.co.uk/shopcomet/product/443034/PANASONIC-TH-37PX80BA/tab/specification

It's only a 1024*768 display rather than 1920*1080 but:
- is 100hz
- plasma won't suffer reduced line resolution in same way as LCD counterpart would
- 39" version would suffer less than it's larger counterparts from reduced line resolution.

I've been offered one for £625 inc 5 year g'tee.
Or.. do you think down conversion of HD 1080 signals renders it an inadequate HD performer?

I am facing much the same problem, but Chris's reminder about photos will tip me towards full HD. You can meet all your specs for that price if you go for something like an LG which is attracting me at the moment. There is a 47" LCD with 100hz and full 1920 for about £800 so I am sure that for a 37" or 42" they would meet your budget.

Two of my demands are an HDMI in the front or side and optical output and the model they are advertising has both and a total of 4 HDMI connections. What is holding me back is that it has rather a large bottom surround (if you know what I mean) containing a woofer and some supersonic sound system and as I intend to use my old amp and speakers it will be redundant and a bit of an eyesore.

I will not be going overboard with price this time as I see better things in the future and I learnt my lesson with my Panasonic non HD plasma which was quite expensive and now I would imagine would be worthless.

Bob Aldis

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005

Thank-you for your enticement Chris.
I really think 37" is big enough as I have a long thin room.
I don't play video games and most of my viewing will likely be SD.

I've haven't found a shop with a decent demo system yet. The SD pictures I've seen are bad and they all say 'oh it's networked, you'll get much much better at home' which isn't much help when choosing.

If they're bad at 37" it will be worse on a bigger screen.

So, I am way swayed by your higher res preference, but not in size.

Sorry, I don't the grasp the point on your analogy for monitors as that's usually just about screen space, with no trade off on resolution/quality.

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005
Bob Aldis wrote:
I am facing much the same problem, but Chris's reminder about photos will tip me towards full HD. You can meet all your specs for that price if you go for something like an LG which is attracting me at the moment. There is a 47" LCD with 100hz and full 1920 for about £800 so I am sure that for a 37" or 42" they would meet your budget.

Two of my demands are an HDMI in the front or side and optical output and the model they are advertising has both and a total of 4 HDMI connections. What is holding me back is that it has rather a large bottom surround (if you know what I mean) containing a woofer and some supersonic sound system and as I intend to use my old amp and speakers it will be redundant and a bit of an eyesore.

I will not be going overboard with price this time as I see better things in the future and I learnt my lesson with my Panasonic non HD plasma which was quite expensive and now I would imagine would be worthless.

Like yourself Bob, I have surround sound amp, so audio on TV isn't key.
I have a few LG models short listed, but can't see any 'There is a 47" LCD with 100hz and full 1920 for about £800 '
P.S. - Just spotted the 6000 range is 100hz for 42"+. I was looking at spec for 37" which is only 50Hz and wrongly assumed that was same for across range.

The only LG's I see with 100hz are the 7000 range, but that's £1200 for 47"?
http://www.currys.co.uk/martprd/store/cur_page.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@0414005614.1226168440@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccdgadefjdfjledcflgceggdhhmdgml.0&page=Product&fm=12&sm=0&tm=2&sku=050579&category_oid=

Haven't seen any 'big bottomed ones' apart from the 6000 range with the circular sensor in the centre.

Chris.
Offline
Joined: Nov 5 2000

My monitor analogy (which didn't work!) was sort of a way of saying that to the owner of the 15 inch the 19 seems a big improvement, but once you've used a 22 you wouldn't want to go back to 19, still a clumsy analogy.

If your new TV is mainly going to be used for viewing Standard Def material, you do need a TV that does some kind of processing. At the same time ignore the claims from some manufacturers that seem to suggest that SD is going to look completely brilliant.

IME It will either look terrible or acceptable.

Don't be over critical. When you're viewing it in the shop you're actively looking for artefacts etc. When you're watching at home you forget about all that and enjoy the programme.

