|
|
new tv is 50hz ok
Hi
I'm reluctantly replacing my sony 21in crt after many years of great pics. After checking out market, am I correct in thinking only 100hz sets cope with motion blur effectively, Samsung have good reviews but are only 50hz, any advice gratefully received ( of a televisual nature ! ) Cheers - Rog |
new tv is 50hz ok
In article
s.com, rog scribeth thus Hi I'm reluctantly replacing my sony 21in crt after many years of great pics. After checking out market, am I correct in thinking only 100hz sets cope with motion blur effectively, Samsung have good reviews but are only 50hz, any advice gratefully received ( of a televisual nature ! ) Cheers - Rog I spent some time worrying about all that but just before Xmas we bought a Sony KDL40EX503U and quite frankly I've err .. umm .. just enjoyed the programmes can't fault it at all. Its as good as what they transit and seems to render better Pix that what I've seen on in store demos. And since the HD service has started up around here the Pix is sometimes stunning when they get it right at the other end;! Its also got a net connection for iplayer and Youtube and others I haven't got around to as yet but no motion blur that I've seen !.. -- Tony Sayer |
new tv is 50hz ok
On 20/04/2011 9:23 PM, rog wrote:
Hi I'm reluctantly replacing my sony 21in crt after many years of great pics. After checking out market, am I correct in thinking only 100hz sets cope with motion blur effectively, Samsung have good reviews but are only 50hz, any advice gratefully received ( of a televisual nature ! ) Cheers - Rog UK tv is 50hz. many people with 100hz sets end up turning off the ' picture enhancement ' processing that comes with them. -- Gareth. That fly.... Is your magic wand. |
new tv is 50hz ok
On Wednesday, April 20th, 2011 at 13:23:45h -0700, Rog wrote:
After checking out market, am I correct in thinking only 100hz sets cope with motion blur effectively, Samsung have good reviews but are only 50hz That is just not correct at all. Go to http://www.samsung.COM/uk/consumer/tv-audio-video/television/led-tv/index.idx?pagetype=subtype and you will see that you can choose Samsung LED Televisions on the basis of being either 100 Hz or *200* Hz. |
new tv is 50hz ok
Faster refresh rates may or may not help with motion blur.
For me, I can easily see a 50Hz flicker, so - motion blur aside - I simply must have a 100Hz or higher refresh rate (actually my flicker-detection neurons top out at about 85Hz). If your TV behaves like a cinema projector - simply flashing each picture up two or more times - then you will escape the headache-inducing 50Hz flicker but it won't help at all towards reducing motion blur. You've only got to see how dreadful even a fairly slow pan looks on a cinema screen. However, if your TV does some fancy processing to interpolate intermediate frames, which it then shows between the real ones as part of the flicker reduction regime, then you'll enjoy smoother apparent motion as well. BUT, it all depends on how good the processing is, what parameters Samsung consider to be important, and what - exactly - you personally mean by motion blur. My Panny plasma is supposed to have all sorts of fancy processing and such, and I still think motion looks horribly flickery (but not blurry). I'd take a good long look at a 50Hz TV in the shop before buying it. If you find it satisfactory for your particular brain, then go for it. SteveT |
new tv is 50hz ok
"Steve Thackery" wrote in message
... Faster refresh rates may or may not help with motion blur. For me, I can easily see a 50Hz flicker, so - motion blur aside - I simply must have a 100Hz or higher refresh rate (actually my flicker-detection neurons top out at about 85Hz). If your TV behaves like a cinema projector - simply flashing each picture up two or more times - then you will escape the headache-inducing 50Hz flicker but it won't help at all towards reducing motion blur. Flicker is a totally different issue. LCD screens do not flicker in the way that CRTs do. You've only got to see how dreadful even a fairly slow pan looks on a cinema screen. However, if your TV does some fancy processing to interpolate intermediate frames, which it then shows between the real ones as part of the flicker reduction regime, then you'll enjoy smoother apparent motion as well. BUT, it all depends on how good the processing is, what parameters Samsung consider to be important, and what - exactly - you personally mean by motion blur. My Panny plasma is supposed to have all sorts of fancy processing and such, and I still think motion looks horribly flickery (but not blurry). I'd take a good long look at a 50Hz TV in the shop before buying it. If you find it satisfactory for your particular brain, then go for it. SteveT -- Brian Gregory. (In the UK) To email me remove the letter vee. |
