[nodiak]

I have a 32" Sony Trinitron (~ 5 yrs old) and am looking at larger screen sizes. I'd like to get something with larger images in 16:9 format. For instance if a person on my 32", 4:3 screen is 16" tall, what size 16:9 tv would I need to have to make that person 18" tall (or larger). Is there a rule of thumb for 4:3 vs. 16:9 screen size comparison?
I won't be setting up a HT, just watch sports, discovery/etc., and occassional movie. Have ~ 50" wide by 34" high space. Browsing shows most 50" and smaller sets will fit. (This space is fixed, and places the tv on the floor which works for us).
I haven't begun research on technologies, but the rear projection models seem generally cheaper which matters for me.
Thanks, Don

[byteme]

I've got a 70" 16:9 and a 4:3 image is 58" diagonal.  So in order to get the same 4:3 32" diag size you'd need 38.6" 16:9, if my calcs are correct.

If you go rear projection not only will you spend less money but you'll also get a better picture.  Plasma and LCD can't do as good a picture as DLP and none can do as good a picture as LCoS.  Sony and JVC make LCoS (liquid crystal on silicone) TVs.  If you check on tiger direct every now and again they'll have great deals on JVC's.  I got my 70" there for about $2200 shipped.  Best TV I've ever seen.

[nodiak]

Thanks for the math clue byteme, looks like 41-50" is a good size for me. I'll have plenty to learn to make a decision. I did watch Thanksgiving football on my bro-in-laws 62" (don't know brand or type) and the picture wasn't as good as my trinitron - everything was stretched out widthways and the detail wasn't superior. Have browsed some Samsung 50" and if I find one on sale or used I'll be ok (after xmas should be a good time to shop).
Don

[John151]

Thanks for the math clue byteme, looks like 41-50" is a good size for me. I'll have plenty to learn to make a decision. I did watch Thanksgiving football on my bro-in-laws 62" (don't know brand or type) and the picture wasn't as good as my trinitron - everything was stretched out widthways and the detail wasn't superior. Have browsed some Samsung 50" and if I find one on sale or used I'll be ok (after xmas should be a good time to shop).
Don

That could be the content, and not the TV.  A TV of that size needs a good HD signal!

[nodiak]

I'm sure that's true, as with audio what goes in...

[John151]

My BIL has a 50+" Sony TV. He has it hooked up with the worst possible signal and components, and brags about the picture.  I have been biting my lip and nodding  (I am not going to stick my nose into his business, and I don't want to get sucked into a project 45 miles from home).  If he only knew what he is missing.

[byteme]

Thanks for the math clue byteme, looks like 41-50" is a good size for me. I'll have plenty to learn to make a decision. I did watch Thanksgiving football on my bro-in-laws 62" (don't know brand or type) and the picture wasn't as good as my trinitron - everything was stretched out widthways and the detail wasn't superior. Have browsed some Samsung 50" and if I find one on sale or used I'll be ok (after xmas should be a good time to shop).
Don

That could be the content, and not the TV.  A TV of that size needs a good HD signal!

For those that aren't used to it SD is VERY hard to watch on an HD TV.  No matter what upconverting algo they use the fact of the matter is 480i has a limited amount of pixels.  Your 32" TV is made for that number and does a real good job of displaying SD I'm sure.  When you blow up 480i into 50" on an HD that isn't made for SD it's GOING TO LOOK WORSE.  There is no way around that.

However, once you see HD you're not gonna watch SD unless there is no other option.  Period.

I don't know what you've got for a source but typically, OTA (over the air) is going to be the best picture you'll get, then DBS (Dish or DirectTV) and then cable.  Cable sux IMO - they compress more than the other sources, the don't provide many of their channels in digital (which again could contribute to your picture quality in SD) and they don't offer as many HD channels as DBS.  I've had Dish for almost 8 years and would never go back.

[byteme]

My BIL has a 50+" Sony TV. He has it hooked up with the worst possible signal and components, and brags about the picture.  I have been biting my lip and nodding  (I am not going to stick my nose into his business, and I don't want to get sucked into a project 45 miles from home).  If he only knew what he is missing.

I love that!  Seen it often - they'll have a 16:9 TV, buy Full Frame DVDs and have them connected via composite cable then they'll blow the picture up losing EVEN MORE of the original information recorded on film!  Then for TV they run the cable right into the back of the TV.  They'll think they have surround but have things set for ProLogicII, not have a center channel or will use their TV for a center.  Then brag about the whole thing.  You can try to help them but typically they've spent too much money to listen.

