Understanding TV Technology

Tech and cars on 28/07/2016 - 14:55
Last edited 28/07/2016 - 18:20 by 1 other user

Dear Oz Bargain Community,

Can someone please give me a more in depth comprehensive guide on understanding TV technology. The google guides I come across are not in depth enough. They don't cover details such as 200hz vs 50 hz, etc.

At the moment you can buy an LED 55 Inch for $1000. Or you can buy one for $2500.. Both 1080p, both LED (not OLED). So I don't understand what I'm paying for.

I have a series 5 samsung 40 inch TV. If the input quality is not high resolution, it looks crap.
Consoles look like they don't have any anti-aliasing.
Where as on my friends 'more expensive' LED tv, the same console looks A LOT better because everything looks much smoother and not as 'jagged' as it does on my TV. Now I can't seem to find that 'specification' that I should be looking for when buying a TV.

I should add - I don't need a smart TV. I've been given an Apple TV which I plug in via HDMI which I'm very happy with to continue using. Sound is not a factor either, as I will be using external speakers via optical input via PCM. I really am simply after a good quality panel that scales images well.

Any help/guidance would be appreciated.

Electrical & Electronics

Comments

DisasterArea on 28/07/2016 - 15:37

this is the place for you : http://www.avsforum.com/
For a console you want to turn off ALL on-board image processing altogether.
If you don't want a smart TV, that's hard to find these days, these are the closest thing you'll get are "VISIO" not sure you can get them in AUS.

http://www.lifehacker.com.au/2015/08/five-best-budget-hdtvs/

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=11219…
- Tech and cars on 28/07/2016 - 15:53
  
  Thank you. I don't mind if it is a smart TV.
  
  I'm just saying I don't really care about this aspect of the TV features.
airzone on 28/07/2016 - 19:05

+2

The frequency indicates how fast the liquid crystals flow around the screen.

I was actually told this by a sales guy at the good guys.
Mumbles on 28/07/2016 - 23:55

+2

Internet research is still the best place to find the advice you are working for since its an in depth topic.

Google the terms "LED TV buyers guide".

There are good reasons for the price differences. I categorise them into 1) Processor and 2) Panel.

Probably before the time of your Series 5 Samsung the biggest difference in budget TV's from latest brand name TV's were in the quality of the panel (eg. contrast ratios, independent edge lit back lighting, etc). The construction of LED panels has matured significantly (ie. budget TV's with contrast ratios > 1:4000). The difference has shifted more towards processor speed, especially in 4K TV's.

Anti-aliasing is the computing industries term. For TV/DVD they use the term "Upscaling" (eg. DVD 720p upscaled to 1080p). This is a feature of faster processors. I'm not certain but most new 4K TV's have some form of upscaling since most of the sources are still 1080p.

Unfortunately there is no standard for measuring the TV processor's performance and the quality of its upscaling.

Perhaps look for a TV with the Picture-In-Picture (PIP) feature. Whenever you squeeze and super impose live stream onto another it requires a lot of processing power and artistry. See if these TV's produce the anti-aliasing/upscaling quality that you are looking for.
- Tech and cars on 29/07/2016 - 09:10
  
  Thank you so much for this in depth reply. I now have a bit better understanding of what to look for.
  
  "Unfortunately there is no standard for measuring the TV processor's performance and the quality of its upscaling." - Fair enough. This is ideally what I'm looking for.
  
  If you have a minute , It would be great to hear your explanation between 50/60Hz, 100 Hz, 200 Hz, etc. The frequency of the TV.
  
  I notice on some tv's look like the motion is 'fast forwarded' which is an effect that I dislike. Would this directly correlate to the frequency of the TV?
  
  Thank you again for your time and response.
  - Mumbles on 29/07/2016 - 13:19
    
    +1
    
    Okie dokie. I will try.
    
    I'm assuming you are like me and have a little knowledge about computer monitor frequencies from a computer gaming background (eg. 60Hz/72Hz/75Hz/100Hz refresh rates).
    
