Page 1 of The big 100hz/50hz debate - what`s your view ?

I`m advising a friend on buying a new widescreen TV at the moment, and we`re having real problems over the whole 50/100hz thing.

As far as I can see after extensive viewing, 100hz looks more stable and sharper, but even on the top-end Panasonics and Sonys looks a bit smeary and artificial. 100hz has come a long way from the smear-fests of the original sets, but I`m still not convinced. I suppose the best of both worlds are the new sets which can switch between 100 and 50hz, but these are still much more expensive.

Now I`m all for getting something that`s as up-to-date as possible for future-proofing (and so I don`t get sick with envy as soon as I see the newest thing ;-) but I`m really not convinced that 100hz is worth the premium being charged... To be honest, I think I *prefer* 50hz !!

Also, when it comes to prices, you can get a good quality flat screened 32" 50hz set for the price of a moderate 28" 100hz. I`m think that that`s the best way to go.

Please, anyone who has 100hz screens, experience of both, or who has made this decision, let me know what you think.

DanB

This item was edited on Friday, 11th May 2001, 14:23

Dan

I have a Phillips 32" widescreen 100Hz Tv. The picture quality is way better, though it has various options on how to watch it.

I watch using an option called Natural Motion which stops any juddery movement sometimes associated with 100Hz TV`s

Hi Dan - I have a 32inch Phillips WS - but i set mine at 100hz - it seems sharper that way - i get smears with it set in Natural Motion or the other settings come to that - maybe mine is not as up todate (5yrs old) - so i guess thing have got better.....

And here is an example of how difficult and subjective this topid is - one person uses "natural motion", while another avoids it for smearing !

DanB

Well 100Hz technology is based on interlaced video technology, this is the worst way of creating a higher field rate, it`s also the cause of the motion artifacts.

This really is entirely down to personal choice. The best bet is to go into a shop and try and watch the sort of things that you normally watch (within reason!) on both types of sets and see which you prefer. Watching a DVD of Antz or A Bug`s Life (they always seem to be playing in TV shops) isn`t such a good test!

I watch a lot of sport, and on the 100Hz sets I saw last year it didn`t always look so good. The 50Hz sets all looked great though.

I chose 50Hz and stand by that decision.

Rich

There`s more to it than that with some sets.

i`ve got the sony KV36FS70 and that does a strange 100Hz thing due to it`s "DRC" processing

at 100Hz it`s all lovely and stable, but at 50Hz it`s fake-progressive so I keep it at that 90% of the time as it`s soooooooooooo luverly. no scanlines, and best of all no extra blank lines when playing NTSC discs

v.nice.

the 100Hz is fine tho, doens`t mess up at all.

50Hz mode on DRC sets doubles (tries to) vertical and horizontal resolution,

in 100Hz mode DRC only doubles resolution in one direction (horizontal ?).

that`s the one. works a treat - much better than I would`ve thought.

I`ve got Philips 36, natural motion looks good on DVD`s but the set struggles when watching SKY and normal T.V. it looks like it`s missing frames sometimes.

there are 2 other viewing options on the philips sets and these 2 aren`t as good as natural motion