[John151]

Btye - Do you remember when you helped me help a friend a few years ago?  He is so happy with his set up - and it was all done on the cheap.  Got a used Pioneer receiver here on AC, the great deal on the Polks and cables, and then a great deal on a Panny projector.  I think his total cost was under $4K.  He is still grinning ear to ear!

[nodiak]

I promise, I won't brag 
I appreciate you guys experience and depth with HT, I knew where to post to get the lowdown. As you can tell I'm a 2 channel guy who just wants good tv when the mood hits. For instance right now I'm listening to tunes and watching college football.
Actually all this was prompted by my middle age vision getting a bit worse and sitting 15' from the tv when I'm in the audio sweet spot. I think I can spring for a better tv this winter. byteme, that tiger direct link is great, that's my style, thanks. I'm on cable and will check out DirectTV too.
Don

[ctviggen]

For those that aren't used to it SD is VERY hard to watch on an HD TV.  No matter what upconverting algo they use the fact of the matter is 480i has a limited amount of pixels.  Your 32" TV is made for that number and does a real good job of displaying SD I'm sure.  When you blow up 480i into 50" on an HD that isn't made for SD it's GOING TO LOOK WORSE.  There is no way around that.

However, once you see HD you're not gonna watch SD unless there is no other option.  Period.

I don't know what you've got for a source but typically, OTA (over the air) is going to be the best picture you'll get, then DBS (Dish or DirectTV) and then cable.  Cable sux IMO - they compress more than the other sources, the don't provide many of their channels in digital (which again could contribute to your picture quality in SD) and they don't offer as many HD channels as DBS.  I've had Dish for almost 8 years and would never go back.

I think most channels I watch are perfectly fine in standard definition reconfigured to high definition.  Granted, I watch some talking heads, and a few home improvement shows.  I don't really need to see these in high definition.  What becomes very hard to watch is sports.  Sports is much better in HD, although I find the cable version of the channels to be quite compressed with many artifacts.  In fact, sometimes the digital artifacts are so bad that it's hard to watch.  A good HD signal is very good for outdoor channels and sports.   

I also like Dish, but I've had cable for a while now.  I still think I like Dish a bit better.  I think Dish offers more options for channels, but I've also heard they no longer let you buy the equipment.  That can get expensive, as the rental fees are in the $10 range per month, then they charge you extra for an additional receiver, and they used to charge a per-month fee for the DVR data (which is ridiculous, considering all the data is there) or "use" of the PVR.  So, you start at $43/month for programming, and your bill will be $80/month.  Dish's website is useless for determining how much you'll actually be paying.  If I ever cut down enough trees, I might consider going back to Dish, but I'll have to call them, ask them the true price of having one DVR and one HD receiver, and compare to cable. 

[zybar]

Go DirecTV or Verizon FIOS for your provider if possible.

FIOS will give you a better picture, but DirecTV will give you more HD content (they have around 80 channels now and claim that they will be around 100 by the end of the year).  DirecTV also has the best sports packages by far.  In fact, I really can't switch away from DTV because I don't want to lose their football and baseball packages (it's the only way I can watch the Yankees and Giants living up in Boston).

I have also found DTV and FIOS to better much better priced than cable or DISH.

George

[byteme]

Btye - Do you remember when you helped me help a friend a few years ago?  He is so happy with his set up - and it was all done on the cheap.  Got a used Pioneer receiver here on AC, the great deal on the Polks and cables, and then a great deal on a Panny projector.  I think his total cost was under $4K.  He is still grinning ear to ear!

I do!  Glad he's happy - that's what it's all about!

[byteme]

I think most channels I watch are perfectly fine in standard definition reconfigured to high definition.  Granted, I watch some talking heads, and a few home improvement shows.  I don't really need to see these in high definition.  What becomes very hard to watch is sports.  Sports is much better in HD, although I find the cable version of the channels to be quite compressed with many artifacts.  In fact, sometimes the digital artifacts are so bad that it's hard to watch.  A good HD signal is very good for outdoor channels and sports.   

I also like Dish, but I've had cable for a while now.  I still think I like Dish a bit better.  I think Dish offers more options for channels, but I've also heard they no longer let you buy the equipment.  That can get expensive, as the rental fees are in the $10 range per month, then they charge you extra for an additional receiver, and they used to charge a per-month fee for the DVR data (which is ridiculous, considering all the data is there) or "use" of the PVR.  So, you start at $43/month for programming, and your bill will be $80/month.  Dish's website is useless for determining how much you'll actually be paying.  If I ever cut down enough trees, I might consider going back to Dish, but I'll have to call them, ask them the true price of having one DVR and one HD receiver, and compare to cable. 

