What's a good HDTV for watching old films?
January 2, 2012 9:59 AM Subscribe
What should I be shopping for if I'm looking to buy an HDTV and plan on watching a lot of older, often black-and-white films? My attempts at research have left me better informed, but also completely confused.
I haven't owned a TV in a decade, and I've decided to spring for an HDTV in the 37" to 42" size range. Off the bat, I know there are some considerations that are of little use to me: I don't foresee watching anything in 3D, and I won't be hooking the TV up to cable.
The TV will be used to stream netflix, but I will mainly be watching movies on Blu-Ray and also standard def DVD. I tend to watch older movies from the 30s and 40s, many of them in black-and-white. I've read some things about black levels varying between LCD and plasma screens, and figure that this may be even more noticeable when watching black and white movies. I've also read that a 60hz refresh rate will display 24fps film transfers poorly. But mostly I'm feeling very confused.
Any suggestions of specific TVs for my purposes, or even features to look out for, would be very welcome. I'm really not sure what the relative advantages of plasma/LCD/LED-LCD and the various available refresh rates are. I am definitely going to spend less than a grand, and closer to $500 would be ideal. Thank you.
I haven't owned a TV in a decade, and I've decided to spring for an HDTV in the 37" to 42" size range. Off the bat, I know there are some considerations that are of little use to me: I don't foresee watching anything in 3D, and I won't be hooking the TV up to cable.
The TV will be used to stream netflix, but I will mainly be watching movies on Blu-Ray and also standard def DVD. I tend to watch older movies from the 30s and 40s, many of them in black-and-white. I've read some things about black levels varying between LCD and plasma screens, and figure that this may be even more noticeable when watching black and white movies. I've also read that a 60hz refresh rate will display 24fps film transfers poorly. But mostly I'm feeling very confused.
Any suggestions of specific TVs for my purposes, or even features to look out for, would be very welcome. I'm really not sure what the relative advantages of plasma/LCD/LED-LCD and the various available refresh rates are. I am definitely going to spend less than a grand, and closer to $500 would be ideal. Thank you.
Best answer: Plasma == power hog, expensive, prone to burn-in, short life, potentially really good brightness and contrast even in harsh light
LCD w/ CFL backlight (old-school LCD) == your typical LCD TV. You get what you pay for in terms of contrast, viewing angle, etc. Tons of people have these and they work well.
LCD w/ LED backlight == same as above, but can be much brighter than CFL backlight (so good in harsh light, one of the LCD-CFL weaknesses) but is harder to get the color balance right. (Many cheaper LED backlight TVs have especially garish over-saturated reds in my opinion.) LED backlights will last much, much longer than a CFL and are generally more energy-efficient.
The high refresh rates ("120 Hz display!") are the equivalent of smoothing: the TV takes two frames, interpolates a frame that is halfway between them, and displays that between the two actual frames. Some people like the smoother motion you get from it. Some people find it annoying. I'm in the camp who likes it 98% of the time: I don't notice it and, side-by-side at the TV store, the same tennis match / movie / etc. does look smoother and less artificial.
Projectors generally only make sense if you're going really big. For small sizes, a panel TV will offer a better picture for the same amount of money. (In order to hit the same contrast ratios, gamut, etc., you generally have to spend a good premium over a panel. Don't forget to factor in noise and bulb lifetime where applicable.)
Re black levels: you'll get what you pay for. A good quality LCD panel will have very black blacks and still manage a good contrast range. The only time you'll notice that black isn't 100% black is if you're watching in a dark room and there's a really dark scene with no bright features. Most LED backlight TVs (and some CFLs? sorry, it's been a while since I was in the market) will get around this by playing with dynamic backlight levels: they'll actually turn down the backlight brightness when the average scene brightness goes way down. I'm sure you've seen specs where the manufacturer lists some silly impossible "dynamic contrast ratio"; that's what they're doing. "How big is the difference between darkdark with the backlight almost off and brightbright with it full on?" Honestly, though, it works well. Nonetheless, the *real* contrast ratio of the panel is important. If you skimp you'll be able to notice it when the lights are low.
Re 24 fps: YMMV, but I've never been able to notice a problem. My TV does inter-frame interpolation as mentioned above, though, and I don't know if that has something to do with it.
posted by introp at 10:44 AM on January 2, 2012 [1 favorite]
LCD w/ CFL backlight (old-school LCD) == your typical LCD TV. You get what you pay for in terms of contrast, viewing angle, etc. Tons of people have these and they work well.
