# Do you buy into this theory? You should buy a 720p tv if it's less than 50"



## jacag04 (Jul 12, 2006)

People have said you cannot tell the difference or that is very minimal from a 1080p tv if its less than 50".


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

It has plausable rational behind it.

When you are at a smaller screen, you don't need as many pixels/resolution to get a good picture.

And depending on how far you are sitting... you may not be able to see the difference between 720p and 1080i.... 

And with very little content at 1080p (except optical based media)...

I don't have any first hand viewing at that small of a size to see if there is a difference between the two.


----------



## EXTREMUM (Jan 18, 2008)

I have a 50" LG Plasma, which is 768p (1366x768), sitting less than 10' from the screen, and the picture is still fantasic.

With a smaller screen, I seriously doubt you'll be able to tell the difference of 720p/1080i/1080p.

However, it is rumored the black levels are far superior at 1080p, over 720p or 1080i.

I say go for a 720p telelvision, if it's a plasma.


----------



## Carl Spock (Sep 3, 2004)

Poppycock. These same folks say you can't see/hear the difference in cabling, either. I have for 30 years.

Buy the very best, most advanced TV that you can afford and that you like the look of. I can guarantee you that in two years, something will be both significantly cheaper and better. Don't start off by limiting yourself to yesterday's technology. A set that just does 720p is definitely yesterday's technology.

Said as a guy who upgraded from a 720p set to one that does 1080p. And BTW, these were 38-42" sets and I sit about 8' away.


----------



## dms1 (Oct 26, 2007)

jacag04 said:


> People have said you cannot tell the difference or that is very minimal from a 1080p tv if its less than 50".


I disagree. What matters is not the size of each pixel, but rather the angle it subtends on your eye. This is a factor of the pixel size (which is itself a factor of the resolution and screen size) and the viewing distance. Typically, one adjusts the viewing distance to fit the visible width within the primary field of vision (or rather, buys a TV that will not appear too wide based on the viewing distance). In other words, you look at bigger screens from further away. The net effect is that, to a good approximation, the angle each pixel subtends on the eye during normal viewing is dependent on the resolution but largely independent of the screen size.

Of course, a more practical limitation at the current time is the lack of 1080p source material, but given that a new TV will likely be expected to last ten years, I'm sure this will change within the life of the TV.


----------



## dms1 (Oct 26, 2007)

EXTREMUM said:


> However, it is rumored the black levels are far superior at 1080p, over 720p or 1080i.


There is no technical reason that this should be the case. However, with LCDs at least, the contrast ratio is increasing all the time and it is only recently that 1080p LCDs have become mainstream. Therefore, it follows that any 1080p LCD will have a state-of-the-art contrast ratio too.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

IMHO, 1080p is one of today's biggest consumer electronic sales scams.

There are plenty of "expert" articles out there that basically say a 1080p HDTV is un-needed, unless you plan to watch mostly HD DVD or Blu Ray disks, which happen to be *the only sources *that present 1080p content.

*Not one broadcast source *- NOT ONE - transmits their images in 1080p (and most likely won't for 3, 5, or more years). ABC, FOX, ESPN and many other channels broadcast in 720p, while CBS, HDNet, Discovery HD, and others broadcast in 1080i. None in 1080p - none.

Buying a 1080p HDTV for watching today's HD broadcasts is like having the Space Shuttle to go to the grocery store. In fact, 99.99% of all people cannot now, nor will ever be able to, see the difference between 1080i and 1080p image presented on a a properly calibrated display either.

The TV manufacturers *love* watching folks get baited into spending $400 - $2000 more per set just for 1080p over comparible 1080i sets. They are the *only* ones to have *anything* to gain - certainly in contrast to viewers of HDTV. Wanna buy a bridge? 

Here's just 2 great articles (including 1 from from Home Theater Magazine) singing the same song.