new tv is 50hz ok
On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 23:52:11 +0100, "Brian Gregory [UK]"
wrote: "Steve Thackery" wrote in message ... Faster refresh rates may or may not help with motion blur. For me, I can easily see a 50Hz flicker, so - motion blur aside - I simply must have a 100Hz or higher refresh rate (actually my flicker-detection neurons top out at about 85Hz). If your TV behaves like a cinema projector - simply flashing each picture up two or more times - then you will escape the headache-inducing 50Hz flicker but it won't help at all towards reducing motion blur. Flicker is a totally different issue. LCD screens do not flicker in the way that CRTs do. That is correct. I don't understand why their is fashion for have 100Hz or even higher for LCD panels. It is just a question of higher numbers being "better" for the marketing department. I could also not stand the flicker at 50Hz so bought a 100Hz TV but the extra processing does introduce artifacts. -- (\__/) M. (='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and (")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by everyone you will need use a different method of posting. |
new tv is 50hz ok
snip
I spent some time worrying about all that but just before Xmas we bought a Sony KDL40EX503U and quite frankly I've err .. umm .. just enjoyed the programmes can't fault it at all. I also bought the 32EX503 (1080 + 100Hz motionflow + Freeview HD) and find it excellent - the best LCD picture I've seen - particularly good on SD transmissions. It does a great job on fast motion - eg tennis balls, footballs. Slight negatives: 1. Blacks become a bit grey when viewed at an angle. 2. Sound is decent, but not great bass - it is a thin TV with downfiring speakers. better than most thin TVs. 3. Channel change could be a bit faster. |
new tv is 50hz ok
On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 22:08:25 +0100, tony sayer
wrote: I spent some time worrying about all that but just before Xmas we bought a Sony KDL40EX503U and quite frankly I've err .. umm .. just enjoyed the programmes can't fault it at all... Same here :-) -- Alan White Mozilla Firefox and Forte Agent. By Loch Long, twenty-eight miles NW of Glasgow, Scotland. Webcam and weather:- http://windycroft.co.uk/weather |
new tv is 50hz ok
In article , viewer
scribeth thus snip I spent some time worrying about all that but just before Xmas we bought a Sony KDL40EX503U and quite frankly I've err .. umm .. just enjoyed the programmes can't fault it at all. I also bought the 32EX503 (1080 + 100Hz motionflow + Freeview HD) and find it excellent - the best LCD picture I've seen - particularly good on SD transmissions. It does a great job on fast motion - eg tennis balls, footballs. Slight negatives: 1. Blacks become a bit grey when viewed at an angle. Not noticed that, but then again its -my- telly and when -I- want to watch it everyone else has to sit elsewhere;!.. 2. Sound is decent, but not great bass - it is a thin TV with downfiring speakers. better than most thin TVs. Not bothered to criticise that at all, this is the way of flat panel TV's if I need the sound better the nearby ESL63's can do that;).. 3. Channel change could be a bit faster. Yes that does seem rather sluggish.. But a lot of the time we're using an external sat receiver which is quite fast so its not really a problem.. -- Tony Sayer |
new tv is 50hz ok
On Thursday, April 21st, 2011 at 12:20:46h +0100, Alan White wrote:
On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 22:08:25 +0100, tony sayer wrote: I spent some time worrying about all that but just before Xmas we bought a Sony KDL40EX503U and quite frankly I've err .. umm .. just enjoyed the programmes can't fault it at all... Same here :-) Very favorable in depth review to be found here -- http://www.hdtvtest.co.UK/news/sony-kdl40ex503-kdl40ex503u-20100603700.htm Seems like a "economically priced" basic receiver for DVB-t2 reception and display of Full HD source material. |
new tv is 50hz ok
"Alan White" wrote in message ... On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 22:08:25 +0100, tony sayer wrote: I spent some time worrying about all that but just before Xmas we bought a Sony KDL40EX503U and quite frankly I've err .. umm .. just enjoyed the programmes can't fault it at all... Same here :-) -- Alan White Mozilla Firefox and Forte Agent. By Loch Long, twenty-eight miles NW of Glasgow, Scotland. Webcam and weather:- http://windycroft.co.uk/weather 713U here a stunning set, no complaints, not sure what the difference is with the 503U |
