DS Forums

 
 

Looking for a new LCD or Plasma (200mhz)


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-02-2009, 00:51
LEP
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,192

I'm looking for a new 50 inch (approx) TV. Somebody told me that I should be looking for a 200mhz as better quality pictures etc.

Any recommendations where I could get one from? Must have full HD (for SKY HD and Wii console and blue ray player).

I have a 2k limit (Is that enough for a 200mhz?)
LEP is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 01-02-2009, 01:31
stvn758
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 17,338
Sony have 200mhz, my Samsung goes to 120mhz which is a multiple of the 24frames which makes the algorithm that calculates everything simpler - apparently.

Don't think you will need to spend 2k on one for this feature alone, unless you want to treat yourself.
stvn758 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2009, 08:44
rjb101
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,609
I'm looking for a new 50 inch (approx) TV. Somebody told me that I should be looking for a 200mhz as better quality pictures etc.

Any recommendations where I could get one from? Must have full HD (for SKY HD and Wii console and blue ray player).

I have a 2k limit (Is that enough for a 200mhz?)

Dont know about the 200Mhz malarkey, but how about one of these?

http://shopping.trustedreviews.com/U..._50_Plasma_TV/
rjb101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2009, 09:03
chrisbartley
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: berks
Posts: 1,643
200Mhz - that would be a step up

think you mean Hz not Mhz
chrisbartley is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2009, 09:26
LEP
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,192
200Mhz - that would be a step up

think you mean Hz not Mhz

Yeh, I mean Hz. I have no idea about technology etc. All I know is I want a great picture and I was told to start looking out for 200 Hz
LEP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2009, 09:36
chrisbartley
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: berks
Posts: 1,643
I think Sony are the only ones offering 200hz at the mo

my panasonic plasma has 100hz, but since you cant switch it off - so can't tell how much difference it makes
chrisbartley is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2009, 09:55
tichtich
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,094
200Mhz - that would be a step up
Actually, he wrote 200 mhz, which would be a step down to 200 millihertz or one fifth of a hertz (though strictly it should be written "mHz"). Imagine if your TV screen was only updated once every 5 seconds!

Sorry for the pedantry.
tichtich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2009, 10:01
tichtich
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,094
By the way, what's the point of 200 Hz? I thought 100 Hz was already faster than the human eye can discern.
tichtich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2009, 10:56
rjb101
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,609
Found a review of the sony

http://www.trustedreviews.com/tvs/re...46in-LCD-TV/p5

200 hz seems to improve watching sport
rjb101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2009, 11:48
ROB_123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 89
Hi guys not really into TV tech , What is HZ?? And how dose it improve the picture??

Thanks
ROB_123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2009, 11:54
Orbitalzone
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Sussex
Posts: 12,173
Well personally, I believe the main benefit of 200Hz is that it sounds better than those pathetic 50 or 100Hz Models.... so what are you gonna buy??!

I await members jumping down my throat but I'm more convinced it's a sales ploy than an actual real benefit.

Does repeating the same fields 2 or 3 or 4 times (or whatever) really make for better viewing? we've seen it all before with 100Hz models, the extra processing can make it look worse albeit without any flicker... which many people don't see anyway.

HOWEVER, it's quite likely that the 200Hz models perform better not because they're 200Hz but because they're higher spec models and so the whole product will be more refined.

We see it all the time, higher priced models have certain extra features that often don't make any odds ultimately, they sound better of course , but the fact they might put in a higher spec LCD panel, better overall processing, better components, better speakers, better everything, then it's better than the non 100Hz or non 200Hz. I'd take a stab that if you turned off the 200Hz it should still look pretty good...of course they could make the non 200Hz mode look worse than it really should do.

me a cynic of consumer electronic companies?

yes.
Orbitalzone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2009, 13:44
Nigel Goodwin
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Derbyshire
Posts: 41,794
Well personally, I believe the main benefit of 200Hz is that it sounds better than those pathetic 50 or 100Hz Models.... so what are you gonna buy??!

I await members jumping down my throat but I'm more convinced it's a sales ploy than an actual real benefit.

Does repeating the same fields 2 or 3 or 4 times (or whatever) really make for better viewing? we've seen it all before with 100Hz models, the extra processing can make it look worse albeit without any flicker... which many people don't see anyway.
First off, I completely agree with you.

Second - flickering - there is no flickering on an LCD or Plasma, they don't work in the same way.

Third - they don't repeat the same frame multiple times, they 'make up' frames to try and create what would be there, based on the content of successive frames.