I've found with the Panasonic (using built-in DVB-T) that good quality SD like Top Gear is totally fine, actually quite nice. Some old repeats of 80's series on ITV4 and camcorder footage on You've Been Maimed are revealed in all their nastiness.

On my parents' 37" Samsung LCD, nothing ever really looks good (apart from photos in the card slot)

For still images I reckon LCD wins. Take some photos on an SD card to the shops. Many Panasonics and Samsungs have SD card slots. Some BluRay players have SD card slots and if you're keen to see how stills look on a particular TV get them to connect the BD up to it.

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005
Chris Longley wrote:
If your new TV is mainly going to be used for viewing Standard Def material, you do need a TV that does some kind of processing. At the same time ignore the claims from some manufacturers that seem to suggest that SD is going to look completely brilliant.

Thank-you for your patience Chris, your comments are very helpful.

On upconverting:
Each m/f has the buzz words for image processing, which I believe is mainly hyped phrasing for 'we use different software/firmware to others'.

If input is 720 *576 and output is 1920 *1080 then they must all do some processing.
To my mind this can take 4 forms:
1) Simple one to several pixels direct mapping (which would display a simple diaganol line as a houndstooth, so don't expect this to be used much.
2) Image processing that doesn't use direct mapping, but probably produces blurred/soft results.
3) Image processing to find blocks of colour, edges etc, so maintains sharpness.
4) As 3) but also using inter frame processing - which I would guess is only perhaps done on 100Hz models.

The eye is the ultimate tester. Just need to find a retailer with non-networked SD demo.

I'll take my camera so I can test usb or sd slots.
For photo's
-I've only come across panasonic with sd lots and typically those with SD slot have no usb.
-Other m/f's sometimes have usb's only on lower spec models.
For example it's on the LG 6000 model 50 hz, but not on the LG7000 100Hz.

Bob Aldis
Offline
Joined: Mar 7 2001
Dave R Smith wrote:
Haven't seen any 'big bottomed ones' apart from the 6000 range with the circular sensor in the centre.

Thats the one I meant. I wondered what the white blob was. I has absolutely everything on my check list, but I am really put off by the "big bottom"

Bob Aldis

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005

I see there is also a 6100.
It's much slimmer - nearly half at 4.5cm!(claims to be worlds slimmest) and a bit lighter.
http://uk.lge.com/products/model/detail/lcdtv_42lg6100.jhtml#

The flash demo shows external HD connected via USB, but looks like this can only be used for jpg and mp3 not hd movies on mpeg etc.

Launched aug 2008 rather than april 2008 for 6000, so upconversion and display software/firmware may be a tad more up to date.

Appears to be same in other respects except backlight is WCG-CCFL (6000 is CCFL) whateever that means.

P.S.
Alan - The 6100 has an expert mode - showed a gamma item on the menu in the flash demo, it didn't elaborate, but possibly you can dictate your gamma curve. Can you do that on your Panasonic.. he asks teasingly.

Chris.
Offline
Joined: Nov 5 2000

On the Samsung sets that take memory cards, the SD card slots are on the back but at the side, (on the left as you face the set).

Don't get too hung up on the in-set processing.

There's DVD players that do decent upscaling of SD material. Some of the better DVB set top boxes can upscale too.

You're spoilt for choice on the computer.

The choice of resizing, noise reduction, sharpening, colourspace, gamma and deinterlacing algorithms in ffDshow is pretty mind-boggling

http://ffdshow-tryout.sourceforge.net/html/en/cspOptions.htm

http://ffdshow-tryout.sourceforge.net/html/en/resize.htm

I get it to upscale anything below a certain resolution to 1920 x 1080, then have different profiles for different source material eg different sharpening for standard DV

It works with MediaPortal, Windows Media Player / MediaCentre and MediaPlayerClassic. You need a fast PC to do everything in real time, it even has a split screen mode like video processors of yesteryear.