----------



## EXTREMUM (Jan 18, 2008)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> IMHO, 1080p is one of today's biggest consumer electronic sales scams.
> 
> There are plenty of "expert" articles out there that basically say a 1080p HDTV is un-needed, unless you plan to watch mostly HD DVD or Blu Ray disks, which happen to be *the only sources *that present 1080p content.
> 
> ...


Hence, my choice of a 720p/1080i, for my first plasma. I'm only using it for DTV, upconversion DVD player, and my laptop. Plus, the price was unbeatable.


----------



## phat78boy (Sep 12, 2007)

I would agree, but would lower the size to 37". I could tell the diffrence at 47" when I recently upgrade my 47" LCD to a 1080P. It was 1080i/720P. It was a room TV and my sitting distance was about 10 feet. I wouldn't say the difference was huge, but there was a difference. Both sets were by the same manufacturer and nearly identical besides resolution.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

phat78boy said:


> I would agree, but would lower the size to 37". I could tell the diffrence at 47" when I recently upgrade my 47" LCD to a 1080P. It was 1080i/720P. It was a room TV and my sitting distance was about 10 feet. I wouldn't say the difference was huge, but there was a difference. Both sets were by the same manufacturer and nearly identical besides resolution.


There are igame reproduction quality differences between various manufacturers' sets (even between different models from the same manufacturer) and LCD/plasma, etc. but not between equal type HDTVs of equal sizes. It just doesn't exist.

The other reality is that most HDTV's never get properly calibrated. Not many people want to either spend the proper time to do it or pay someone else to do it. At best, folks take them out of the box, connect a couple of cables, and plug them in.....maybe...adjusting brightness or contrast to suit their taste.

That means what you may very well be seeing is the best image on your HDTV based on how it is set up, which in fact, may not be up to its potential. For that reason, I was careful to include "properly calibrated" in my original statement. If a newer HD set seems better than a previous one, it could very well be the original one was never properly set up. It's not that unusual.

Another example - go look at the big box store displays. I have seen the exact same 1080i set sitting next to the very same model - both had distinct different quality images. My bet is that neither one was properly calibrated. These stores almost never calibrate a display set.

One last example. I had a close friend just buy 5 - yes 5 - new HDTV sets for his home recently. They range from a 26" unit to a 65" Mitz. Once they were all installed properly via HDMI cabling, etc., I spent the better part of 6 hours calibrating them all. I'd challenge anyone to tell me which ones are the four (4) 720p / 1080i units and which one is the only one (1) 1080p unit. Hint - the 65" unit is NOT the 1080p. The only reason the owner got the one 1080p is that they practically gave it away on a special one day sale. No harm, no foul.

It's a shame so many people either buy into the sales baloney on this or else insist on throwing away money needlessly.


----------



## dettxw (Nov 21, 2007)

For me the Samsung 42" 720p plasma in the living room was a great deal and has a beautiful picture. It looks lots better than the Sony 32" LCD in the bedroom, especially on the SD channels. 
If they ever start broadcasting in 1080p then I'll consider replacing these sets.


----------



## EXTREMUM (Jan 18, 2008)

dettxw said:


> For me the Samsung 42" 720p plasma in the living room was a great deal and has a beautiful picture. It looks lots better than the Sony 32" LCD in the bedroom, especially on the SD channels.
> If they ever start broadcasting in 1080p then I'll consider replacing these sets.


If you decide to get a 1080p at 42", you most likely won't notice the difference.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

Viewing distance also plays a big role. My 50in. 720p set does not look too good from 5-6 feet away, but from my normal viewing distance of about 12-13 feet I can't see any reason to have paid a penny more for 1080p.


----------



## EXTREMUM (Jan 18, 2008)

Sirshagg said:


> Viewing distance also plays a big role. My 50in. 720p set does not look too good from 5-6 feet away, but from my normal viewing distance of about 12-13 feet I can't see any reason to have paid a penny more for 1080p.


