LCD Confusion

[venkatcr]

There is a detailed discussion in the following link.

http://www.hifivision.com/television/1604-whats-difference-between-hd-ready-full-hd.html

Cheers

 

[reignofchaos]

well the contrast measured by a professional review site puts the sony KLV-32W400A at 2500:1 measured contrast and the panasonic at a measured contrast of 1800:1.if u happen to use it for gaming the sony as the advantages being a lcd has minimal burn in issue where as the panasonic plasma may have a burn in which is warned in review site.
ghosting is no longer a issue.

the draws back mentioned in the panasonic review are
1 The panel's light color
2 Menus overly simple, settings should be more gradual
3 Lack of sharpness in HD

the drawback mentioned in the sony are
1 Sound isn??t up to par with the excellent image quality.

but if u happen to use it only for SD viewing like ur local cable ,then a tv with lower resolution is better since the plasma as only 1024x768 pixels so the tv has marginally less to upscale vs the sony 1920x1080 resolution.for HD viewing sony is a winner.

so in the end the sony gets 5 out 5 where as the panasonic gets 4 out 5.

Which professional site are we talking about? Any links please. The only site whose reviews I trust is HDTV Reviews – LCD TV & Plasma Television Display Rating.

According to them the PX80/PV80 has a measured black level of 0.05cd/m2 while the 40" W400A has the same black level. However the W series can't match the D65 color spectrum, fails in both video and film mode deinterlacing tests, scaling quality is poor, motion resolution is poor. Finally the panel also has clouding issues. I'm not sure how it is a better TV.

The Pioneer 4280XD has a black level of 0.03 cd/m2 is still unmatched by anything else.

 

[adder]

Which professional site are we talking about? Any links please. The only site whose reviews I trust is HDTV Reviews – LCD TV & Plasma Television Display Rating.

According to them the PX80/PV80 has a measured black level of 0.05cd/m2 while the 40" W400A has the same black level.

sure here the link for the pana px80/pv80 Panasonic TH-42PX80E - DigitalVersus

link for the sony 32inch W400A
Sony Bravia KDL-32W4000 - DigitalVersus

link for the 40inch W400A
Sony Bravia KDL-40W4000 - DigitalVersus


and the 0.05 black level is for the panasonic TH-42PY800H which is a FHD plasma

 

[reignofchaos]

sure here the link for the pana px80/pv80 Panasonic TH-42PX80E - DigitalVersus

link for the sony 32inch W400A
Sony Bravia KDL-32W4000 - DigitalVersus

link for the 40inch W400A
Sony Bravia KDL-40W4000 - DigitalVersus


and the 0.05 black level is for the panasonic TH-42PY800H which is a FHD plasma

Here's the black level.

Panasonic TH42PX80 Plasma Calibration & Benchmark Test


That review you linked to looks so amateurish, even I can probably do a better job than that.

 

[adder]

Here's the black level.

Panasonic TH42PX80 Plasma Calibration & Benchmark Test


That review you linked to looks so amateurish, even I can probably do a better job than that.

i already have seen and used to see HDTV test.co.uk digital versus is not amateur review siteAbout Les Numeriques ,if thats not all they have pictures side by side so that people can see the difference,digtal versus sister site is behardware.com.if u go to the compare page u can see the pictures ,benchmarks side by side.including monitors,cameras etc.its currently the most top rated websites,i been following that website from around a year,so have i been following HDTV test.co.uk but i find digital versus better ,since u can decide which is better by seeing the pictures.they have also reviewed the panasonic PY800H FHD plasma which was measured at a contrast of 3500: exactly the same as pioneer KURO which is the highest in any flat panel except OLED.

 

[reignofchaos]

i already have seen and used to see HDTV test.co.uk digital versus is not amateur review site ,if thats not all they have pictures side by side so that people can see the difference,digtal versus sister site is behardware.com.if u got to the compare page u can see the pictures ,benchmarks side by side.including monitors,cameras etc.

If that review is not amateurish, I have nothing to say. No mention of any testing methodology, no mention of what tests they did, no mention of how they calibrated the color space and you call it a good review .

I have a lot of respect for behardware cos thats a good site. But this is rubbish.

 

[reignofchaos]

i find digital versus better ,since u can decide which is better by seeing the pictures.they have also reviewed the panasonic PY800H FHD plasma which was measured at a contrast of 3500: exactly the same as pioneer KURO which is the highest in any flat panel except OLED.

What you see in images will depend on how good your display is and also how the images are taken. They must be in the same lighting conditions, same exposure and same camera. I don't see how they achieve that nor do they mention anything. The only way to know whats better is to step out and see the panels in person. Anyone with even partially working eyes will know that the panasonic still has miles to go before it can be even considered close to the pioneer in black level.