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005
Chris Longley wrote:
On the Samsung sets that take memory cards, the SD card slots are on the back but at the side, (on the left as you face the set).
.

Chris, I can't take your advice, because I do take your advice.;)
You said nothing really looks good on your parents Samsung, so that kicks them off the list before we get to preference for photo display TV's.

>Don't get too hung up on the in-set processing.
If I'm to believe Alan Roberts, in-set can be better. I'd prefer it inbuilt rather than have a seperate device.

I'll have to experiment in due course with HD content via pc, so thank-you for the pointers.

I was going to ask, do upscaling dvd players have a 'loop through' ability, so that a sky SD input can be upscaled realtime..but of course players don't have inputs, it would have to be a recorder.

I currently record 'HQ' on my Phillips Recorder which is only 1 hour of a typical 100 minute film on DVD. So I'll probably be looking for a upscaling DVD recorder with a hard drive.

Alan Roberts
Alan Roberts's picture
Offline
Joined: May 3 1999

Pretty sure that there are no products out there that use methods 1-3, the results would be dire. Even method 4 is pretty unlikely.

The simplest up-conversion processing is 2-d interpolation. Going upwards, bi-linear interpolation (a 2x2 matrix) isn't too bad, but doesn't always look good. Bi-cubic (4x4 matrix) is significantly better, and is probably all that's needed. BUT, you always have to de-interlace first, and that's the hardest part. De-interlacing has to make frames at the field rate, and the good ones will certainly use motion detection to determine the algorithm, or shape/size of the 3-d filter used. Typically, a good de-interlacer will use input from 3 temporally adjacent fields, with motion detection decoding whether the use spatial or temporal interpolation. The very best ones also look at the motion after the fashion of MPEG.

You can't up-or down-convert without de-interlacing (except when the source is already progressive and the meta-data carried with it firmly states so and the display actually reads and takes notice of the meta-data). Incidentally, I think that the PZ81 de-interlacer is permanently in circuit, even when taking in VGA and HDMI.

Get my test cards document, and cards for 625, 525, 720 and 1080. Thanks to Gavin Gration for hosting them.
Camera settings documents are held by Daniel Browning and at the EBU
My book, 'Circles of Confusion' is available here.
Also EBU Tech.3335 tells how to test cameras, and R.118 tells how to use the results.

Chris.
Offline
Joined: Nov 5 2000

Dave I should have said that my parent's Samsung is getting on for two-and-a-half years old; Samsung could have cleaned up their act in the meantime.

I'm firmly with Alan on the subject of in-set processing being better where the Panasonic is concerned, the delacer accessing an elementary part of the signal etc.

I also think Panasonic haven't just stuck in an off-the-shelf bog standard DVB-T tuner. The Freeview pictures are very good for Freeview pictures.

The tuner in the set that you buy may not be that good, you might get better results from an external box.

I don't know of any DVD players or recorders with a loop through for the delacer / upscaler.

There's a deinterlacing product that allows you to passthrough video on a PC.

I get the impression though that connecting your PC up is lower on your agenda?

For the price of some DVD recorders you could build an HTPC with remote, it would do all of the recording, pausing and rewinding live TV tricks, it would display your photographs as well as videos you've made with a user-friendly front end. It would play DVDs. It can feed your amp Dolby Digital and DTS via SP/DIF

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005

Thank-you Alan and Chris,
The m/f & model at the top of my shortlist changes daily, but currently a Panasonic..heard it mentioned somewhere ;)
I see the Plasma screens have built in anti-theft - typically weighing 40kg against 20kg lcd.
I wouldn't fancy hanging that weight on the wall - though my freestanding LCD is my current plan.

Chris Longley wrote:
I get the impression though that connecting your PC up is lower on your agenda?

