PS2 on Big Screen TV???

I was wondering if someone could give me thier input....
I just ordered a bigscreen TV from BestBuy (had gift cards so I had to go there)and I ended up getting a Toshiba 43" HDTV for about $2,000.00. My question is if I made a wise purchase or should I trade it in for a wide screen or a bigger screen. I decided to get this TV because the picture quality is excellent and $2000.00 is about the most I could spend, but if you guys think I may be unhappy with it, maybe I can still cancel the order before its delivered and save for something else. I plan on playing my games and DVDs on this TV. Thanx for any input.

have it delivered to my house, and ill test it out for you.

mm

mm I did not even know you lived in a house....  Hmmm, strange....


Dood, if you like it and it works for you then you will be happy.  If you sit there regretting what you bought, then no it is not worth it.....


But I still say Widescreen is the way to go...

hell yeah, me and the rest of the Kommunist chimps sit around and watch re-runs of "planet of the apes" and eat nanners.

mm

I\'d just give you guys my opinion on 4:3 vs. 16:9.

I know that you could buy a bigger 4:3 for the same money you\'d pay for 16:9. But I dunno... 16:9 has always had a place deep inside my heart.

I just like 16:9 so much more than 4:3. So if I\'d have to choose I\'d buy 16:9. It\'s a personal thing.

Originally posted by retrodog
A 55" 16:9 is about equivelent to a  61" 3:4 for viewing 16:9 material.

Untrue.  And remember I said you lose lines of res when watching 16x9 material on a 4:3 set.

Originally posted by retrodog
Then the 61" digital TV kicks ass. And a lot of the stations and material are still 3:4.

The people who buy these TVs aren\'t looking to watch the latest episode of Friends on them.  They want to take full advantage of they\'re DVD collection and be ready when HDTV becomes the standard in 5 years.

Originally posted by retrodog
Each of these sets sell for about $3,000 (without the digital reciever) so cost is pretty much a wash.

If you\'re the type of person that pays $3000 for a TV than another $500 for getting a 65" widescreen is probably not that big of a deal to you.

Originally posted by retrodog
You might feel like some really cool dude with a 16:9 set but you\'ll be watching a 32" display most of the time and I\'ll be enjoying 61" of pure cinematic beauty, for the same price.  

I understand what you are trying to say but \'61" of pure cinematic beauty\'??  Read over that again.  What movie is shot in 4:3?

Originally posted by Moushroomed
I was wondering if someone could give me thier input....
I just ordered a bigscreen TV from BestBuy (had gift cards so I had to go there)and I ended up getting a Toshiba 43" HDTV for about $2,000.00. My question is if I made a wise purchase or should I trade it in for a wide screen or a bigger screen. I decided to get this TV because the picture quality is excellent and $2000.00 is about the most I could spend, but if you guys think I may be unhappy with it, maybe I can still cancel the order before its delivered and save for something else. I plan on playing my games and DVDs on this TV. Thanx for any input.

Hmmmmm, I would go for widescreen but I watch more DVDs than I do 4:3 broadcasts.  This may not be true for you.  I would hold out for the Toshiba 40H80 which is a 40" HD-ready widescreen but costs $2500 at Best Buy.  You can find it cheaper online, or better yet go to a Home Theater shop and see if you can haggle the price down.

Bottom line: 16:9 does look much better & is more than worth it when watching 16:9 material, but if all you watch is TV shows and play videogames (many of which will be 16:9 compatible in the future) then a 4:3 set is not a totally bad investment.  Just remember not too long from now people will be ranting about how widescreen support for videogames kicks ass and your stuck with your oversized HD-ready 4:3 set.

[videoholic]

Can I chime in here for a bit..

I agree!!!

OK, done.

THX and others,

Gees, give me a break. Loosen up a little. I\'m just presenting an alternate consideration. You guys talk like you will only ever own one game console and only one more TV. I say get a 3:4 now since most everything is still in that format and then switch over later, when they change. Or,,, go ahead and get a 16:9 now. Whatever makes you happy. If you\'re really gonna watch DVDs and other 16:9 material most all of the time and you are gonna sit right up there with you little face two feet away then I would sure as hell get the 16:9. I\'m not watching mine that close so I\'d prefer for right now to get the full big screen of 4:3 and same size 16:9 view of the 55" 16:9 set. They may not be exactly the same size but they are pretty darn close. Either do the math or go look at them. I did.

Thanx for the input guys. I know this topic getting a little over done, but I have one more question. If I were to forget about getting a HD TV then I could get a bigger screen size (Sony or Toshiba 53") at a sacrifice of picture quality also. Does HD make that big of a differance for gaming and DVDs? Also is it harder to play games on a bigger screen? exp. football where you need to keep an eye on what is going on all over the sceen.

