1080 vs 720

[hrsp]

Was having this discussion at the bar tonight so i figured id share and get your opinions...

All "HD" shows on cable/dish/dsl/ show in 720 as of today..no broadcast that i know of can display 1080...also have heard that it will be a significant amount of time before shows will be able to be viewed in 1080...So with that being said if you don't watch a lot of blurays doesn't it make sense to save ALOT of money and go with the 720 set?

ive seen two very similar tv's one being "able" to do 1080 and the other only "able" to do 720 and they looked identical...

im not sure what dvd's play in but id assume it would look the same on both tv's

question time...what do standard dvds show in? what about when they are "upconverted" when played on a bluray player?


so whats your take on it?
Also do you think that someday in the near future that adults will have there friends over to watch a game or a movie and they will all grab 3d glasses and wear them? i just cant imagine saying "hey guys come over for the game...but bring your one 3dglasses"!!! lol

[BoosTT]

I think direct TV has some 1080p broadcasts. Also it makes a huge difference when. You have a PC plugged in it.

[Russ Jerome]

Need to clarify 1080i and 1080p before debating any further.

That being said a 720tv with "ability" to 1080i, broadcast from TWC (Planet Earth) will make you sit back and go "WOW!" because I dont think the human brain can ingest any more than whats displayed. I think the brand of TV makes a HUGE difference as well as Plasma's superiority to reproduce colors and high speed motion....another non-debate :)

A quality 720 plasma (Samsung,Pioneer,ect) will smoke a 1080 non-plasma in picture quality from every body's I've watched at homes and displays anywhere. Doesnt matter as the Obama tree huggers kill of plama's and there voltage consumption.

[95 TA - The Beast]

Actually, Plasmas today don't use any more power than LCDs, so, at the end of the road for plasma it is a moot point. That coupled with the fact that the latest plasmas have a 100,000 hour display life (which bests most LCDs, even with LEDs that are rated at 40,000-60,000 for the backlight regardless of technology) and they don't generate any more heat than a LCD.

Same thing goes with DLP sets. It is nearing the end of thier "retail viability" and they have a picture that rivals, if not bests, most plasmas and LCDs. I just picked up a 73" Mitsubishi DLP which is 3D Ready (plan on getting a PS3 for 3D Blu-ray and games this summer once it is finalized and widespread), is a 1080p set, has black-levels that blow away most plasmas and LCDs even and contrast that is second to none in regards to bright whites/colors and dark blacks with no bleed.

The point is since Plasmas and DLPs are near the end of thier retail viable lifespan all the stops have been pulled out on the technology and the best of what they are is being offered over the next year or so (which means however long they can make a dent in the display market). Honestly, once they get LCDs to double the display rates of the best sets right now there will be no need for any other technology.

3D video is the next "big thing" with DTV already offereing up a number of 3D video options with a dedicated 3D ESPN channel promised. DLPs are the best option for a truely big-screen immersive experience on the cheap (compared to Plasmas or even the 3D Ready LCDs). In about 2-3 years, once the 3D stuff is standardized down to a single solution/standard (in regards to glasses, players, games, etc), we will be in the wide-market brushfire of retail activity that LCDs had a couple of years ago which is still raging today. That needs to happen to make the technology more cost effective (I mean glasses cost around $170 each today, so for a family of 6 it would be over $1k just for glasses, thus the commentary about bringing your own glasses to the game).

After that, the next "big thing" will be *TRUE* 3D displays where glasses won't be needed. Who knows how many years it will take to get that done right and you can best be sure the expense of it will be SOOO far beyond even what any current display technology costs it will be prohibitive for a number of years for anyone that doesn't have money to burn in large quanitities. But, the key is, the push for that technology won't happen unless the current "gen" of 3D tech with glasses doesn't produce a big following and a ton of media to support it. No-one is going to spend big bucks on anything if there is limited availability of media content. Just look at the original Laserdisc video, as they really pushed and tried to make an impact, but the format was wrong, the cost was too high, the standards weren't there to take advantage of it and it flopped because of bad timing/design/innovation.

[Rocket Power]

I feel like the last guy to buy cassettes with only having low def TV's:rolf

[Karps TA]

In regards to the 720/1080 arguement, I see no reason to buy old technology, when the new tech doesn't cost that much more. We're at a time where tech is changing so fast, that to buy a 720 which is now 2-3 steps backwards just isn't worth it for your main tv. Now if we're talking something for the bedroom, then buy whatever is the cheapest. Shit I bought a Westinghouse 37" 1080P over 2 years ago for $500 shipped. I see great deals on 1080P tv's online all the time.

As for 3D, I could care less myself. Have zero desire to sit in a theater to see a 3D movie, matter of fact I refuse to. I don't care about sitting in front of my tv wearing stupid glasses. The picture on say the new thing Samsung LED's is so great that I just can't see the point. But it's being jammed down our throats. Maybe someday I'll see something that makes it seem worthwhile. But so far they haven't done anything to make me care.