Question:
I have had both and prefer my 50Hz model expecially on fast moving action but can not convince the people in the office that fast moving on 50Hz is clearer...
Does anyone have a good URL I can refer them too...
Originally posted by icklesimba
I have had both and prefer my 50Hz model
Not this again. Its down to personal preference.
This should be in the hardware forum.
Oh, and your wrong 100Hz is better overall :p
moving...
personally, i don't like 100hz. if you're getting a new tv, demo the ones you're considering first.
How does this affect the picture... (sorry I am a little ignorant about this...oh...and I think my new TV is going to be 100Mhz...)
Originally posted by jnms
How does this affect the picture... (sorry I am a little ignorant about this...oh...and I think my new TV is going to be 100Mhz...)
50 hz refreshes the screen at 50 cycles per second.
100 hz refreshes the screen at 100 cycles per second.
Flickering is visible on a 50hz tv,more so the larger the tv.It also strains the eyes.Flickering is not visible on a 100 hz tv,and is far more comfortable to view(for long periods).
A 100hz tv will be digitised,hence the noise reduction,and this can lead to smearing in fast moving scenes,football.A decent 100hz system will not produce smearing.(Check reviews,as they will always mention it.)
Personally i cannot take the flicker,and notice it on any 50hz screen.If you find someone who says they cannot see it,it is simply because they are used to it(the flicker).
Ahh, thanks for that. I was wondering why some people don't like 100Mhz.
Cheers...
Fact is TV programmes are made in and to be viewed at 50hz, 100hz reduces flicker but at the end of the day messes up the image.
IMO 100hz is a typical bungled european solution to a problem that should ONLY be solved with progressive scan - accept no substitute.
Originally posted by vila
Fact is TV programmes are made in and to be viewed at 50hz, 100hz reduces flicker but at the end of the day messes up the image
IMO 100hz is a typical bungled european solution to a problem that should ONLY be solved with progressive scan - accept no substitute.
I think i am correct in saying that progressive scan has a refresh rate of 60hz,and therefore flicker is evident.A decent 100hz system is a cost effective solution for the masses.
100Hz is bad, it is creating the 100Hz picture from an interlaced source (this leads to smearing etc on fast moving action, such as camera pans, football matches etc)
I must admit all the 100Hz tvs I have looked at (32/36 inch) have sufferred from this smearing.
The 50hz picture always seems clearer to me.
Originally posted by Napoleon
I think i am correct in saying that progressive scan has a refresh rate of 60hz,and therefore flicker is evident.A decent 100hz system is a cost effective solution for the masses.
No, progressive scan uses a refresh rate based on source material.
For dvd players with progressive PAL this would be 50Hz (50 full frames a second)
For dvd players with progressive NTSC, with film sourced discs (24fps) it would be 48Hz
For dvd players with progressive NTSC, with video sourced (30fps) discs it would be 60Hz
The flicker problem with current interlaced tv is caused by the use of the interlaced method of displaying half the screen at a time. With progressive the full screen is shown in one go so the flicker between fields doesn't exist, this allows for a rock solid picture.
Highend players (and PCs) offer the ability to output at a scaled up rate (for 24fps source this means: 72Hz, 96Hz etc) as it's creating the scaled up frame rate from a progressive source it won't suffer from the side effects like when an interlaced source is scaled up (100Hz tvs).
100Hz suffer from the side-effects because they generate the increased refresh rate from an interlaced source, if they created it from a progressive source it wouldn't suffer from the problems.
Put it this way I splashed out on a 100hz TV for the first time just under a year ago, when it pops its clogs I will be heading back to 50hz for sure.
Picture looks superb with DVDs admittedly, but if you want a TV for all-round use, stick with a 50hz model.
Oh If anyone wants to buy mine its up for sale.
Does anyone have a good URL I can refer them too...
Answers:
Originally posted by icklesimba
I have had both and prefer my 50Hz model
Not this again. Its down to personal preference.
This should be in the hardware forum.
Oh, and your wrong 100Hz is better overall :p
Answers:
moving...
Answers:
personally, i don't like 100hz. if you're getting a new tv, demo the ones you're considering first.
Answers:
How does this affect the picture... (sorry I am a little ignorant about this...oh...and I think my new TV is going to be 100Mhz...)
Answers:
Originally posted by jnms
How does this affect the picture... (sorry I am a little ignorant about this...oh...and I think my new TV is going to be 100Mhz...)
50 hz refreshes the screen at 50 cycles per second.
100 hz refreshes the screen at 100 cycles per second.
Flickering is visible on a 50hz tv,more so the larger the tv.It also strains the eyes.Flickering is not visible on a 100 hz tv,and is far more comfortable to view(for long periods).
A 100hz tv will be digitised,hence the noise reduction,and this can lead to smearing in fast moving scenes,football.A decent 100hz system will not produce smearing.(Check reviews,as they will always mention it.)
Personally i cannot take the flicker,and notice it on any 50hz screen.If you find someone who says they cannot see it,it is simply because they are used to it(the flicker).
Answers:
Ahh, thanks for that. I was wondering why some people don't like 100Mhz.
Cheers...
Answers:
Fact is TV programmes are made in and to be viewed at 50hz, 100hz reduces flicker but at the end of the day messes up the image.
IMO 100hz is a typical bungled european solution to a problem that should ONLY be solved with progressive scan - accept no substitute.
Answers:
Originally posted by vila
Fact is TV programmes are made in and to be viewed at 50hz, 100hz reduces flicker but at the end of the day messes up the image
IMO 100hz is a typical bungled european solution to a problem that should ONLY be solved with progressive scan - accept no substitute.
I think i am correct in saying that progressive scan has a refresh rate of 60hz,and therefore flicker is evident.A decent 100hz system is a cost effective solution for the masses.
Answers:
100Hz is bad, it is creating the 100Hz picture from an interlaced source (this leads to smearing etc on fast moving action, such as camera pans, football matches etc)
Answers:
I must admit all the 100Hz tvs I have looked at (32/36 inch) have sufferred from this smearing.
The 50hz picture always seems clearer to me.
Answers:
Originally posted by Napoleon
I think i am correct in saying that progressive scan has a refresh rate of 60hz,and therefore flicker is evident.A decent 100hz system is a cost effective solution for the masses.
No, progressive scan uses a refresh rate based on source material.
For dvd players with progressive PAL this would be 50Hz (50 full frames a second)
For dvd players with progressive NTSC, with film sourced discs (24fps) it would be 48Hz
For dvd players with progressive NTSC, with video sourced (30fps) discs it would be 60Hz
The flicker problem with current interlaced tv is caused by the use of the interlaced method of displaying half the screen at a time. With progressive the full screen is shown in one go so the flicker between fields doesn't exist, this allows for a rock solid picture.
Highend players (and PCs) offer the ability to output at a scaled up rate (for 24fps source this means: 72Hz, 96Hz etc) as it's creating the scaled up frame rate from a progressive source it won't suffer from the side effects like when an interlaced source is scaled up (100Hz tvs).
100Hz suffer from the side-effects because they generate the increased refresh rate from an interlaced source, if they created it from a progressive source it wouldn't suffer from the problems.
Answers:
Put it this way I splashed out on a 100hz TV for the first time just under a year ago, when it pops its clogs I will be heading back to 50hz for sure.
Picture looks superb with DVDs admittedly, but if you want a TV for all-round use, stick with a 50hz model.
Oh If anyone wants to buy mine its up for sale.
1 2