Best HDTV for SD Signal?

[roderick]

I am looking to buy a 46" flat panel HDTV, likely a 1080i to watch DVD movies (I have an upconversion player) however the majority of my viewing will be regular analog over the air broadcasts.

I am receiving conflicting and disturbing information from the store reps saying that :

1. The SD channels on the HDTV will look worse than on my rcurrent 32" CRT - so what is the point in buying a HDTV in my case.?

2. That LCD are better than plasma for SD input (and vice versa).

3. That some models/brands are better at displaying SD input than others and this is not necessarily the high end products. How can I find out who these are?

Where do I go from here?

[57]

What matters is the quality of the incoming signal, the setup of the STB and TV and lastly the upconversion done in the TV. See the following post:

http://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/showthread.php?t=18580

Analogue OTA, if you have a good signal, should be pretty good quality on a properly set up TV. What about digital OTA?


When you have time, check out:

http://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/showthread.php?t=57741


Please put your location (and service provider if applicable) into your UserCP Profile (location).

[jfplay]

1. The SD channels on the HDTV will look worse than on my rcurrent 32" CRT - so what is the point in buying a HDTV in my case.?

The point of buying an HDTV is to watch HD content. Since that's not your plan you're best off saving your money, IMO.

The difference in quality in movies on an upconverting player just doesn't seem to be enough to justify the SD tradeoff.

[dennism3]

Just got an LG 52" DLP and I gotta say the SD is way better than it was on my 41" old Sony rear projection. SD is pretty good on an HD TV! IMHO. 'Course HD is better

[supervij]

I'm pretty impressed with SD quality on my new 50" Sony SXRD A2000. And the upconversion on the Oppo looks incredible -- almost as good as HD. But yes, true HD is better.

cheers,
supervij

[bgclarke]

We got a 42" Samsung DLP a couple of weeks ago and were surprised that SD actually doesn't look too bad.

Watching DVDs through our Panasonic upconverting DVD player is also very crisp.

[castaban]

I also have a Sony (KF50WE620) and am very impressed with the quality of SD on it. When I was buying my TV, I did quiet of bit comparison and I found Sonys looked best with SD, but of course I have not compared to all TVs out there.
But jfplay is right, there is no sense buying an HDTV just to watch DVD's and SD. Quality will not be much better than your CRT, even though you have an upconverting player.
Once you see HD though, watch out, there is no going back...

[JohnJoshs]

about lcd's being better then plasmas with SD, I have to agree.

I have a panasonic 58" (600 series) plasma and a Sharp Aquos 37" LCD (Last years model) and I prefer watching SD on the LCD -

Even the HD looks better! but theres nothign like watching sports in HD on a 58" plasma!

[castaban]

Generally SD will look better on a smaller screen. (Or you perceive so). I have not heard SD will look better on LCD than Plasma. This is mostly a function of how good of a scaler and deinterlacer your TV has.

[roderick]

Digital or HD OTA unfortunately are not available here (and probably will never be since the cable and satellite guys have the market wrapped up).

So it seems some people are quite happy with SD on their HDTV. Were these digital channels or analog ?

On another angle:
Will a DVD recorder accept a SD TV channel improve it and output it to the TV on the fly? Will an upconverting DVD recorder produce an even better signal?

[castaban]

My signal is Digital, most people will have digital signals.
I have not heard any DVD recorder (upconverting or not) do that.
As far as upconverting DVD players are concerned, they cannot create the information which is not there. Basically they do de-interlacing and scaling to 1080i/720p. Argument is they (especially very good ones) do that better than your TV, hence the perceived improvement on quality. (As all digital displays display only their native resolution, they have to convert SD or DVD to their resolution). But if your TV has a good scaler/de-interlacer you might not see much of a difference. This is the case for my TV even though I have probable one of the best (Oppo 971) upconverting DVD players you can have (Although some people claim they get better quality with Sony and Oppo)

[I_Want_My_HDTV]

Best HDTV for SD Signal?

This is a very subjective opinion. Some HDTVs may have technically superior scalers but it depends a lot on which type of artifacts you can tolerate. I find that the source is a much greater factor in SD picture quality. Different TV suppliers and different receivers from the same TV supplier will produce vastly different results. Maybe the questions should be, "What is the best HDTV?" and "What is the best SD source?" Either way, HDTV and DVD will be much better than SD and the best all around HDTV will produce the best picture with almost any source.

[Clumsy]

SD looks like sh*t on my 2 year old Sony 50" projection TV. I can't even see the puck when watching hockey.

[sox]

I think they are are all the same, Clumsy. Depends what rink and lighting and cameras....Alot of the games on my old 27' JVC were the same way, so doubling the size isnt going to help any. One thing I did notice was a very noticible diff in picture quality from cable to satelite. Sat. blew cable away.

[castaban]

You probable have the same TV I have and it looks not that bad. Do you have Digital Cable? Maybe your set needs calibrating? It also depends how close you sit to your TV