LCD w/ LED backlight == same as above, but can be much brighter than CFL backlight (so good in harsh light, one of the LCD-CFL weaknesses) but is harder to get the color balance right. (Many cheaper LED backlight TVs have especially garish over-saturated reds in my opinion.) LED backlights will last much, much longer than a CFL and are generally more energy-efficient.
The high refresh rates ("120 Hz display!") are the equivalent of smoothing: the TV takes two frames, interpolates a frame that is halfway between them, and displays that between the two actual frames. Some people like the smoother motion you get from it. Some people find it annoying. I'm in the camp who likes it 98% of the time: I don't notice it and, side-by-side at the TV store, the same tennis match / movie / etc. does look smoother and less artificial.
Projectors generally only make sense if you're going really big. For small sizes, a panel TV will offer a better picture for the same amount of money. (In order to hit the same contrast ratios, gamut, etc., you generally have to spend a good premium over a panel. Don't forget to factor in noise and bulb lifetime where applicable.)
Re black levels: you'll get what you pay for. A good quality LCD panel will have very black blacks and still manage a good contrast range. The only time you'll notice that black isn't 100% black is if you're watching in a dark room and there's a really dark scene with no bright features. Most LED backlight TVs (and some CFLs? sorry, it's been a while since I was in the market) will get around this by playing with dynamic backlight levels: they'll actually turn down the backlight brightness when the average scene brightness goes way down. I'm sure you've seen specs where the manufacturer lists some silly impossible "dynamic contrast ratio"; that's what they're doing. "How big is the difference between darkdark with the backlight almost off and brightbright with it full on?" Honestly, though, it works well. Nonetheless, the *real* contrast ratio of the panel is important. If you skimp you'll be able to notice it when the lights are low.
Re 24 fps: YMMV, but I've never been able to notice a problem. My TV does inter-frame interpolation as mentioned above, though, and I don't know if that has something to do with it.
posted by introp at 10:44 AM on January 2, 2012 [1 favorite]
Oh, I forgot to mention: the disc player does matter! Older DVDs are often coded in 480i, etc., and the player has to be smart enough to de-interlace them and reverse the 4:3 pulldown so you end up with clean 480p signal, which your TV can then inter-frame interpolate, etc., as it pleases. You don't have to go to ultra-high-dollar videophile players, but read trusted reviews and stay away from the cheap ones that didn't implement the de-interlacing algorithm correctly.
posted by introp at 10:49 AM on January 2, 2012
posted by introp at 10:49 AM on January 2, 2012
We have a digital projector (Optoma) and a huge screen (a screen looks much better than a plain wall, I think) , but I also watch films on my plain HDTV. Zillions of films have been remastered for DVD and Blu-ray and there's plenty of HD versions as well that can be found all over the internets on various sites (wink, wink, nudge nudge.)
posted by Ideefixe at 10:54 AM on January 2, 2012
posted by Ideefixe at 10:54 AM on January 2, 2012
introp- unless OP is making the effort to buy a $30 DVD player that doesn't even accept component video cables, he's getting one that upconverts to progressive scan (480p). scarylarry- whatever DVD (or blu-ray, they're cheap now and play DVDs beautifully too) you get, do NOT just slap on the crappy composite video cables that come bundled with them- you don't have to spend a fortune on branded cables but you do want ones that can allow to to watch things in progressive scan 480p at least, and high-def (720p, 1080i or 1080p) at best, and for that you need analog component video cables (if the DVD doesn't accept these, do not buy it- if it costs $30 or less new, that's probably what you're getting) or an HDMI cable. I'd mention DVI but don't see it anymore these days.
posted by ethnomethodologist at 11:07 AM on January 2, 2012
posted by ethnomethodologist at 11:07 AM on January 2, 2012
Best answer: Unless you're a spectacularly fussy viewer, 60Hz won't be a problem.
Honestly, this is one of those things that's easy to overthink. I'd suggest this.
(1) Look on newegg for lcd and led-lcd tvs with a lot of reviews (ie at least 20), and an average of at least 4 stars.
(2) Google around for more on any of them that seem interesting to you and are at the right price point. With luck, some reviews will mention their b/w performance. A note: if you end up at avsforum, be aware that this is one of those communities where being fussy and complainy is a hobby, so take complaints there with a grain of salt. It's very much a "Hmmm.... Two dollars... and it only transports matter?" sort for forum.
(3) Buy whichever seems the bestest to you. Any of the highly-rated tvs on newegg will almost certainly be good enough.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 11:19 AM on January 2, 2012
Honestly, this is one of those things that's easy to overthink. I'd suggest this.