For the price of some DVD recorders you could build an HTPC with remote, it would do all of the recording, pausing and rewinding live TV tricks, it would display your photographs as well as videos you've made with a user-friendly front end. It would play DVDs. It can feed your amp Dolby Digital and DTS via SP/DIF

Incitefully true Chris.
Display of my own HD filmed content would be handy, but I'll leave the method for another day.

Rob James
Offline
Joined: Jun 26 2001

If you are interested in economy, and depending on the viewing hours per day, you might want to check the power consumption. A 52" Panny Pz81 is over 500 Watts. A Sony 52" 4500 is 370 Watts. (and it weighs 35kg)

Rob The picture is only there to keep the sound in sync

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005

Thank-you to all contributions to this thread.

With this help I went for the Panasonic TX37LZD80
-It has SD slot, but no USB, which I would have preferred.
-Only 50Hz but reviews say it's processing compensates for this.

Also shortlisted:
LG 37LG6000
-Only 50 HZ
LG 42LG6100
-Updates the 6000 to 100Hz - not available though in 37"
-Larger 42" would please Chris ;) .

On these LG's I like the idea of its ring sensor for adjusting to room lighting / power saving.
As Bob says they have a big bottom.
Given that I'd have to go for the larger 42" inch than desired 37" to get 100hz, it meant an even bigger bottom. It looked too intrusive, not sleek.

I was tempted by Plasma as I believe they will give better picture for SD content.
Also, review of TX37LZD80 said poor black compared to plasma variant as it's only failing.

Rob - I didn't think I was influenced by wattage, but having seen that Plasmas use twice the power it deterred me.
Though would be handy for toasting crumpets!:rolleyes:

I bought it online, so just have to wait for it to drop through the letterbox.

Rob James
Offline
Joined: Jun 26 2001

Good decision I think. Let us know how you get on.

I was within an ace of ordering the Panasonic 50" freesat until I noticed the power consumption - 505W aargh! So I'm now taking a lot more notice.

Rob The picture is only there to keep the sound in sync

Chris.
Offline
Joined: Nov 5 2000

A couple of times I've went to get something from a shelf above the TV and I've felt the heat

It's not a bother currently seeing as it's winter (I tell myself it just contributes to the warmth of the room). Come the summer I can imagine me running it in Eco mode and being very selective about my viewing!

Dave a friend of mine has a Panasonic from the same range as the one you've ordered. It's a great set.

Please do let us know in the thread how you get on.

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005
Chris Longley wrote:
Please do let us know in the thread how you get on.

Well you did ask!

Review of move to Panasonic TX-37LZD80

Arrived 2 days ago, plugin, auto-tune sweeps for loads of digital channels then anlogue.
Couldn't be easier - though the pre-attached stand doesn't seem to swivel through 15 degrees as the manual says.

My aeriel is 15+ years old. Wasn't sure if it was up to digital but I assume I'm getting them all and with good signal strength.

I was prompted for ID for anti-crime purposes, name, postcode etc.
Like a car radio, very impressive I thought
... until I realised some time later, burglar person can still watch my TV.:rolleyes:
It will just have my name in the menu system.
May be I should edit the PIN protected area to say 'Stolen from D Smith' instead of just 'D Smith'.:p

Standard Definition viewing:
Quality is typically good, but variable and difficult to guess reasons.
It would seem to be any of:
i) Camera quality/set-up and lighting.
ii) Post production format
iii)Transmission processes.
I suppose HD is like a magnifying glass, just magnifying any weakness in the production workflow.

Old episodes of 'Friends' look 'soft'. I'd assume they use top notch gear/processes and digital media doesn't fade, so don't know why this is.
Unless it's designed to be 'soft' for aesthetc reasons?

Viewing from typical 2.5m all looks good.
From 1 to 1.5m it looks rough. Not an issue at home but is perhaps typical viewing distance in a shop isle when buying.

Some SD graphics e.g. Pringles microphone advert, look like HD.
Watching 'A year in Tibet' last night was excelent, though there was a panning scene of pedestrian in foreground (10% of picture area) and distant flat/open landscape to distant mountains. The background seemed to have a high frequency judder, quite harsh on the eye.
I suspect a 100HZ TV would show better.
A few seconds during a 1 hour programme, so can't grumble, though haven't watched an action film on it yet.