Viewing distance is everything. Which 50" 720p do you have? Is it plasma? I'm viewing mine from less than 8' constantly, and the picture is magnificant.


----------



## Cholly (Mar 22, 2004)

I have a a 55 inch 720p RP LCD and a 37 inch flat panel LCD. To my tired eyes, as well as those of my family and friends, they both look great. Viewing distance may have a lot to do with it, but sitting closer than 8 feet from a 55 inch TV doesn't make a lot of sense. Think of all the folks who have 720p projectors, throwing a picture on a 100 inch screen. They're quite content with the results, because their viewing distance is going to be greater than 10 feet, for the most part.
There are other aspects of a picture to take into account: contrast ratio, color saturation and program content all have an effect on the viewing experience.


----------



## phat78boy (Sep 12, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> There are igame reproduction quality differences between various manufacturers' sets (even between different models from the same manufacturer) and LCD/plasma, etc. but not between equal type HDTVs of equal sizes. It just doesn't exist.
> 
> The other reality is that most HDTV's never get properly calibrated. Not many people want to either spend the proper time to do it or pay someone else to do it. At best, folks take them out of the box, connect a couple of cables, and plug them in.....maybe...adjusting brightness or contrast to suit their taste.
> 
> ...


Like a 600x400 picture blown up to 1024x768, it looks much worse when blown up. It looks fine at 600x400, worse at 1024x768. From a distance though, it looks fine at 1024x768. The closer you get or the larger the display, the more you notice.

If you had a true 1080P picture on all of your sets, I'm not sure how you couldn't notice the difference between 1080P and 720P. Especially on larger TV's from close distances.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

phat78boy said:


> If you had a true 1080P picture on all of your sets, I'm not sure how you couldn't notice the difference between 1080P and 720P. Especially on larger TV's from close distances.


We have been comparing 1080i to 1080p.

Most 720p sets made the past 2 years also can image 1080i very well.

You are correct that distance makes a difference, but that is the case with any resolution.

I have 1080i on a 116" screen via a DLP projector in my Home Theater, and quite frankly, the imagery that a neighbor gets in his Home Theater using a recent model 1080p projector is equal to mine, even walking right up to the screens. That's *his *opinion (I happen to share it). He's actually thinking of returning it in exchange for a 1080i unit and pocketing $2000. (_Both units are fully calibrated by the way_).

All this said - there are so many HD displays out there, you really have to see one for yourself to see if it meets your viewing needs.

My whole point, and as the supporting documentation I posted also illustrates, is that many people are caught up in the 1080p hype and spend needless dollars for 1080p when they don't have to do so.

If someone gets a 1080p set for a price very close to a 1080i set, I say go for it. There's no real harm - other than paying too much money - for a minicule difference in imagery between 1080i and 1080p that most human eyes cannot detect.

Add that to the fact that there is *no broadcast programming transmitted in 1080p *to the home, and it kinda makes 1080p a solution without a problem.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

EXTREMUM said:


> Viewing distance is everything. Which 50" 720p do you have? Is it plasma? I'm viewing mine from less than 8' constantly, and the picture is magnificant.


In my sig - master bedroom. It's DLP. I was looking for a sub $1k set and found this which in the end i got for WAY less than that. Figured I couldn't go wrong.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Your mileage may vary. Personally I was surprised, but I did see a difference between 720p and 1080p in a 32" TV from 4 feet, but on the other hand I'm hard pressed to tell the difference between 480i wide and 1080i from 15 feet (watching the living room TV from the kitchen)


----------



## phat78boy (Sep 12, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> We have been comparing 1080i to 1080p.
> 
> Most 720p sets made the past 2 years also can image 1080i very well.
> 
> ...


If the projector is not recieving a 1080P signal, it will probably look the same as your 720P/1080i model. I have a 119" projector setup that I recently upgraded to a 1080P model. From my Hi-Def media(Blu-Ray, HD-DVD) I see a big difference. When watching broadcast HD or upconverted media, I don't see that much of a difference.