200Hz Sony sets are a great picture, but I suspect that it's because they are a great set, nothing to do with 200Hz - which I agree is mostly a sales gimmick (as is 100Hz).
Nigel Goodwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2009, 15:10
ROB_123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 89
Well personally, I believe the main benefit of 200Hz is that it sounds better than those pathetic 50 or 100Hz Models.... so what are you gonna buy??!

I await members jumping down my throat but I'm more convinced it's a sales ploy than an actual real benefit.

Does repeating the same fields 2 or 3 or 4 times (or whatever) really make for better viewing? we've seen it all before with 100Hz models, the extra processing can make it look worse albeit without any flicker... which many people don't see anyway.

HOWEVER, it's quite likely that the 200Hz models perform better not because they're 200Hz but because they're higher spec models and so the whole product will be more refined.

We see it all the time, higher priced models have certain extra features that often don't make any odds ultimately, they sound better of course , but the fact they might put in a higher spec LCD panel, better overall processing, better components, better speakers, better everything, then it's better than the non 100Hz or non 200Hz. I'd take a stab that if you turned off the 200Hz it should still look pretty good...of course they could make the non 200Hz mode look worse than it really should do.

me a cynic of consumer electronic companies?

yes.
First off, I completely agree with you.

Second - flickering - there is no flickering on an LCD or Plasma, they don't work in the same way.

Third - they don't repeat the same frame multiple times, they 'make up' frames to try and create what would be there, based on the content of successive frames.

200Hz Sony sets are a great picture, but I suspect that it's because they are a great set, nothing to do with 200Hz - which I agree is mostly a sales gimmick (as is 100Hz).

Thanks for the help guys but what exactly is HZ and what dose it do??
ROB_123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2009, 17:46
Orbitalzone
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Sussex
Posts: 12,173
First off, I completely agree with you.

Second - flickering - there is no flickering on an LCD or Plasma, they don't work in the same way.

Third - they don't repeat the same frame multiple times, they 'make up' frames to try and create what would be there, based on the content of successive frames.

200Hz Sony sets are a great picture, but I suspect that it's because they are a great set, nothing to do with 200Hz - which I agree is mostly a sales gimmick (as is 100Hz).
I guess you're right (they don't promote them as flicker free these days, I'm thinking more along the CRT days of 100Hz (been out the TV trade for 9 years and LCD/Plasma has sort of passed me by!)

I didn't realise the missing frames were intelligently processed, well relatively intelligent, I have to wonder at the actual results given as it's not what was made by the broadcaster but interpolated by the TV.
Orbitalzone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2009, 17:54
Orbitalzone
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Sussex
Posts: 12,173
Thanks for the help guys but what exactly is HZ and what dose it do??
Take a look HERE

In this case it generally refers to the amount of frames or images displayed in a second...... TV movement is created by displaying lots of still images in quick succession to create movement (ok there's more than that with interlacing etc)

So the more images per second creates smoother results especially with fast action or panning shots.
Orbitalzone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2009, 18:37
Nigel Goodwin
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Derbyshire
Posts: 41,794
I didn't realise the missing frames were intelligently processed, well relatively intelligent, I have to wonder at the actual results given as it's not what was made by the broadcaster but interpolated by the TV.
I never said 'intelligently'

Bear in mind this is vaguely similar to how MPEG compression works - whole frames are only sent every so often, with only the major changes been sent for the frames in between. The decoder makes most of it up
Nigel Goodwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2009, 18:39
Nigel Goodwin
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Derbyshire
Posts: 41,794
Sony have 200mhz, my Samsung goes to 120mhz which is a multiple of the 24frames which makes the algorithm that calculates everything simpler - apparently.
Actually that's not true.

120Hz is just the American version of 100Hz, as their frame rate is 60Hz instead of 50Hz. Presumably the Sony 200Hz American version is 240Hz?.
Nigel Goodwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2009, 19:27
rjb101
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,609
But why do the Americans have 60Hz, is it because they generate electricity at 60 Hz where as we us 50Hz?

I'm sure the TV's aren't mains voltage dependent on which Hz to use.

Or is it because it would look weird with artificial lighting if one is 50 and the other 60
rjb101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2009, 19:49
stvn758
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 17,338
Actually that's not true.

120Hz is just the American version of 100Hz, as their frame rate is 60Hz instead of 50Hz. Presumably the Sony 200Hz American version is 240Hz?.
I thought hi def was meant to do away with the PAL NTSC differences.
stvn758 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2009, 20:51
Orbitalzone
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Sussex
Posts: 12,173
But why do the Americans have 60Hz, is it because they generate electricity at 60 Hz where as we us 50Hz?

I'm sure the TV's aren't mains voltage dependent on which Hz to use.

