Can anyone tell me what the equivalent size of a 4:3 picture is when viewed as normal 4:3 on a widescreen TV - both 28" and 32"?

Hope that makes sense!

Just that I'm going to buy a widescreen but don't want to end up with a smaller picture when watching 4:3 broadcasts to what I do at present.

I think a 4:3 picture on a 32" set is pretty much equivalent to a 28" 4:3. A 28" widescreen would be equivalent to a 24" 4:3.

Cheers James, glad you didn't go into your usual rant about widescreen!

If those figures are correct I'll be ok with a 28" as my current telly is 21" and I wanted a slightly bigger 4:3 pic.

Think it's actually about 28wide=23square/32wide=26square - it seems to be just short of one TV size down (need a tape measure or some simple maths to be sure).

But then, it depends what you mostly end up watching - you'll really notice the difference with films and widescreen broadcasts. I went from a 28" square to a 32" wide and it suddenly seemed huge. If your house and your wallet can manage the 32 then go for it...

No, it's smaller than that.

I used to have a Sony 32" WS and was never happy with the height. I can accuratley say that the height was the equivalent of a 25" 4:3.
I would say that a 24" WS is the equivalent of a 21" 4:3.

I eventually upgraded to a 40" (and that's 40" viewable area too), which is the equivalent of a 34" (if such a size exists).

RichradS, what size 4:3 are you used to?

You'll probably need a 36" WS if it's a 28" 4:3

Unlike monkeysoup I didn't see a huge size difference when I went from a 28" 4:3 to a 32" WS. Smaller if anything, even though I was actually getting more per sq inch on the WS.

But it's an object's height rather than width that we usually determine if something looks 'big' or not. As is the case here.

I've currently got a 20" (or is it 21") 4:3

Could somebody with a 28" WS measure the height of the picture and then I can check that against my 4:3 - should give me an idea!

Like I said, films seemed much bigger (good old anamorphic broadcasts vs 4:3 letterbox). And there were other factors (flat screen etc) which made the upgrade seem much better, even though 4:3 pictures had slightly shrunk. What's most important is not the appearance and the measurements of the TV when switched off in a brightly lit room, but the effect when you turn it on and the lights off.

Yes, a 28" WS TV will give you the equivalent (in height) of a 21" 4:3 TV which is what you have. Note, on all CRT TVs, some of the tube is masked.

O-level geometry suggests:

21-inch 4:3 height = 12.6''
24-inch 4:3 height = 14.4''
28-inch 4:3 height = 16.8''

28-inch 16:9 height = 13.7''
32-inch 16:9 height = 15.7''
36-inch 16:9 height = 17.6''

Of course TV manufacturers don't make screens that are the excat shape and size you think they ought to be from the description.

I hate to be pinickety, but the actual viewing area of the screen is measured in cm's....this is the area that actually provides the image. The inch measurement has generally been used as a reference to the overall tube size including it's black borders. So a 25" TV typically measures more like 23.25" (59cm) and so on

I know it might sound like fussing over nothing, but if you're after the real viewing area it's worth using centimetres.

This is true, but the "error" is constant, so the comparisons hold.

Yes I guess that's true, like for like sizewise and so on....I only mentioned it as once I sold a 28inch TV to a lady, when she got home she measured it and complained we'd only sold her a 26" TV and she felt we'd tried to rip her off... luckily all of our sales tickets had cm and inch measurements and we already tried to explain the difference between the visible cm size versus inch size.