127cm plasma screens

[docjon]

I have seen several 127cm plasma screens come onto the market over the past couple of weeks at around the $9000 mark Examples are LG RT-50PZ, Samsung PS50P3H, Hyundai HY5000. It seems as if the prices are dropping quite dramatically. I find it difficult to compare these products picture to picture as they are in different stores. Does anyone have any experience with any 127cm screens ? Are all these models HD? They are all 1366X768 pixels

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?BenOne=A9?=]

docjon wrote:
> I have seen several 127cm plasma screens come onto the market over the
> past couple of weeks at around the $9000 mark Examples are LG
> RT-50PZ, Samsung PS50P3H, Hyundai HY5000. It seems as if the
> prices are dropping quite dramatically. I find it difficult to
> compare these products picture to picture as they are in different
> stores. Does anyone have any experience with any 127cm screens ? Are
> all these models HD? They are all 1366X768 pixels
>
>

If it's 768 pixels high, it has enough to do channel 7s HD, but even then, it's
going to look shite close up because the pixels will be so big, IMHO.

My 94cm plasma is 1024x1024 and the pixels aren't really noticeable from more
than 2m away. Note that this is still not enough to display a full 1080i HD
picture but it's the best you can get in that size I think.

To achieve the same detail level with the 127cm display you would need a
vertical resolution of approximately 1384 pixels.

Please correct me if I'm wrong or if there are other factors to consider.

--
Ben Thomas

Apparently less than 10% of accidents are caused by drivers exceeding the speed
limit.

[Dewgan Legend]

All 127 cm and larger plasmas are HD. The only plasmas that are SD are those
that are 842 x 480 and smaller.

Most, if not all, 127 cm screens are 1366 x 768 pixels.

[Note that a HD image can be 1920 x 1080 pixels in resolution. This will be
downscaled to 1377 x 768. Even though teh image is downscaled the plasma is
still considered HD]


"docjon" <docjon.151x70@no-mx.forums.eyo.com.au> wrote in message
news:docjon.151x70@no-mx.forums.eyo.com.au...
>
> I have seen several 127cm plasma screens come onto the market over the
> past couple of weeks at around the $9000 mark Examples are LG
> RT-50PZ, Samsung PS50P3H, Hyundai HY5000. It seems as if the
> prices are dropping quite dramatically. I find it difficult to
> compare these products picture to picture as they are in different
> stores. Does anyone have any experience with any 127cm screens ? Are
> all these models HD? They are all 1366X768 pixels
>
>
> --
> docjon
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> docjon's Profile:
http://forums.eyo.com.au/member.php?action=getinfo&userid=4927
> View this thread: http://forums.eyo.com.au/showthread.php?threadid=45264
>

[docjon]

I see that all the plasma screens now have a native resolution of 1366X768 -even the 60inch models. In order to make a larger screen the size of the pixels must be larger. This means that at a fixed viewing distance of ,let's say 2 meters, the pixilation will be much less obvious on a smaller screen. In that case, the larger the screen the further the recommended viewing distance. Therefore, assuming one's viewing distance is governed by the room size or furniture position, it is pointless getting a larger screen because the pixels will be too visible. I looked at the 127cm (50inch) screens from a distance of between 2.5 and 3.5 meters and they looked pretty good. I was wondering if anyone was also looking at 127cm screens and what their opinions were.

[Dewgan Legend]

> Eg. The 1024x1024 Fujitsu/Hitachi panels are actually interlaced displays,
> with all the attendant problems of interlacing plus the added complication
> of de-interlacing for signal processing and then re-interlacing for
display.
> Despite the extra processing the latest Fujitsu/Hitachis can look very
good.
>

They don't have all the attendant problems of interlaced displays.

Plasmas don't flicker whereas CRTs can have quite significant flicker.

Since the most common input signals (576i and 1080i) are already interlaced,
there is actually less work for the ALIS display to do.

I can't think of any other attendant problems of interlaced displays.

[Trevor S]

"Dewgan Legend" <dewganlegend@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:c66vjp$a72$1@perki.connect.com.au:

<snip>

> Even though teh image is downscaled
> the plasma is still considered HD]

Maybe by the marketing people, not by anyone in their right mind they
aren't.


--
Trevor S


"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth."
-Albert Einstein

[news at 11.00]

"Dewgan Legend" <dewganlegend@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c6aeqo$n2f$1@perki.connect.com.au...
>>
> Since the most common input signals (576i and 1080i) are already
interlaced,
> there is actually less work for the ALIS display to do.
>

Nope.
Interlaced signals are de-interlaced for processing, scaled to 1024 then
re-interlaced for display.
The re-interlacing is an extra step for all ALiS based plasmas.

> I can't think of any other attendant problems of interlaced displays.

Try harder :)

Reduced vertical resolution
Sawtooth edge distortion
Visible scan line structure
Line crawl

Granted the above problems can be masked by clever signal processing but
that means more processing has to be done on the signal.

Fujitsu/Hitachi devised this method to cut costs.
High definiton panels with good brightness can be produced without the need
for expensive dual scan techniques.
Structual complexity of the panel and electronics are reduced while
efficiency is increased over traditional ribbed column PDPs.


cheers,