Wow, keep your hair on Graham! is my first flippant reaction. Caveat: thanks for the reply in the spirit of my earlier snowflake reaction post. The foxsat hdr I’ve been using for over a decade sends 720p hd to whatever screen it’s connected to if the recording is made in hd. You will know the details of the sd signal and I don’t, but I find the difference in picture and sound quality from sd to hd not enough to merit using hd for anything other than the occasional nature documentary or blockbuster movie or music programme, I’m not a ‘strictly’ viewer and never keep hd recordings as they take up too much space. That’s with my 40” Sony tv or 32” Panasonic tv which are both ‘full 1080p hd’. Whether that’s upscaled or downscaled and whether or not it’s interlaced or de-interlaced to get whatever number of pixels to the screen has been of no interest until now when I weigh up my options before buying a new tv. What’s your opinion on the technology behind the Sony Kd65xf9005 compared with LG OLED65C9PLA? On paper and judging by reviews it seems inferior but I thought the picture looked more natural and balanced in the limited demo I saw. What I’m getting at is that I’m mostly interested in the ‘user experience’ and not so much with the technical details. I understand user experience is subjective and technical details are objective and as a forum ‘expert’ one would prefer objective information. Sorry, I’ve had a few glasses and should pick this up in a more sober state.
My Humax Forum » Freesat HD » FOXSAT HDR
Which 65” tv for fox sat hdr or upgrade
(54 posts)-
| Tue 26 Nov 2019 1:22:58 #31 |
-
bob793 - 8 hours ago »
Wow, keep your hair on Graham! is my first flippant reaction. Caveat: thanks for the reply in the spirit of my earlier snowflake reaction post. The foxsat hdr I’ve been using for over a decade sends 720p hd to whatever screen it’s connected to if the recording is made in hd. You will know the details of the sd signal and I don’t, but I find the difference in picture and sound quality from sd to hd not enough to merit using hd for anything other than the occasional nature documentary or blockbuster movie or music programme, I’m not a ‘strictly’ viewer and never keep hd recordings as they take up too much space. That’s with my 40” Sony tv or 32” Panasonic tv which are both ‘full 1080p hd’. Whether that’s upscaled or downscaled and whether or not it’s interlaced or de-interlaced to get whatever number of pixels to the screen has been of no interest until now when I weigh up my options before buying a new tv. What’s your opinion on the technology behind the Sony Kd65xf9005 compared with LG OLED65C9PLA? On paper and judging by reviews it seems inferior but I thought the picture looked more natural and balanced in the limited demo I saw. What I’m getting at is that I’m mostly interested in the ‘user experience’ and not so much with the technical details. I understand user experience is subjective and technical details are objective and as a forum ‘expert’ one would prefer objective information. Sorry, I’ve had a few glasses and should pick this up in a more sober state.If you have set original or 1080i the box sends 1920 x 1080 interlaced at 25 fps if it's connected to a Full-HD TV. Only if it's connected to a true 720p TV like say a Pioneer Kuro will it switch to output 720p using information exchanged during HDCP HDMI handshake.. True 720p TV's (those with a 1280 x 720 display are rare). The first HD ready TV's were not 720p but had 1366 x 768 displays. The HD ready spec guaranteed a picture from a 1080i 25fps source or a 720p50 source.
Obviously there is not a 1:1 relationship between either source and the screen so either source requires the TV to scale to 1366 x 768 pixels.
Your TV should have an info button that shows what the source video format is. It won't have a button that says what you are looking at because that's fixed by the display panel and unless a different panel is installed it cannot be changed.
For the best results with either of your TV's you should set 1080i. If you set 720p the box will scale 1920 x 1080 to 1280 x 720. This loses a large amount of video data which you can never fully recover. The TV then has to try and recover the lost data by guesswork (interpolation) to produce 1920 x 1080 pixels.
I have the 55" version of the LG C OLED model. It's a superb TV but you can see the impact of scaling FULL-HD to 4K. Given a true 4K source especially a high dynamic range source the picture is astonishing.
Good as the Foxsat-HDR is the picture quality isn't as good as the G2 boxes. If you want the best results picture wise get either a FVP-5000t terrestrial box or a G2 Freesat+ box.
While the black Friday sale is on get a 4K Amazon Fire TV stick.
I wouldn't touch Currys with a bargepole. Buy from Richer Sounds and get a free 6 yr warranty. Ask Richer Sounds to set up a 4K TV with a Full-HD source and judge for yourself.
The TV itself has a Freesat TV tuner and will record to a USB drive but compared to a multituner pvr it's not very flexible.
To view live content however the built in sat or Freeview tuner gives excellent pictures.
Incidentally the TV audio is excellent.
| Tue 26 Nov 2019 9:48:56 #32 | -
bob793 - 20 hours ago »
Wow, keep your hair on Graham! is my first flippant reaction. Caveat: thanks for the reply in the spirit of my earlier snowflake reaction post. The foxsat hdr I’ve been using for over a decade sends 720p hd to whatever screen it’s connected to if the recording is made in hd. You will know the details of the sd signal and I don’t, but I find the difference in picture and sound quality from sd to hd not enough to merit using hd for anything other than the occasional nature documentary or blockbuster movie or music programme, I’m not a ‘strictly’ viewer and never keep hd recordings as they take up too much space. That’s with my 40” Sony tv or 32” Panasonic tv which are both ‘full 1080p hd’. Whether that’s upscaled or downscaled and whether or not it’s interlaced or de-interlaced to get whatever number of pixels to the screen has been of no interest until now when I weigh up my options before buying a new tv. What’s your opinion on the technology behind the Sony Kd65xf9005 compared with LG OLED65C9PLA? On paper and judging by reviews it seems inferior but I thought the picture looked more natural and balanced in the limited demo I saw. What I’m getting at is that I’m mostly interested in the ‘user experience’ and not so much with the technical details. I understand user experience is subjective and technical details are objective and as a forum ‘expert’ one would prefer objective information. Sorry, I’ve had a few glasses and should pick this up in a more sober state.Just realised you are confusing 720 x 576 as 720p It's not. It's the last figure that gives the vertical resolution the first is the horizontal.