SD memory card
I haven't tested the SD photo card utility as my camera uses Compact Flash.
All Panasonics I checked out had SD card slot, but no USB input as found on many other m/f's. This seems short-sighted by Panasonic as USB is more flexible (allowing external HD for jpg/mp3) and future proofed.
It also seems the way to go with pc monitors and TV's encroaching on each others traditional territory.

EPG.

Coming from a 15 year old Sony TV, I find the EPG handy - though I tend to use Sky instead.

Can tailor 4 personal profiles, though turning TV on next day displays prompt on lines of 'New channels found - sweep now? - will delete profiles' discourages use.

Has 'Sky' like ability to store advanced viewing schedule choices.
This can be recorded via Q-Link gear or, it would appear, 1 of the 2 scarts are in/out enabled for this purpose.

I found the screen bright - too bright even in day time. Hitting the blue Sky mneu button makes you squint.
Changing viewing mode to 'Cinema' from 'Normal' seems to fix this better than the brightness level.
Probably 'Normal' means 'normal for bright shop display as default'.

Sound:
I use seperate surround sound amp from sky source so haven't really tested it, but sounds OK with no thrum and discretely engineered speakers within slim border frame.

Remote.
I think Panasonic regard large screen viewer as having Mr Magoo eye-sight as the keypad numerals are over-sized.
It needs to be fairly accurately pointed to activate - I think I read this criticism elsewhere.

Positioning TV.
My hi-fi amp etc and TV are on opposite sides of room. I considered moving amp etc to under TV to minimize spaghetti cables and long cable runs around room.
Good job I didn't. Instruction manual says not to place other audio/video gear near the TV!

Does size matter?

...in reply to Chris ;-)
I'm pleased with the 37" size.
A 42 inch would dominate room and SD content would need viewer to sit further back to avoid blocky image.

HD
Thread is entitled 'HDTV checklist' but I haven't seen any yet.

Thank-you all for enabling me to make a happy purchase.:)
Hope you can update me in 15 years time when I next upgrade it for XS3DHTV (Extra special 3D Hologram TV).:rolleyes:

Alan Roberts
Alan Roberts's picture
Offline
Joined: May 3 1999

Sounds good, and confirms almost everything I've found on the 42 plasma. If you can, take a look at channel 108 for BBC's HD. And Channel 5 popped up a couple of days ago. Nice thing is that you don't have to go ferreting about for new channels, they just appear all on their own. Nice or what :) ?

And now, the Humax Freesat PVR is out, so.....

Get my test cards document, and cards for 625, 525, 720 and 1080. Thanks to Gavin Gration for hosting them.
Camera settings documents are held by Daniel Browning and at the EBU
My book, 'Circles of Confusion' is available here.
Also EBU Tech.3335 tells how to test cameras, and R.118 tells how to use the results.

drgagx
Offline
Joined: Dec 1 2001

"...though the pre-attached stand doesn't seem to swivel through 15 degrees as the manual says."

Check underneath the stand - there may be two grub screws that need to be eased. I have just acquired the Panasonic 42" plasma following recommendations here. This has a swivelling base but I had to ease two grub screws first to get it to swivel.

So far so good. One disappointing omission for me - I am FreeSat only - is the absence of Sky News which is available on the terrestial digital service. Is this ever likely to appear on FreeSat?

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005
drgagx wrote:
"...though the pre-attached stand doesn't seem to swivel through 15 degrees as the manual says."

Check underneath the stand - there may be two grub screws that need to be eased. I have just acquired the Panasonic 42" plasma following recommendations here. This has a swivelling base but I had to ease two grub screws first to get it to swivel.