I will agree that for most TV's, the cost is not worth the extra. I do however think that the bigger size of the TV, the more noticeable it is.


----------



## EXTREMUM (Jan 18, 2008)

phat78boy said:


> I will agree that for most TV's, the cost is not worth the extra. I do however think that the bigger size of the TV, the more noticeable it is.


This is true. You're going to have to go beyond 50"-60" to notice a difference. After each HD install I do for DTV, I see a better picture on screens 50" or smaller screens (especially the plasmas), and the larger screens (especially LCDs) produce a lot of pixelation.

However, I've installed HD DirecTV on a few high-end projectors, and the picture is merely flawless on 80"-100+" @ 1080i.


----------



## Austin316 (Dec 9, 2007)

To me it kinda funny reading this as I have a Slim fit Samsung 50inch DLP 720p/1080i set and I love it. and I got it for a great deal the day before turkeyday. Anyway I know I will probably go out in 5 years to get a new one. When I go to get that new set 1080p will probably just starting to make it to be more main stream on TV (OTA, Satellite, Cable) and I go into best buy and they have something for an extra 2grand that be better then 1080p. So my point is I buy for what is being used now. 1080p still being very new to the "retail market" will take a couple of years to be really main stream in my day to day tv watching and by that time I going to go out and buy a new tv anyway.


----------



## Milominderbinder2 (Oct 8, 2006)

jacag04 said:


> People have said you cannot tell the difference or that is very minimal from a 1080p tv if its less than 50".


So for my computer monitor I would want...

320 x 240?

Holy 1984, Batman!

This is the kind of *fact *that is said by a salesman who is out of 1080's.

- Craig


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Craig, your argument is _reductio ad absurdum_, but you make a point. I think, though, we can say that at some point, the level of detail becomes too fine for a person to detect on a moving image, and perhaps the point is that it's different for different people.


----------



## phat78boy (Sep 12, 2007)

I wll defintely agree with that. I have a few friends that think their upconverting DVD player looks just a good as an HD-DVD or Blu-Ray. I am a "toy" guy and as such notice much more then the average "TV watcher", if you will. I point at jagged edges and they say you can't tell if you're watching the whole screen. 

O well, ignorance is bliss I guess.


----------



## dms1 (Oct 26, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> I think, though, we can say that at some point, the level of detail becomes too fine for a person to detect on a moving image, and perhaps the point is that it's different for different people.


For a static image, the best angular resolution the eye can achieve is about 1.6 minutes or arc. You can combine this with the angular width of the visual field to work out what resolution is needed to not be able to distinguish individual pixels at a comfortable viewing distance. I can't be bothered to do it now, but I seem to recall that when I did calculate it once, 1080p pixels will still be visible as discrete pixels, but 2160p (when someone invents that) won't be.

I'm sure there is variation between individuals. Also, I suspect that when it comes to moving images, the minimum perceivable angular resolution drops, and I would hazard a guess that the degree of drop varies a lot with individuals. There is probably also a psychological element in which the brain sub-consciously expects a TV image to be non-perfect and therefore "ignores" some imperfections.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

phat78boy said:


> If the projector is not recieving a 1080P signal, it will probably look the same as your 720P/1080i model. I have a 119" projector setup that I recently upgraded to a 1080P model. From my Hi-Def media(Blu-Ray, HD-DVD) I see a big difference. When watching broadcast HD or upconverted media, I don't see that much of a difference.


That was the whole point I was making - there is almost NO 1080p source content, so why pay for 1080p imagery, unless you either have it and plan to use it alot or else knowingly choose to throw away money. The sales pitches I've heard in stores for 1080p HDTV's to unsuspecting and unknowing buyers border on intentional gross deception.


EXTREMUM said:


> However, I've installed HD DirecTV on a few high-end projectors, and the picture is merely flawless on 80"-100+" @ 1080i.