As a rule of thumb, a HDTV (with tuner) is going to run about $1,200 more than a regular analog unit in that size range, maybe even a little more. This is only for 3:4 type since that is all that is available in analog. Even more for the 16:9 type.

So what it boils down to is whether you want to spend $1,200 to only get rid on some horizontal scan lines, which you don\'t really notice that much if you are sitting back at a standard viewing distance (as described earlier). Sure there are a lot of additional advantages to the digital TV but if you ignore those, like it sounds you want to, that\'s a lot of money to get rid of some scan lines.

You will need to sit back at the described distance if you want to allow your peripheral vision to work adequately. Otherwise you will have to keep moving your head around to look at different parts of the screen. Try sitting in the fourth row at the theater sometime. It\'s cool but it sure wears your neck out. And you miss a lot.

Moush- If you want to take full advantage of an HDTV, you need a high definition or standard definiton signal.  This includes HD broadcasts (which require a $750-$1000 set top box converter) or just a progressive scan DVD player which run for $600.  As for your situation, the line doublers in those sets are usually of high quality so you can in fact take the 480i signal from your ps2 and other consoles and have your HDTV convert it to 480p.  Sony\'s DRC technology is a prime example.  You will see a noticeable improvement.  Just make sure the set you buy does HD upconversion.

Originally posted by retrodog
If you\'re really gonna watch DVDs and other 16:9 material most all of the time and you are gonna sit right up there with you little face two feet away then I would sure as hell get the 16:9.

Why in the hell would I sit 2 feet away from the TV when my DVDs are being played full screen on a 16:9 set?  I think you are thinking of a 4:3 tv which letterbox 16:9 material, thus shrinking the entire image.

Widescreen is simply better.  You are the only person I\'ve talked to that prefers 4:3 over 16:9 for just $500.  I\'m guessing you actually own a 61" 4:3 TV and don\'t wanna feel you made a bad choice.

THX,

Why are you trying so hard. You are obviously so opinionated about the benifits of 16:9 that you are offended by someone who sees the benifits of both and can openly discuss it. Gees, do you listen to Rush Limbaugh every day too? Why don\'t you listen to what the guy is really saying. Not everyone wants to spend all their money for the best there is available. This $500 dif that you refer to is fuzzy math. I don\'t know where you shop at but I\'m only referring to what I found at a couple of places here (Conn\'s and Circuit City). The remark about being two feet away was obviously meant as sarcasm, and only a refernece back to the concept of the diferences being less noticeable at a standard viewing distance. Now go swallow some pop rocks and drink a coke. That\'ll make you feel much better. Promise...

As usual,,, LOL LOL LOL

[videoholic]

Originally posted by Moushroomed
Thanx for the input guys. I know this topic getting a little over done, but I have one more question. If I were to forget about getting a HD TV then I could get a bigger screen size (Sony or Toshiba 53") at a sacrifice of picture quality also. Does HD make that big of a differance for gaming and DVDs? Also is it harder to play games on a bigger screen? exp. football where you need to keep an eye on what is going on all over the sceen.

Question 1, is it worth it, YES.  

A large screen tv is really just making the scan lines wider and the gaps between the scan lines wider.  If you are going to spend a lot of money on a tv, it\'s downright stupid to buy anything not HD compatible.  In a few years it will be very common place and you will be wondering why you spent so much on that standard 4:3 set.  Already CBS has like 18 shows, Football, etc in HD.  NYPD Blue is now in HD.  Super Bowl, etc....  It\'s groing pretty nicely now.



For gaming it is So much easier playing on a big screen.  I can\'t even play on a 27" anymore.  It\'s awesome.

On another note:  I just bought a HDTV receiver today.  Man it kicks ash..  I have been receiving OTA stations via Direct-TV because the analog signal down right sucks where I live.  Now I can pick up the digital signal and wow.  Direct-TVs network package is so degraded that it made a huge difference.  And I am talking about 4:3 stuff.  Haven\'t watched any HD stuff yet.  I cought the very end of Jag, but not really enough to look at it.  It looks damn good though.

retrodog- ok no hard feelings.  If you want to discuss television then fine, let\'s do it.  I will hear your opinion and give you mine as well.  It\'s done all the time on ubb\'s, and people throw their thoughts on the subject back & forth.  Please do not get offended.  There have been many a Home Theater thread on this forum with members explaining their opinions to the point of arguing.  It\'s all well and fine.  We have stated our thoughts without resulting to name calling and/or childish threats.

But this **** about eating pop rocks and then drinking a coke is going a bit out of line maybe.  Anyways sorry if I offended you and let\'s try to keep discussions away from name calling or trying to make people explode.

Now if you still wanna know where you can get a 65" widescreen for less than $500 more than a 55", just ask.

Regards

THX

Do any of you guys know some good home theatre websites and/or forums? I\'d really appreciate it if you could point me in the right direction.