(1) Look on newegg for lcd and led-lcd tvs with a lot of reviews (ie at least 20), and an average of at least 4 stars.
(2) Google around for more on any of them that seem interesting to you and are at the right price point. With luck, some reviews will mention their b/w performance. A note: if you end up at avsforum, be aware that this is one of those communities where being fussy and complainy is a hobby, so take complaints there with a grain of salt. It's very much a "Hmmm.... Two dollars... and it only transports matter?" sort for forum.
(3) Buy whichever seems the bestest to you. Any of the highly-rated tvs on newegg will almost certainly be good enough.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 11:19 AM on January 2, 2012
Best answer: AVSForum (mentioned above) also produced a free calibration DVD that you can use to optimally tweak your display, and there are PDFs that will walk you through the process. You may even find that there is a 'best settings' doc out there for your specific TV.
FWIW, I downloaded/burnt the DVD, sat down with doc in hand and dove into my Samsung's menus only to find that, from the factory, things were set pretty close to optimum already.
posted by jquinby at 11:35 AM on January 2, 2012 [1 favorite]
FWIW, I downloaded/burnt the DVD, sat down with doc in hand and dove into my Samsung's menus only to find that, from the factory, things were set pretty close to optimum already.
posted by jquinby at 11:35 AM on January 2, 2012 [1 favorite]
The main thing you will want to look for which is often not mentioned, is how well the screen does at being evenly black across the whole display. My LCD TV, which is not an expensive one, but a name brand, has brighter spots in the 4 corners when the screen is completely black. It isn't noticeable when watching a romantic comedy, or something that takes place outside, but when I watch a darker movie (like Alien, for example), I can tell, since the screen is so dark most of the time.
I don't think that is something you are going to be able to test in a bright display room at a store, but something you should definitely test for at your home when you bring home your TV, since it is something you may not notice at first, depending on what films you watch.
posted by markblasco at 11:42 AM on January 2, 2012
I don't think that is something you are going to be able to test in a bright display room at a store, but something you should definitely test for at your home when you bring home your TV, since it is something you may not notice at first, depending on what films you watch.
posted by markblasco at 11:42 AM on January 2, 2012
Plasma == power hog, expensive, prone to burn-in, short life, potentially really good brightness and contrast even in harsh light
Much of those issues have been tamed over the past several years. Plasma tvs can be had for very reasonable prices, often lower than comparably-sized LCDs. Burn-in is fairly unheard of now in plasmas, too. I can't speak to the power-hog thing.
The BIG advantage with plasmas is the exceptionally even and dense blacks you can get. LCDs are prone to uneven blacks across a screen...Something you may want to consider if your thing is watching b/w movies.
posted by Thorzdad at 1:01 PM on January 2, 2012
Much of those issues have been tamed over the past several years. Plasma tvs can be had for very reasonable prices, often lower than comparably-sized LCDs. Burn-in is fairly unheard of now in plasmas, too. I can't speak to the power-hog thing.
The BIG advantage with plasmas is the exceptionally even and dense blacks you can get. LCDs are prone to uneven blacks across a screen...Something you may want to consider if your thing is watching b/w movies.
posted by Thorzdad at 1:01 PM on January 2, 2012
For around $500, I think plasma will give you the best picture quality. The issues brought up (burn in, short life, etc) are not problems anymore, if they ever were. Power consumption is higher than LCDs but the additional cost per year of the extra electricity will like be something like $5. Plasmas don't always have better blacks than LCDs they nearly always have *more consistent* blacks - you don't get the bleeding backlights, color changes off-axis, or the other problems that LCD panels bring.
posted by The Lamplighter at 2:42 PM on January 2, 2012
posted by The Lamplighter at 2:42 PM on January 2, 2012
I also wouldn't worry about the refresh rate at all. You've been watching 24hz content on 60hz displays your whole life - have you ever noticed a problem?
posted by The Lamplighter at 2:43 PM on January 2, 2012
posted by The Lamplighter at 2:43 PM on January 2, 2012
« Older Should I Stay or Should I Go? (The Work Version) | Poly-friendly marriage counselor in the SF East... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
I think his loft is about 16 or 18 feet across which gives that 9 foot image. I think the minimum for that projector is 12 feet or something like that. He has the audio hooked up to his ancient stereo so just basic stereo, no surround, but for the kinds of movies he's watching (mostly classics and foreign), that doesn't matter so much.
posted by You Should See the Other Guy at 10:11 AM on January 2, 2012