Quote:
Lifting it up I can feel a plate that rotates.
I wrongly assumed that the square base rotates relative to the TV, but it doesn't.
Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005
Alan Roberts wrote:
If you can, take a look at channel 108 for BBC's HD. And Channel 5 popped up a couple of days ago. Nice thing is that you don't have to go ferreting about for new channels, they just appear all on their own. Nice or what :) ?

And now, the Humax Freesat PVR is out, so.....

108 is SKY text on mine, no sign of BBC HD.:(

Forgot to mention the comparison of DVB and Sky.
Fifth Gear, Tiff Needell in a yellow Porsche racing a chopper round a race track with aeriel shots of lush green airfield location.
The green/yellow looked more vibrant via Sky.

Alan Roberts
Alan Roberts's picture
Offline
Joined: May 3 1999

To make things clear, on Freesat, tghe first few channels are (according to Radio Times and my tele):

101 BBC1
102 BBC2
103 ITV1
104 Channel 4
105 Channel 5
106 BBC 3
107 BBC 4
108 BBC HD
110 BBC ALBA

etc

There's no Sky content at all on Freesat, I suspect you're watching Sky's "Free" system. The Freesat tuner in my 42" doesn't get any of the Sky stuff at all.

Get my test cards document, and cards for 625, 525, 720 and 1080. Thanks to Gavin Gration for hosting them.
Camera settings documents are held by Daniel Browning and at the EBU
My book, 'Circles of Confusion' is available here.
Also EBU Tech.3335 tells how to test cameras, and R.118 tells how to use the results.

StevenBagley
Offline
Joined: Aug 14 2000
Dave R Smith wrote:
Old episodes of 'Friends' look 'soft'. I'd assume they use top notch gear/processes and digital media doesn't fade, so don't know why this is.
Unless it's designed to be 'soft' for aesthetc reasons?

Shot on 35mm film, posted at 480i60 (so burnt in 3:2 pulldown) and then as I understand it they have been standards converted as video and not by using a DEFT converter to remove the 3:2 pulldown. The result is a mushy mess.

Steven

StevenBagley
Offline
Joined: Aug 14 2000
drgagx wrote:
So far so good. One disappointing omission for me - I am FreeSat only - is the absence of Sky News which is available on the terrestial digital service. Is this ever likely to appear on FreeSat?

It's there and transmitted unencrypted -- but it is just not in the EPG. If you can manually add channels, get it to scan the transponder at 12.207GHz Vertical polarization, a Symbol rate of 27500 and FEC of 2/3.

There's also another FTA HD channel called Luxe HD (same SR and FEC, but 12.643GHz and horizontally polarized).

Steven

drgagx
Offline
Joined: Dec 1 2001
StevenBagley wrote:
It's there and transmitted unencrypted -- but it is just not in the EPG. If you can manually add channels, get it to scan the transponder at 12.207GHz Vertical polarization, a Symbol rate of 27500 and FEC of 2/3.

There's also another FTA HD channel called Luxe HD (same SR and FEC, but 12.643GHz and horizontally polarized).

Steven

That is all double Dutch to me, I`m afraid - tho` Alan Roberts has the same model and surely will understand it. But I will consult the manual to see if manual adjustment is possible.

I got access to Sky News of another TV - an older Panasonic Viera LCD model using digital terrestial TV. I may try plugging in an r/f aerial in the plasma TV to see if that works.

Claire
Offline
Joined: Apr 28 2001

Sky News is available from my new Humax FoxSat HD box (£150 at Argos).

To get this channel I have to switch to manual tuning, while in manual tune mode I can also receive Luxe HD which is very nice quality.

This FoxSat box is in my living room connected to my 1 yr old Panasonic 42" Plasma tv. I have a quad LNB in the dish so have a spare feed for another HD box, the other two cables go to the kitchen and bedroom where I have Sky boxes (SD) and smaller tv's.

None of the Sky boxes are on subscribed channels so it's all free to view.

Claire

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005
Alan Roberts wrote:
If you can, take a look at channel 108 for BBC's HD. And Channel 5 popped up a couple of days ago.