 

[adder]

If that review is not amateurish, I have nothing to say. No mention of any testing methodology, no mention of what tests they did, no mention of how they calibrated the color space and you call it a good review .

I have a lot of respect for behardware cos thats a good site. But this is rubbish.

well i dont what to say in ur opinion its a bad review ,IMO its a good review and i rate it above HDTV test .co.uk.

check out the link u can differentiate side by side contrast,ghosting,576i,720p,1080p images now thats a lot of imformation.
Face to Face : cameras, printers, ... - DigitalVersus

 

[adder]

What you see in images will depend on how good your display is and also how the images are taken. They must be in the same lighting conditions, same exposure and same camera. I don't see how they achieve that nor do they mention anything. The only way to know whats better is to step out and see the panels in person. Anyone with even partially working eyes will know that the panasonic still has miles to go before it can be even considered close to the pioneer in black level.

well yes pioneer is better i never said its bad infact i always say they are a reference class.yes pioneer has slightly more contrast at 3620 which is mentioned in digital versus.well yes nothing can beat a person actualy seeing the tv in front of their own eyes.but people should know a thing or two about examining since i remember one of my friend this was about 2 years ago, when plasma had a sheer advantage in contrast but my friend kept saying lcd was better since the image was sharp but little do people know about detail in dark shadow regions where contrast makes the difference.so its good to see reviews too.

 

[reignofchaos]

well i dont what to say in ur opinion its a bad review ,IMO its a good review and i rate it above HDTV test .co.uk.

check out the link u can differentiate side by side contrast,ghosting,576i,720p,1080p images now thats a lot of imformation.
Face to Face : cameras, printers, ... - DigitalVersus

That link doesn't even have images of the pioneer and panasonic plasmas to compare with

 

[adder]

That link doesn't even have images of the pioneer and panasonic plasmas to compare with

the link posted was to show as an example of the side by side comparision feature to show that this is NO amateur site
.but since they have been updating their sites and lots of changes have taken place,in the begining they didnt have the comparision of contrast,color gamut,viewing angles etc only comparision pictures was the ghosting image test,and the text performance.only around 4 months ago did they start adding new comparision pictures. since the pioneer test was done quite a long time back and at that time their site didnt have the 1080p,720p,viewing angle etc images and they are yet to post the panasonic comparision pictures.

 

[adder]

Thanks venkat for your detail reply. Your reply to point 2 is still not clear to me.
Why HD panel does not matter <=42 inch ?

Thanks,
Navin

well it all depends on ur viewing distance,and the FHD panel in 32inch will also make sense if u happen to sit very close.in the image below u have a 625line,720line,1080line image

From a close distance the 625line image appears more degraded where as the 720line image is better and even better is 1080line image.now increase ur viewing distance around 2.5 meters and above, and u will notice that all images will start to look the same after a certain distance.so i hope u understand whu there are FHD tvs.if u want to sit close to the TV get urself a FULL HD lcd.

but there is also another problem in TV which have higher resolution since when u see a SD content the tv will have more upscaling to do and hence there will be a loss in sharpness and detail which again u can compensate by increase ur viewing distance.


in the below images are from the sony KLV-32W400A which is a 1080p FHD tv.

if u increase u viewing distance at a certain distance all will look the same,but u can notice the fine details of a FHD image at close distance.i hope u understood the benifits and disadvantage of HD,FHD,SD etc by just looking at the image.
all images above courtesy of digitalversus.com

 

[spirovious]

Do you want to say that 1080i or HD ready feature is okay for 32 inch LCD?

Interesting options there. I can see that you are using price as the primary determinant. The 32W400A is a lovely LCD display. But I would personally any day recommend the 42PV8 because a) i like plasma pictures better, do compare them yourself and see if you agree....better blacks, better colours, better motion.....b) the size matters.......32 inches doesnt' feel like big-screen experience.....42 inches does......c) while the W400 is Full HD, the benefits of that will be all but invisible at that size.....

Therefore i strongly recommend the 42PV8

 

[psychotropic]

Absolutely....at 32 inches, the difference between HD Ready and FUll HD will be very very difficult to discern and not worth the extra cash.

And to the person who started this thread. I honestly wouldn't recommend Philips. Along with LG they lag behind the others in terms of the quality of the panels (jointly) manufactured by them. For 55k there are many options including the Samsung plasma that I own. At the end of the day, just go and check them out yourself and see how you like them.

Do you want to say that 1080i or HD ready feature is okay for 32 inch LCD?