Anything over 720 for the last figure is classed as HD not SD. 720 x 576 is SD (576i).
All the HD channels have a vertical resolution of 1080 pixels and a horizontal of 1920 pixels (1080i).
Multiply the two to get the total number of pixels that physically exist on the screen. As virtually all TV's now have square pixels, I have ignored this.
SD 720 x 576 = 414,720
720p - 1280 x 720 = 921,600
Full-HD = 1920 x 1080 = 398,131,200
4K = 4 X times Full-HD = 1,592,524,800
Of course the actual pixels will be larger on a larger TV because the screen area is larger.
That's why you need to watch a larger TV from a greater distance before the actually lower resolution of the screen in ppi (pixels per inch) becomes obvious.
720 x 576 is the resolution that the best SD channels have.
Photographs taken on high res digital camera have a much higher resolution in ppi than a TV because you normally view them from much closer.
A normal resolution for a Full-HD screen is only about 70 ppi.
| Tue 26 Nov 2019 22:23:19 #33 | -
I watch in sd 576i most of the time. I had the foxsat hdr set to 720p for hd recordings because I was told that was the best setting. In light of what you’ve said I’ve now changed it to 1080i but can’t be sure there’s a difference. It’s a very slight change if any. Surprisingly the menu looks clearer. I recently adjusted the tv settings, having used it for over 10 years on factory settings. This made the picture different but maybe not better but the menu text appeared less clear. I’m not really bothered about this and don’t want to waste your time. What do you think of the Sony Kd65xf9005 vs LG OLED65C9PLA?
| Tue 26 Nov 2019 23:37:24 #35 | -
Are there not expert reviews of these sets on t'internet? It is unlikely that anyone here will have both to be able to make a A to B comparison.
| Wed 27 Nov 2019 0:00:26 #36 | -
Just saw previous post. Why do you suggest I get an Amazon fire stick? Don’t modern TVs do everything that the stick does already? Is that to get 4K content? I’ve not considered that before but they are currently £20 on amazon so I guess that would be worth it for occasional use like I do with hd currently. I’m sceptical of Black Friday but am looking out for any genuine bargains. Not only do I have poor freeview reception where I live but curry’s are the only place to see new TVs in west Cornwall, I like Richer Sounds but they are a 2 hour drive away in Exeter. I might buy from there to get installation and guarantee if that’s on offer though, thanks for that tip. The Sony Kd65xf9005 has twin Freesat tuners but like you say, recording options are limited. With catchup tv I might not need to record as often but would still like to have a 1100s or arris box if they are available. Have you seen Kd65xf9005 to compare?
| Wed 27 Nov 2019 0:16:16 #37 | -
There are separate reviews for each but no direct comparison I’ve seen. The Sony uses backlighting but lights groups of pixels together apparently. LG is what all current reviews favour but is OLED better or just the most recent innovation? It’s difficult to judge when only 4K demos are shown.
| Wed 27 Nov 2019 0:25:20 #38 | -
bob793 - 10 hours ago »
Just saw previous post. Why do you suggest I get an Amazon fire stick? Don’t modern TVs do everything that the stick does already? Is that to get 4K content? I’ve not considered that before but they are currently £20 on amazon so I guess that would be worth it for occasional use like I do with hd currently. I’m sceptical of Black Friday but am looking out for any genuine bargains. Not only do I have poor freeview reception where I live but curry’s are the only place to see new TVs in west Cornwall, I like Richer Sounds but they are a 2 hour drive away in Exeter. I might buy from there to get installation and guarantee if that’s on offer though, thanks for that tip. The Sony Kd65xf9005 has twin Freesat tuners but like you say, recording options are limited. With catchup tv I might not need to record as often but would still like to have a 1100s or arris box if they are available. Have you seen Kd65xf9005 to compare?Because the 4K firestick has both Netflix Amazon Prime and iplayer streaming in 4K and currently it's only £30.00. Amazon prime is especially good as the app supports native framerate streaming which gives silky smooth 24 fps streaming. The Netflix app isn't as good as it still uses drop frame to output at 60Hz.
If you have a laptop and install PLEX on the stick and the laptop you can stream photos and video files in super quality. (Plex supports native frame rate playback).
Richer Sound will deliver if you order on the net and also setup the TV for you.
OLED is the best picture quality. Blacks are pure black compared to back lit displays. On the other hand they cost a fair bit more.
| Wed 27 Nov 2019 10:40:33 #39 | -
I thought most 4K TVs have the ability to access 4K content via BBC iPlayer, Amazon Prime, Netflix etc so what does the 4K fire stick do that the tv can’t? I don’t have a laptop anymore but have several iPads, but again, I can watch the above on the iPads already.
| Wed 27 Nov 2019 18:40:00 #40 |
Reply »
You must log in to post.