Agreed that talking head shows are typically less "strain" going from SD to HD and sports is the worst going back and forth.

Cable v DBS though - sure, you do pay a bit more per month for each box and for DVR but overall what they offer, quantity, quality, customer service everything is better IMO than cable.  Cable provides less channels, less HD channels, lower quality, worse customer service and fewer options.  And the cost is comparable or cheaper than cable too - unless you bundle in VOIP, broadband and everything else.  I pay $120 or so per month for the highest level package - every channel Dish offers and all the movie channels too.  I get about 60+ HD channels, have two HD DVRs and didn't pay a penny to have two dishes installed.  Very well worth it to be able to watch everything and never have to say "Wisconsin v Ohio State is going to be on Big Ten Network and Charter doesn't offer that - not to mention they don't offer it in HD!".

Zybar was also right on w/ FIOS.  With the early adopter deals they have going and the promise of silly bandwith, all digital quality, that could be the best thing going.  Unfortunately, availability is still pretty weak.

[mjosef]

A dissenting voice in the cable vs DTV video quality issue:
I found the opposite of the above expressed views, having had both DISH and DTV for about 4years prior to switching to cable almost 2 years ago. Cable (Cablevision in my area) I found had much better video quality than either of the  aforementioned Satellite  companies. Many of the cable channels were a pain to watch (Scifi, tnt, usa, etc) with blotching in dark scenes(from over compression) and occasional break-up during any kind of overcast weather. Switching to cable during their 3 for 1 promotion, I saw deeper/richer colors...and none of the weather induced loss of signal issues.
As to price...now that the year promotion package price is over my tv bill is higher by about 15-20%(vs DTV)...but no way am I going back to DSL, and I am leery of DTV or DISH...they promise a lot but their delivery does not always match their aspirations.

Sure its been about 2 years, maybe they have improved..I dunno.
Over at AVS there are other viewers with similar viewing results as myself, so I know its not just me.
I would love to try FOIS, but its not yet available in my area.
Just my 2-cents.

I should add...I have no love for the cable co monopoly in NYC, I don't understand why they don't compete against each other...in my area I cannot get TIme warner nor comcast, its like a frigging cartel...divide up the territory and each company rule their little kingdom...which was the main reason I went with  Satellite some 6 years ago when I moved back to the City(from Joisey). We need more competition.

[satfrat]

A dissenting voice in the cable vs DTV video quality issue:
I found the opposite of the above expressed views, having had both DISH and DTV for about 4years prior to switching to cable almost 2 years ago. Cable (Cablevision in my area) I found had much better video quality than either of the  aforementioned Satellite  companies. Many of the cable channels were a pain to watch (Scifi, tnt, usa, etc) with blotching in dark scenes(from over compression) and occasional break-up during any kind of overcast weather. Switching to cable during their 3 for 1 promotion, I saw deeper/richer colors...and none of the weather induced loss of signal issues.
As to price...now that the year promotion package price is over my tv bill is higher by about 15-20%(vs DTV)...but no way am I going back to DSL, and I am leery of DTV or DISH...they promise a lot but their delivery does not always match their aspirations.

Sure its been about 2 years, maybe they have improved..I dunno.
Over at AVS there are other viewers with similar viewing results as myself, so I know its not just me.
I would love to try FOIS, but its not yet available in my area.
Just my 2-cents.

Get ready for another dissenting voice.    DirecTv launcehed their present HD satellite (D10) this year which has enabled them to open up 80 channels since spetember wih a projected 100 by years end. Early next year, DiecrTv's second satelite (D11) will be launched that will allow many more local netwok HD channels to become available to the public. These new HD channels are excellent quality, which is what one would expect from a freshly launched satellite. I've had my C-band 12' satellite dish since 1985 and I had a DirecTv HD DVR systrem installed in august,,, just to take advantage of the flood of cable HD channels. I'm also a big sports fan and the real good news is the majority of these sports channels are now in HD. Granted there's limited HD content now but the same was true with ESPN those first few years when HD first became available. now most of ESPN's programing is in HD. It shouldn't take as long today for these sports channels to start broadcasting in HD.

Living in Vermont, the cable here just flat out sucks and even when you're in an area where the cable has improved, the HD content is limited,,, severely limited when compared to the DirecTv of today. It's a nobrainer to go the with DirecTv of today, both in HD quality and quanity.

Another 2 cents 

Robin

[mjosef]

Robin living out there in the wilderness you don't have a choice 
Just kidding