    If you are using your TV as a computer monitor or for a gaming console everything is still true. Computer video cards can refresh at very high Hz/FPS (Frames Per Second) so its still the same advice as the old CRT computer monitors. The human eye can detect screen flicker at anything under 72Hz refresh rate). So for consoles and video cards you'll definitely find benefit in higher refresh rates as long as your games can make use the high refresh rates.
    
    TV's have a minimum of 50Hz refresh rate because its related to the AC voltage from your power point:
    http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/all-this-talk-of-numbers-…
    
    I notice on some tv's look like the motion is 'fast forwarded' which is an effect that I dislike. Would this directly correlate to the frequency of the TV?
    
    The reason why 100Hz/200Hz doesn't benefit movies + free-to-air video streams the same as for gaming is that cinematic film is recorded in 24/25 frames per second. When the 100Hz/200Hz feature is enabled it causes the TV processor to artificially create additional frames to insert. It does it by filling in the blanks with interpreted images. Eg. where a football player might run. Its to do with how the eye/brain perceives LCD/LED technology where the screen image stays static but individual pixels get changed versus the old CRT TV's where the whole screen gets blanked out and all the pixels get refreshed.
    
    For watching movies + free-to-air + sports you can disable the 200Hz rates to leave it at the lowest 50Hz refresh rate. The result of turning on higher 100Hz/200Hz is that it will give you a weird, artificially smoothed out motion for moving objects. Some people love it (especially for fast sports), some people hate it. Each individual is different.
    
    I personally prefer it switched off for film since 25fps video cameras already capture motion blur. Then I might switch 100Hz/200Hz on for the few occasions where I want to read sharp detail on fast moving objects like 200km/hr cars during motorsport.
    - Tech and cars on 29/07/2016 - 14:22
      
      Thank you so much for this explanation.
      
      So from what it sounds like - I would want a tv with a good processor so that it has good upscaling/smoothing. Good color accuracy and basically 'good quality pixels'. 50 Hz is fine for my use. I don't see myself switching between 50, 100 or 200 hz.
      
      But what I'm probably going to find is all the TV's with "good processors" will be the ones that are 100, or 200hz or are 4k TV's. I suppose I'm not really after a 4k TV but I would assume the new 4k tv's would also have great processors.
      
      I think I have a much better overall picture - thank you again!!
Kangal on 29/07/2016 - 04:41

+6

(best) OLED -> Quantum Dot -> Super-LCD IPS/LED -> Regular LCD -> Flatscreen Plasma -> Rear-projection (worst)
(best) Individual pixel lighting -> Many sector local dimming -> General local dimming -> Edge lit (worst)
(best) 300Hz -> 240Hz -> 200Hz -> 120Hz -> 100Hz -> 60/50Hz -> 30Hz (worst)
(best) 4320p -> 2160p -> 1080p -> 720p -> 576p -> 384p (worst)
(best) 75in -> 70in -> 65in -> 60in -> 55in -> 50in -> 47in -> 42in -> 40in -> 32in -> 28in -> 24in (worst)

You should get everything in its proper class.
For instance;

$300- 32 inch, Dumb TV, 720p, 50Hz, LCD
$900- 47 inch, Smart TV, 1080p, 100Hz, IPS/LED, Edge-lit
$1,800- 55 inch, Smart TV, 1080p, 200Hz, IPS LED, HDR, Many sector lighting
$5,400- 65 inch, Smart TV, 2160p, 240Hz, OLED, Individual lighting

This is a rule of thumb.
Best do your research depending on the model number, from reputable review sites.
And don't trust the marketing buzzwords, fake spec numbers, salesmans pitch, and the slow-moving monotone content on display.
- Tech and cars on 29/07/2016 - 09:10
  
  Thank you. I'll definitely keep this in mind when considering the next purchase!
LYRICALRAVER on 30/07/2016 - 21:50

you're lucky you have the interNet to do research because a couple of years ago in about 2003 people would be hard-pressed to find information about buying TV's. It was simply a matter of choosing a brand name you trust and hoping for the best! I think this is partly what the companies took it for granted that people bought out of ignorant and blind trust in their consumer trends and popular brands.
- Tech and cars on 31/07/2016 - 09:00
  
  Yep. That's why Sony dominated the market!

Understanding TV Technology

Comments

New Forum Topics