Samsung Or Sony

in case of "source mis-match" probably down scaling is implicit and built in while upsacaling has to be explicit (thru tv or avr). anyone want's to confirm this understanding for lcd tv's found in the market.

most people are now aware of pmpo v/s rms and audio manufacturers have got their act together and increasingly have started indiciating rms values.

however, the tv companies throw "dynamic contrast" at us, which is not really comparable as each has their own technique to measure it. wonder how we should actually compare and decide on contrast ratios that are published in specifications?

all tvs have a upscalers and upscale to their native resolution,but older tv were pretty bad in upscaling department tv before 2005,and also older tv would simpy refuse to accept a resolution which is higher then their ntaive resolution.
well nowdays all tvs manufacture quote dynamic contrast only very few if not only one manufacture quotes the static contrast and that company is sony.for instance of S-IPS based tv like LG and philips will not give a contrast above 1500:1.while tv like toshiba ,panasonic,hitachi lcd which use A-IPS tech will not give a contrast of more then 1000:1 or a max of 1200:1,the sony and samsung lcds have a contrast of as high as 2500:1 and LED backlight based samsung have 3000:1 contrast,it is unclear how will the sony lcds which have RGB LEDs compare,no doubt they cost as much as mid size car.

Anuragn:

What you say is true up to 720p. Most TVs de-interlace and and some even scale up to 720p. For example my Akai TV de-interlaces up to 720p with a Fardoudja DCDi chip. But it will not take a 480i signal and scale it to 720p. It will only scale it to 480p. This is done to smoothen the picture, remove jagged edges, improve colour saturation, and images with motion easier to watch. When I feed it a 480p signal, it clearly display 480p. All TVs can display at a resolution that is lower than their native resolution.

All digital TVs have their won de-interlacing and scaling engines.

But i have yet to see a single Full HD TV that has a internal scaling engine for 1080p, where it can take a lower resolution picture and scale it to 1080p. You think if a TV has a scaling engine for a 1080p, the manufacturer will not shout from the roof top? I have also seen some of the Full HD TVs display images at 720p when fed with that resolution.

Scaling engines are very complicated and expensive. To keep their prices competitive, TV manufacturers are focussing on improving their panels, and building the electronics to improve their display.

I could be wrong, but reading specification and manuals, this is the impression I get. I would love to be proved wrong.

Cheers

As i understand, scaling is converting from a resolution to another and de-interlacing is converting from interlaced to progressive

Venkat, correct me if I am wrong but isn't conversion from 480i to 480p called as de-interlacing and not scaling?

Isn't this contradictory to your previous quote. "All TVs can display at a resolution that is lower than their native resolution." ? If the Full HD TV displays 720p images, then does it not display it all over the panel? So isn't this scaled to 1080i (at least)?

(Pl ignore this message)

Bang on the target! This is exactly what I'm trying to say. If a TV with a higher native resolution is able to fill up all the pixels, it means it is up-scaling the picture. Quality of the upscaled picture might not be as good vis a vis the same picture upscaled by a higher-end AVR, but then, that is a different story.

[quote=venkatcr;18801]


This sounds like marketing material. Do you see any jerky movements when you visit a cinema hall? Yes, the resolution of a film is somewhere close to 6000p in terms of resolution. TV manufacturers are working to improve their resolution towards that. Nothing can be done by increasing the frame rate. The eye can actually visualize movement at 16fps. The film industry has adopted 24fps for various historical reasons. All cinema material is shot at 24fps. I don't see how that can be improved, by adding more frames while displaying only 24fps.

Hi,
Pan cataloge-

http://www.panasonicviera.co.nz/user..._Catalogue.pdf

This explains difference in 24p playback & 24p real cinema with added
frames.Check a man jumping in water pool.

Check review abt 100Hz & SD signal-

Panasonic Viera TX-32LXD700 32in LCD TV Review - TV Reviews - TrustedReviews

Pls. read 4th para,though they backed Pan but not Sharp

also check cons-http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/Panasonic-TX37LZD85/Conclusion/

Do anyone know difference between Panasonic TX-32LX800A (NZ) &
Panasonic TX-32LX800C (IND)?

I got manual of 800A which dont have Backlight control,
Indian model 800C speci tells it can.

Dont know Brightness,Response time of 32LX800C

Very difficult to get Indian model manual online.

Secondly can we get Pan LXD or LZD models in grey market?
They are full HD in 32inch.

yes u can get in the grey market,but since panasonic is not popular choice u will have to order it,and also the prices may be slightly higher then other companies,since sony and samsung which are popular are bought in bulk.

Friends,

I am back here after 30 days interval.After returning from Onsite I enjoyed two weeks vacation and then I am writing this in between my hectic offshore schedule.

Let me stick to the topic..Last Saturday I purchased Samsung-LA32A550. I purchased this after long research. My quick comment is "It is simply amazing". Stunning pic quality and sleek look.The only drawback is Sound.It is not enough loud(I think this should be a common pblm in the LCD Tv).But Thats not a matter as I am going to Install HT.

I paid just Rs41,500. I dont know whether it is the right current price.The price diff between sony 32 FHD and Samsung 32 FHD is 16K.Its huge amount.

I strongly suggest Samsung LCD TVs.It has best pic quality and less price compared to Sony.


Cheers,
Pandiyan