I know of 6 such install locations that fit that description. In 2 of them, 1080p projectors were first installed. One has returned back to a 1080i unit because they saw no difference and they got about $2,000 back in their pocket. The 2nd location is seriously thinking of doing the same.

Based on the OP, there is no valid reason to buy anything over a 720p / 1080i display unless you have the need to regularly view 1080p original content (which would be limited to HD DVD and Blu Ray). Even then, many viewers contend there is no advantage of 1080p over 1080i. Since the OP asked this in the content of a buying decision, it's really about their ability to get the best bang for the buck based on their viewing plans.


----------



## gfrang (Aug 30, 2007)

I have always felt you get what you pay for.If you buy a cheaper set whit lower res. 
your also going to get a cheaper processor, lower contrast ratio but 720p is fine in less than 50 in . I always buy what i can afford.


----------



## phat78boy (Sep 12, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> That was the whole point I was making - there is almost NO 1080p source content, so why pay for 1080p imagery, unless you either have it and plan to use it alot or else knowingly choose to throw away money. The sales pitches I've heard in stores for 1080p HDTV's to unsuspecting and unknowing buyers border on intentional gross deception.
> 
> I know of 6 such install locations that fit that description. In 2 of them, 1080p projectors were first installed. One has returned back to a 1080i unit because they saw no difference and they got about $2,000 back in their pocket. The 2nd location is seriously thinking of doing the same.
> 
> Based on the OP, there is no valid reason to buy anything over a 720p / 1080i display unless you have the need to regularly view 1080p original content (which would be limited to HD DVD and Blu Ray). Even then, many viewers contend there is no advantage of 1080p over 1080i. Since the OP asked this in the content of a buying decision, it's really about their ability to get the best bang for the buck based on their viewing plans.


Being the cost of a very good 1080P projector can be had for 3000$, I think cost is not as much of a factor. The same can be said for other types of TV''s also. For a few hundred dollars, I would say get 1080P. If it was a thousand or so dollars, I would also argue it would not be worth it.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

This past Sunday, I just ordered a 1080p Plasma. I would much rather have 1080i programming line doubled to 1080p which should have no real effect on PQ than totally reworked and downconverted to 720p which could. Yes, I understand that there are also issues going from 720p to 1080p, but I am not throwing any information away that way. 

Also, this is a 58 inch set we will sitting about 10 or 11 feet from.

We do have friends that just got a 50 inch 720p Plasma (he definitely took the advice from Consumer Reports to heart) set that they are sitting about 10 feet from and it does look good. However, when I installed it and helped set it up, I just felt like I was not getting as smooth of a picture as we are from our current 1080i RPTV.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

phat78boy said:


> Being the cost of a very good 1080P projector can be had for 3000$, I think cost is not as much of a factor. The same can be said for other types of TV''s also. For a few hundred dollars, I would say get 1080P. If it was a thousand or so dollars, I would also argue it would not be worth it.


A good 1080p projector perhaps, but a great one is more like $13-15K. A great 1080i is in the $10-12K range. Yes, you can get both in the $5-$7K range as well.

It boils down to your expectations, specifications, and implementations. In any case, there is a price gap that matters, but is not justified.


----------



## jacag04 (Jul 12, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> IMHO, 1080p is one of today's biggest consumer electronic sales scams.
> 
> There are plenty of "expert" articles out there that basically say a 1080p HDTV is un-needed, unless you plan to watch mostly HD DVD or Blu Ray disks, which happen to be *the only sources *that present 1080p content.
> 
> ...


Loved the articles, humorous and informative.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

jacag04 said:


> Loved the articles, humorous and informative.


You are what you read.

I'm humorous (maybe once in a while) and informative (even less once in a while). 

I think its important to help people get good information. I personally hate people spending money needlessly. Now if I can only learn that myself...:lol:


----------