 

[adder]

Absolutely....at 32 inches, the difference between HD Ready and FUll HD will be very very difficult to discern and not worth the extra cash.

And to the person who started this thread. I honestly wouldn't recommend Philips. Along with LG they lag behind the others in terms of the quality of the panels (jointly) manufactured by them. For 55k there are many options including the Samsung plasma that I own. At the end of the day, just go and check them out yourself and see how you like them.

well at 32inches u can notice the difference b/w HD and FHD, but like i said before it all depends on ur viewing distance,if u got a 1080p 32inch tv and u feed in a 1080p video u can sit as close 4 feet and enjoy the fine details.
u can see the pictures above of the 720p and 1080p image on the 32inch sony FHD lcd.u can also notice that 576i image on a FHD tv is a bad idea.so people who intend to only watch sd can go for a plasma which has a resolution of 1024x768.

and yes philips and lg are behind in terms of panel tech,and image processing.

 

[reignofchaos]

well at 32inches u can notice the difference b/w HD and FHD, but like i said before it all depends on ur viewing distance,if u got a 1080p 32inch tv and u feed in a 1080p video u can sit as close 4 feet and enjoy the fine details.
u can see the pictures above of the 720p and 1080p image on the 32inch sony FHD lcd.u can also notice that 576i image on a FHD tv is a bad idea.so people who intend to only watch sd can go for a plasma which has a resolution of 1024x768.

and yes philips and lg are behind in terms of panel tech,and image processing.

Are you gonna be watching only static images on the screen? If not, you'll never be able to perceive the difference from 4 ft especially on LCDs with poor motion resolution due to blur. The dynamic resolution of a FHD LCD will drop dramatically because of blurring. Those images are not a guide either cos most TVs these days will downscale 1080p content and not need strictly 720p content. The difference between 1080p and 720p will reduce even more with downscaling of 1080p content to 720p.

 

[adder]

Are you gonna be watching only static images on the screen? If not, you'll never be able to perceive the difference from 4 ft especially on LCDs with poor motion resolution due to blur. The dynamic resolution of a FHD LCD will drop dramatically because of blurring. Those images are not a guide either cos most TVs these days will downscale 1080p content and not need strictly 720p content. The difference between 1080p and 720p will reduce even more with downscaling of 1080p content to 720p.

well yes but then again in a video u won't always have a moving image lets say they are interviewing a person the person will be moving but the the background image could be static.or for instance in movie troy i was testing a HD DVD version that i got free for xbox HD DVD addon,where when the greece army stands in front of troy when they show the soldiers standing u can see the detail in their armor which they are wearing in 1080p video.also plasma also suffers from motion blur.
for that matter even ur own eyes when u watch a moving object u cant notice and difference its only when the objects comes to a stand still that u can notice the fine details.

now about the 1080p video downscaling to 720p u can still notice that a 1080p video on a 1080p screen is still better then a 1080p video on 720p screen.
simple reason is the 1080p screen as more resolution.
if u look at the below images taken from samsung 720p 42inch plasma and a sony FHD 46inch lcd both of which are feeded a 1080p signal.

the above image from the samsung a 1080p video on a 720p plasma which is downscaled.

the above image from the sony lcd a 1080p video on a 1080p lcd which is 1:1.

 

[reignofchaos]

From the image, all I can notice is that either they were taken in dramatically different lighting conditions with different exposures set on the camera or the samsung wasn't properly calibrated for accurate colors and shadow detail. Either way those two images don't prove anything and one can't draw any meaningful conclusion from them.

 

[adder]

From the image, all I can notice is that either they were taken in dramatically different lighting conditions with different exposures set on the camera or the samsung wasn't properly calibrated for accurate colors and shadow detail. Either way those two images don't prove anything and one can't draw any meaningful conclusion from them.

well u cant prove that either

but here is another example this one is from a pioneer KURO 1080p plasma and the samsung 720p plasma.

the above image from the samsung a 1080p video on a 720p plasma which is downscaled.

the above image from the pioneer kuro plasma a 1080p video on a 1080p plasma which is 1:1.

 

[psychotropic]

er....adder....i think i will agree with reignofchaos here.....these still images don't look like the TVs were properly calibrated. There's no way in hell there's so much of a difference in the colour reproduction between flat panel displays.....irrespective of whether they are LCD or Plasma, Samsung or Sony etc., Now without proper calibration, the comparison is not a like for like comparison is it?

Motion blur is still visible on LCDs and the difference with plasmas is very tangible. Any casual comparison of an LCD and plasma side by side will testify to this. I don't think these still images are therefore useful for establishing anything material.