| Author | Message | ||
     dOd Citizen Username: Dod Post Number: 115 Registered: 5-2004 |
Hi, I'm looking for a small 15" LCD set for the office and would like to spend around $300. I can get a couple (Sharp) with ED for the price, but in the 4:3 format. However, I found a 17" 16:9 format Zenith on sale. That set is HD-Ready, not HD or ED. Since I'll only be putting a basic cable through the set, any picture advantage to the ED over the HD-Ready with a basic analog signal? Am I over thinking this? Thanks, dOd (life was easier when the only choice was B&W or colour) | ||
| Carla Citizen Username: Elbowroom Post Number: 111 Registered: 9-2005  |
Are you going to be watching HDTV signals in your office? If not just buy the cheapest set you can find. A regular CRT tube TV will do just fine unless you have limited space. Otherwise get the 4:3 format flat screen so that you will use the screen real estate to the best advantage. Regular 4:3 tv signals on 16:9 screens need to be stretched (unattractive), cut off at the bottom or top (you'll lose things like the CNBC stock ticker, or formatted to 4:30 (leaving black bars on the sides). | ||
| dOd Citizen Username: Dod Post Number: 116 Registered: 5-2004 |
Right, but don't I have the option changing the viewing format to 4:3 or 16:9? Letterboxing -- horizontal or vertical -- doesn't bother me. I'm more curious about the picture quailty ED vs. HD-Ready with a regular analog signal. Thanks, dOd | ||
| Bailey Citizen Username: Baileymac Post Number: 461 Registered: 3-2005 |
I don't think you gain any picture quality if you're only receiving an analog signal. High definition is about horizontal lines of resolution, 480, 780 or 1080. The standard is 480, so if that's what's being broadcast, that's all you'll see. Only a few channels are even broadcast on Cablevision, maybe 10-15 or so, and they look great, but the other channels are just average. |