new tv is 50hz ok
Steve Thackery wrote:
You've only got to see how dreadful even a fairly slow pan looks on a cinema screen. I think this has been exagerated by a recent tendancy towards faster shutter speeds. Ironically, CGI programmers have put a lot of effort and CPU into making the "right" motion blur in each frame, whilst the film makers seem to be losing it. BugBear |
new tv is 50hz ok
"Mark" wrote in message
... On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 23:52:11 +0100, "Brian Gregory [UK]" wrote: "Steve Thackery" wrote in message .. . Faster refresh rates may or may not help with motion blur. For me, I can easily see a 50Hz flicker, so - motion blur aside - I simply must have a 100Hz or higher refresh rate (actually my flicker-detection neurons top out at about 85Hz). If your TV behaves like a cinema projector - simply flashing each picture up two or more times - then you will escape the headache-inducing 50Hz flicker but it won't help at all towards reducing motion blur. Flicker is a totally different issue. LCD screens do not flicker in the way that CRTs do. That is correct. I don't understand why their is fashion for have 100Hz or even higher for LCD panels. It is just a question of higher numbers being "better" for the marketing department. I thought flicker was only a problem with CRTs. This has certainly been my experience of computer monitors, where increasing the refresh rate from 60 to 75 Hz reduces the flicker noticeably, whereas LCDs (with their longer persistence) work all right at 60. -- Max Demian |
new tv is 50hz ok
"bugbear" wrote in message
o.uk... Steve Thackery wrote: You've only got to see how dreadful even a fairly slow pan looks on a cinema screen. I think this has been exagerated by a recent tendancy towards faster shutter speeds. Ironically, CGI programmers have put a lot of effort and CPU into making the "right" motion blur in each frame, whilst the film makers seem to be losing it. Since when? My experience of making videocaps from feature films would suggest that the shutter speed remains a constant proportion of the 24 fps regardless of lighting conditions. -- Max Demian |
new tv is 50hz ok
"Brian Gregory [UK]" wrote in message
... Flicker is a totally different issue. LCD screens do not flicker in the way that CRTs do. True - mine's a plasma. SteveT |
new tv is 50hz ok
"Max Demian" wrote in message ...
I thought flicker was only a problem with CRTs. This has certainly been my experience of computer monitors, where increasing the refresh rate from 60 to 75 Hz reduces the flicker noticeably, whereas LCDs (with their longer persistence) work all right at 60. Sorry - I should have said that mine was a plasma, which are still prone to flicker. Dunno what type of screen Samsung use. SteveT |
new tv is 50hz ok
"viewer" wrote in message
... I also bought the 32EX503 (1080 + 100Hz motionflow + Freeview HD) and find it excellent - the best LCD picture I've seen - particularly good on SD transmissions. I got the 46" Sony with Freeview and Freesat, and was so distracted by the backlight bleed I gave it away to a family member. What a waste of a thousand quid. Its replacement - a 50" Panny plasma - suffers from flicker, and again I'm really disappointed with it. It reckons to have "600Hz sub-frame processing", which most retailers (and reviewers, apparently) think means "600Hz refresh". I think it means nothing - marketing ********. They wanted a big number in front of the letters "Hz" to fool everybody. Even though I do the most careful research, reading lots of professional and owner reviews, I don't have much luck choosing tellies, as you can see. SteveT |
new tv is 50hz ok
In article , Steve Thackery
scribeth thus "viewer" wrote in message .. . I also bought the 32EX503 (1080 + 100Hz motionflow + Freeview HD) and find it excellent - the best LCD picture I've seen - particularly good on SD transmissions. I got the 46" Sony with Freeview and Freesat, Which model was that then?.. -- Tony Sayer |
new tv is 50hz ok
"Steve Thackery" wrote in message
... "Brian Gregory [UK]" wrote in message ... Flicker is a totally different issue. LCD screens do not flicker in the way that CRTs do. True - mine's a plasma. I tend to forget about plasma since I don't think I'd ever want one. They use too much power and often emit a fair bit of radio interference in the HF bands. -- Brian Gregory. (In the UK) To email me remove the letter vee. |
new tv is 50hz ok
