"Oliver Keating" wrote in message
...
"Justin Cole" wrote in message
...
"Oliver Keating" wrote in message
...
ignore 852x480 42" screens.

I agree with this statement entirely, that is a pretty low res and at
that
point you are merely sacrificing quality to achieve size.

In modern terms it *is* 'low res' but remember the signal that will be
fed
to the display is roughly the same. A higher res screen does not invent
extra information that is not there!

No, but I think there is an advantage to be had even if the screen is at a
higher res than the signal, modern electronics usually interpolate the
image, so it does actually look better even though technically there is no
extra detail.

Is this based on actual side-by-side comparison or just theory? It is
generally agreed that 480 screens handle 'normal' video signals better than
1024's. Of course some 1024's will make a good job but interpolation can
make things worse and 'artificial'. It all boils down to what your eye
detects (or has learnt to detect...)

Best to test a 480 and 1024 display side-by-side with your typical
inputs.
Any decent shop will do this - it's a large sum of cash to part with
without
demo'ing first...

I have had a glance, and IMO 480's are not worth bothering with. When you
consider you can get a top-of-the-range 32 inch widescreen TV for half the
price, which offers a much better picture, then the basic plasma's don't
make a good case for themselves.

CRT with much better picture!? The Panasonic plasma's give CRTs a very hard
time - plus you get an extra 10 inches! (Every man's dream ;-) Start
putting NTSC through them and the plasma wins hands down!

Justin.

"R. Mark Clayton" wrote in message
...

"Oliver Keating" wrote in message
...
So I have finally decided to ditch the old telly and get a plasma
screen.

Yes yes, I know a projector is better but it isn't really practical for
my
setup.

You reckon - alignment, burn out, walking in front, image brightness and
power consumption...


Finding reviews for plasma screens has prooved more difficult than I
thought
at first, the only proper (i.e. paper) ones I have found have been from
What
HiFi magazine:

First they recommended:

JVC PD-42D30ES for £5,500

This month they recommend the:

Pioneer PDP-434HDE for £4500

The above two are 42 inch screens, but I noticed that there was a 50
inch
version of the Pioneer for sale:

Pioneer PDP-504HDE for £5799

This seems like quite a good deal, a 50 inch screen for under £6k. But
is
it
any good? I am really having trouble finding any reviews for this,
online
or
offline.

Also, WhatHiFi magazine recommends using a Pioneer DVD player (which
costs
£1000 (!)) and a Pioneer amp to take advantage of Pioneer's "HDMI"
interconnects. Along with surround speakers this pushes the system price
to
nearly £9k. Is this worth it?

The DVD is definitely NOT worth it.


Finally, I am confused about where to buy. Shops I have visisted tend to
have a poor range, or silly prices, so I am looking online. So far the
places I see with reasonable choice a

www.empiredirect.co.uk
www.homecinemaheaven.com

Try Sound & Vision in Bolton [le Moors*], D&C or Richer Sounds.

What Video & Widescreen (Nov. Edition) has a table of review results.

Including only the (best for any make) 1024 x 768+ for 42" these a -

Fujitsu P42HHS10S £5k4 5
Hitachi CL42MA400E £3k 5 "no tuner"
JVC PD-42PD20 £6k5 (1280x1024) 4.5
JVC PD-42D30ES £5k5 4
Philips 42PF9964 £5k8 4.5 "one of the best plasma's money can buy"
Sony KE-42MR1 £8k 4 "flawed performance"

ignore 852x480 42" screens.

There are larger higher resolution screens from

Fujitsu, NEC, Panasonic, Pioneer (not reviewed), Samsung, Sharp, Thompson,
Toshiba and Yamaha. None under £5k though.

You need to be about 3m from a 36", 4m from a 42" and 5m from a 50" in
order
to be able to view it properly.

For my money the Philips 9964 is the best because: -

Pixel Plus cleans up the image (seen this working at a show).
Best tuner box with loads of inputs including VGA.
Best teletext.
About £3k5 on the street.

I looked at one of these about a week ago and I thought it was dreadful.
The picture was chock full of atrifacts and halo effects. I couldn't see
much difference with the extra res either.

I suspect the input signal was lacking but the Panny was clearly much
better. Personally, at the moment the interpolation electronics arn't good
enough. PAL up converted to 1024 or 852 looks worse than down converted to
480. Why we can't get a 576 line plasma is still a mystery.