ok i accepted your "bad" that leads to this firery discussion. i agree with you that full HD give better resolution than HD - and noticeable within certain viewing distance. But, i have to disagree with higher number always give better PQ.

and believed me when i say i do have experience BD and Full HD materials/display, despite my "aging" setup. The reason my setup is like that bcoz that the most one i use for our SD braodcast - for my kids to tune to Ceria and carton network, etc..I do have a Full hd setup to enjoy the HD materials, but, why reveals here - To assume one doesnt know the diff between HD and full HD just because one is using SD is really lame..I let my previous comments and answer to our forumer Q's be the judge wether i'm qualified or not - doesnt really bother me at all.

and yes Western is the opposite of Eastern if you havent realised yet. Funny you are so deep in tech, and yet dunno east,west,north,south - maybe need someone to point it out to u ehh..

When you look back at my previous posting, not once did i mentioned SD/HD is better that Full HD right??. I only stressing that some HD/"not so HD" unit do have good reviews and beats its full hd counterparts in term of overall PQ - now you tell me what's wrong with this. I guess it all depend how many pixel u wanna see as opposed to how good and real the image and colour reproduction, and how smooth and life-like the movement of the subject is, and how many other components and software render these input and later displayed it play a major role - that's what i meant number is nummber, PQ is diff.

If you dont agree get two or three set together and demo it with the same source and setting - side by side (plasma v plasma, lcd v lcd). Then you realised a full hd sony will give different PQ to what a full HD samsung or LG or phillips or ..what else ?? in term of colour saturation, real red and green, motion, details, etc...

If you understand these, then i rest my case. If you dont, then ...i duont really care - as what the other forumer said " its your eyes and money.."

---

Added on January 12, 2009, 2:58 pmYes, i knew i heard bout the Buzz problem somewhere. Hope u enjoying your "new" display now .

This post has been edited by ic-klass: Jan 12 2009, 02:58 PM

and, where can we get this astro "scaler" ??

Sweet!!

wonder how much it gonna cost here later...

I second that.
for astro and "normal" DVD - maybe better if you go for plasma..

---

Added on January 18, 2009, 6:00 pmi think if you in KL, better check with "imsobloodysick" for best price - i think he has the lowest offer now..

This post has been edited by ic-klass: Jan 18 2009, 06:00 PM

Ha...ha..., I'm around. Just didnt have much time to write - just a quick glanced here and there..

Yap, my stuff kind "old tech" already. Bought all of it just before HDMI and Flat TV became mainstream - ? 2002. That time a 42in plasma was euro4k
All of it when I was in Ireland. Used to be so much into Hi Fi/Separates - price very nice overthere..

Now due to working commitment, have to let the hobby dormant - its being a while..
Also had to RIP a few of my gears - Rotel Stereo amp, Marants CD player, Mission speakers, 1st gen XBox, etc..

But still very much happy with my setup. They have served me well (2002 - now!!) Might changed it here and there - esp when HD become our daily broadcast..



This post has been edited by ic-klass: Jan 18 2009, 11:26 PM

ha..ha..love the boxing day and open boxe by them....

You bought it Sept last year (2008??). If it still under warranty - claim it!!

Some things I extracted from "interesting read"



and from same article..



and i almost forgot the first part..



Still, I have no regret being in a plasma camp!!

This post has been edited by ic-klass: Jan 21 2009, 12:02 AM

1. Well no point to record astro/epl as the source is already SD. No matter if you recorded it in DVD/VCD/VCR - to source is still SD, It might become more degraded if recorded via VCD/VCR. For BD/PS3, the source is already HD, so no much worry there - just to see the best PQ and Details. Astro will always look crap on LCD and Plasma - so you need only to find the least crappy of both world. Again that depand also on your choice of monitor and your sources.

2. No body here claimed to be an "expert". Just a friendly forum to discussed the pros and cons of having a flat panel. You might wanna ask other forumer experience in PQ of plasma or lcd base on their setup. Different people have diff setup - even a sony BD player vs panasonic BD player give different PQ. If you really wanna take into account all the faxtors that affect PQ is so many...

3. yes, i agree PQ is diff, number is diff. For me PQ is the main factor (beside money)..

This post has been edited by ic-klass: Jan 23 2009, 06:26 AM

As a general rule-of-thumb, the recommended viewing distance is 3X the size of the screen. So if it is a 50in, the recomended viewing istance is 3 X 50in = 150in. Many debated as what is "recommended viewing distance" really means. For me i like to take it as the minimun distance where you can appreciate the details and quality of the image with the least visible noise. For example, even with a full HD source on a full HD display will look gariny/noisy if you are just 2 feets away..

From my setup - i using 42in PV80 (not really HD), viewed at 3.5m, i would say I'm satisfied with the PQ. If watching astro - still can see some noise esp in local station, but better PQ with other non-local station. Watching DVD (depand on the "grade/quality") hardly any noise if the source is good. PQ with full hd, is the best but can really "lawan" full hd display lah. Cable and connection also play a major roles - get good quality one for better PQ.

The only catch is that it you sit too far, then you will be itching to upgrade to a bigger screen size - I wish i had bought the 50in..

This post has been edited by ic-klass: Jan 24 2009, 07:02 AM

true..Plasma and lcd not really my first choice - coz us still hav SD as mainstream; when my old sony widescreen 32in 100hz kaput. But now, no more widescreen crt..So i choose plasma