In article , Max Demian wrote:
Ironically, CGI programmers have put a lot of effort and CPU into making the "right" motion blur in each frame, whilst the film makers seem to be losing it. Since when? My experience of making videocaps from feature films would suggest that the shutter speed remains a constant proportion of the 24 fps regardless of lighting conditions A lot of "films" these days are not actually made on film at all, but electronically from television cameras. One of the effects available with modern cameras is an extreme shortening of the exposure time, giving a sort of jerky effect that some directors seem to like. Effects in electronic cameras (unlike film cameras with physically moving parts) can be done so easily that many directors do them just because they can. Rod. -- Virtual Access V6.3 free usenet/email software from http://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/ |
new tv is 50hz ok
On 22 Apr, 09:05, Roderick Stewart
wrote: In article , Max Demian wrote: Ironically, CGI programmers have put a lot of effort and CPU into making the "right" motion blur in each frame, whilst the film makers seem to be losing it. Since when? My experience of making videocaps from feature films would suggest that the shutter speed remains a constant proportion of the 24 fps regardless of lighting conditions A lot of "films" these days are not actually made on film at all, but electronically from television cameras. One of the effects available with modern cameras is an extreme shortening of the exposure time, giving a sort of jerky effect that some directors seem to like. Effects in electronic cameras (unlike film cameras with physically moving parts) can be done so easily that many directors do them just because they can. Rod. -- Virtual Access V6.3 free usenet/email software fromhttp://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/ Hi I think I'm going with a samsung UE32D5520, any comments or experience of this gratefully appreciated. Rog |
new tv is 50hz ok
"rog" wrote in message
... On 22 Apr, 09:05, Roderick Stewart wrote: In article , Max Demian wrote: Ironically, CGI programmers have put a lot of effort and CPU into making the "right" motion blur in each frame, whilst the film makers seem to be losing it. Since when? My experience of making videocaps from feature films would suggest that the shutter speed remains a constant proportion of the 24 fps regardless of lighting conditions A lot of "films" these days are not actually made on film at all, but electronically from television cameras. One of the effects available with modern cameras is an extreme shortening of the exposure time, giving a sort of jerky effect that some directors seem to like. Effects in electronic cameras (unlike film cameras with physically moving parts) can be done so easily that many directors do them just because they can. Rod. -- Virtual Access V6.3 free usenet/email software fromhttp://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/ Hi I think I'm going with a samsung UE32D5520, any comments or experience of this gratefully appreciated. Rog If that is a LED set think about buying a set of computer speakers to go with it. LED sets are very think and so correspondingly are the speakers therein. -- Woody harrogate three at ntlworld dot com |
new tv is 50hz ok
In article
s.com, rog scribeth thus On 22 Apr, 09:05, Roderick Stewart wrote: In article , Max Demian wrote: Ironically, CGI programmers have put a lot of effort and CPU into making the "right" motion blur in each frame, whilst the film makers seem to be losing it. Since when? My experience of making videocaps from feature films would suggest that the shutter speed remains a constant proportion of the 24 fps regardless of lighting conditions A lot of "films" these days are not actually made on film at all, but electronically from television cameras. One of the effects available with modern cameras is an extreme shortening of the exposure time, giving a sort of jerky effect that some directors seem to like. Effects in electronic cameras (unlike film cameras with physically moving parts) can be done so easily that many directors do them just because they can. Rod. -- Virtual Access V6.3 free usenet/email software fromhttp://sourceforge.net/proj ects/virtual-access/ Hi I think I'm going with a samsung UE32D5520, any comments or experience of this gratefully appreciated. Rog Well said my piece earlier but seriously suggest you check out the newer Sony's!.... -- Tony Sayer |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:36 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HomeCinemaBanter.com