Or is it because it would look weird with artificial lighting if one is 50 and the other 60
That's exactly the reason, historically the US and other US influenced countries had 60Hz electricity and we in Europe had 50Hz....(this is a simplified generalisation before the purists complain about innaccurcies) as the earlier TV's used this as a reference for syncronisation it had to be the standard and as new TV models came out they had to be backward compatible even though they no longer required the mains cycles to do the syncing.

You can't just suddenly change a standard like that.

(give or take)
Orbitalzone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2009, 23:18
Nigel Goodwin
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Derbyshire
Posts: 41,794
That's exactly the reason, historically the US and other US influenced countries had 60Hz electricity and we in Europe had 50Hz....(this is a simplified generalisation before the purists complain about innaccurcies) as the earlier TV's used this as a reference for syncronisation it had to be the standard and as new TV models came out they had to be backward compatible even though they no longer required the mains cycles to do the syncing.
I don't think mains was ever used for syncing in TV's, the reason was to prevent moving humbars from disrupting the picture - although more modern sets have much better power supplies, and mains hum isn't a problem.

At one time UK TV transmissions may have been synced to the mains, in order to prevent humbars moving at all.

I thought hi def was meant to do away with the PAL NTSC differences.
It has, no PAL or NTSC involved, they have nothing to do with the frame frequency, just the colour encoding - which isn't required for a digital signal.
Nigel Goodwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2009, 09:52
Orbitalzone
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Sussex
Posts: 12,173
.........
At one time UK TV transmissions may have been synced to the mains, in order to prevent humbars moving at all.
.
I think that might be what I was getting muddled with.... it's something I remember someone saying to me years and years ago at some old TV museum.
Orbitalzone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2009, 09:34
BEASTIES
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 20
I'm afraid I can't agree with those who say 50/100/200 Hz is a sales gimmick. My very recent experience is this;

In short, Hz is important with LCD TVs, not so with plasma. It's something to do with response times apparently(!).
My 50Hz Panasonic 42" plasma suffers virtually no motion problems at all. With Sky HD sport viewing motion is superb. Even with freeview rugby or football the motion handling is reasonably good, but that's a problem with the freeview signal as far as I'm aware. I went for plasma primarily for the reason I watch a lot of sport and every LCD I'd seen up until my purchase looked awful with sport. I got it 18 months ago. Newer Panas have 100Hz, which should be even better.

I then bought a Pana 26" 100Hz set for the kitchen having viewed tennis on the same TV in the shop. Other 26" sets with 50Hz looked poor in comparison with the tennis. That set is "fairly" good for watching sport but not "good". I have just taken delivery of a JVC 26" LCD (with PVR built in), which is 50Hz. It's handling of motion is a lot poorer when compared with the 100Hz Pana. I can cope with it because of the small size of the set and will be watching "important" sport on the 42" Pana plasma anyway.

My last point is that I was recently in a Sony shop where they had several 40" LCD sets lined up together. I remarked to the assistant that it was a bit foolish, because the difference between the 50 and 100Hz sets was striking. Bigger sets make everything more obvious! Looking at the 50Hz set in isolation first of all, the picture was a little bit juddery. But when you then looked at the 100Hz set showing exactly the same picture from the same source it was miles better. In fact the 50Hz picture looked terrible. I couldn't stand watching that set for any length of time. The clip was only of a person walking down the street with the background moving behind him. The 200Hz set that was next to both sets was better than the 100Hz set but not greatly so, a lot more expensive tho!

To sum up; If you're buying an LCD of reasonable size make sure it's at least 100Hz. However ANY plasma set will handle motion much better than an LCD.

Also my stepson has just got himself a 40" 100Hz Samsung LCD. The other night I watched the Rugby Club in HD on both his TV and my Pana plasma in turn. His set was pretty good at handling the action, but I preferred the Pana plasma. IMHO a 50Hz plasma is better than a 100Hz LCD. I hope that helps.
BEASTIES is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2009, 10:48
roddydogs
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,355
Better sling my 50hz LCD away, then.
roddydogs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2009, 11:06
edgexedge
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,881
beasties:

for a start, your not comparing like for like
to see if there is a difference for 1 lcd panal, you would need 2 of them set up next to each other, 1 at 50hz, the other at 100hz, & feed them the same source

also, lcd response times are measured in milliseconds, which is the time taken to change a pixel from 1 state to another, & back again
lcd's also only change those pixels that need changing
if you want a screen for fast moving action, games, sports etc, as the response time is a time measurement, the lower the figure the better.


as has already been pointed out, it is likely that the tv's advertised as having 100/200hz simply have better panels fitted to start with
edgexedge is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 16:44.