We're talking at cross purposes - I thought you meant DVB not freesat.

drgagx
Offline
Joined: Dec 1 2001
drgagx wrote:
That is all double Dutch to me, I`m afraid - tho` Alan Roberts has the same model and surely will understand it. But I will consult the manual to see if manual adjustment is possible.

I got access to Sky News of another TV - an older Panasonic Viera LCD model using digital terrestial TV. I may try plugging in an r/f aerial in the plasma TV to see if that works.

I have checked the Panasonic Free Sat plasma manual - see pages 36 and 37 Advanced settings. Sky can be obtained via Other Sat. There is a manual option which enables specific transponder, polarisation and symbol rate settings if you know them (thanks to Steven Bagley). There is also auto set up for other satellite broadcasts. This downloads everything it can find - over 800 channels taking c45 minutes. It is then necessary to select, one at a time, which channels you want to receive - a tedious process. Most of these are either already on FreeSat, or are encrypted or are rubbish (to me anyway) so I finished up with Sky News, LuxHD, Bloomberg and a few channels called Stream-01 to Stream-08. I am not too sure what these are but seemed to be sports channels. HTH others who want to go beyond FreeSat.

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005
StevenBagley wrote:
Shot on 35mm film, posted at 480i60 (so burnt in 3:2 pulldown) and then as I understand it they have been standards converted as video and not by using a DEFT converter to remove the 3:2 pulldown. The result is a mushy mess.

Steven

Thanks Steven.
I contemplated it was due to 4:3 conversion stretch , but it seems only a tad 'fat', so with hindsight on what you say, it's probably due to the 21:9/16:9 conversion..except that that would make them thinner. As you say, lots of processing so the results are mushy.

Alan Roberts
Alan Roberts's picture
Offline
Joined: May 3 1999

Sky News is still on Freeview, and the Panasonics all have Freeview as well as Freesat. I'm not going to tinker with the setup just to get Sky News, I've never been one for digging about to get extra channels, there's more than enough dross about already :)

Get my test cards document, and cards for 625, 525, 720 and 1080. Thanks to Gavin Gration for hosting them.
Camera settings documents are held by Daniel Browning and at the EBU
My book, 'Circles of Confusion' is available here.
Also EBU Tech.3335 tells how to test cameras, and R.118 tells how to use the results.

Bob Aldis
Offline
Joined: Mar 7 2001
Alan Roberts wrote:
Sky News is still on Freeview, and the Panasonics all have Freeview as well as Freesat. I'm not going to tinker with the setup just to get Sky News, I've never been one for digging about to get extra channels, there's more than enough dross about already :)

While staying with a relative recently with Sky box I was idly looking through the EPG. I was absolutely amazed to find out that with a choice of hundreds of channels there was nothing on that even remotely interested me other than the usual reruns.
I am sure that there was a greater spectrum of choice when we only had 3-5 channels, but that could be old age looking back at the golden years ;)

Bob Aldis

Dave R Smith
Offline
Joined: May 10 2005

Yes, I agree Bob, seemed to be more stuff of interest.
Though 20 years ago I'd often record stuff on the timer, but now I rarely record, as I can channel hop, catch the +1 hour channel or take view it will probably be on again soon.
For example School of Rock was on a few days ago and then repeated a couple of days later.

Migration from 4:3 TV to widescreen.
I noticed my DVD's were playing fine in AUTO aspect ratio, but couldn't fathom why it was displayed with slight letter box when I forced the TV to 16:9 mode.
After checking different DVD's and measuring the TV ratio, I found the DVD recorder menu for output set to 'letterboxed 4:3' rather than widescreen. :rolleyes:

Sky remote control TV synch.
I had forgotten how to do it.
I found code 278 worked for the TX37LZD80 with an older style Sky remote.
More info here;
http://www.satelliteonline.co.uk/programming_the_sky_rcu.htm