Proscan TV for gaming

[PC-Engine]

It doesn't matter if it has spaghetti inside or is powered by day old socks. The end result is what matters and the "best picture" is the "best picture". And, uh, you're out of order. I only mentioned the tube in the last reply I think - and I didn't say anything about the tube being great - it is only part of the equation so it matters a lot but is not everything and certainly not irrelevant. Whatever else is needed is in there because it seems the 910 is the "best available" CRT you (well not you apparently) can get.

And how does this relate to Deepak's inquiry? Unless you can find the "best available" SONY tv for $400-$500 nobody cares man. No one cares what YOU consider the best tv > $2000 since no one here was asking for recommendations in that price range. If you want to brag about what YOU consider the best available then maybe you should create your own thread.

I know what Squeeze mode is. I had forgotten that you were suggesting a 4:3 TV so when I saw it, I laughed. Man, 1080i in 16:9 (because it's locked to that mode) on that Zenith = postage stamp.

Um..and if you had a native widescreen tv you'd get a postage stamp 4:3 picture..your point?

At the end of the day he doesn't have $700+ to spend. If he did he could get a bigger Zenith too.

Anyway the new Sanyo HDTVs seem to be comparable to the Zeniths, but it seems you can only get them at Walmart or Sams Club. BTW, what chip do the Sanyos use for upscaling? I also heard the Sanyos have picture lag when watching DVDs in progressive.

 

[Ty]

And how does this relate to Deepak's inquiry? Unless you can find the "best available" SONY tv for $400-$500 nobody cares man. No one cares what YOU consider the best tv > $2000 since no one here was asking for recommendations in that price range. If you want to brag about what YOU consider the best available then maybe you should create your own thread.

Sorry if you thought it was bragging (not sure how spending just 1.4k is bragging - go figure) - I was just kind of excited about ordering it though now I'm leaning towards a 46" TV instead. I guess it was just a way for you to pop that small boner of yours to flame Sony.

Um..and if you had a native widescreen tv you'd get a postage stamp 4:3 picture..your point?

The Zenith has NO choice but to be in 16:9 when in 1080i. Most 16:9 can zoom (some good, some not so good) so no, it won't be the same comparison.

At the end of the day he doesn't have $700+ to spend. If he did he could get a bigger Zenith too.

Absolutely but they might still not be as good as the Sanyo. TV sets in the 25 - 27 & 31 - 32 inch range, Sanyo is #1 in terms of reliability. Zenith is in the bottom half (actually in 31 - 32 they are second to the last just ahead of RCA - w00t!). Anyhow, it just goes back to the initial questions I was trying to get him to ask himself. Along with budget, what will he be using the TV for? Widescreen movies or mostly SD? How long does he plan on keeping it? Can he receive OTA HD signals? Is he interested in Cablecard? HTPC? There are a whole host of questions that can help further define exactly what he is looking for.

Anyway the new Sanyo HDTVs seem to be comparable to the Zeniths, but it seems you can only get them at Walmart or Sams Club. BTW, what chip do the Sanyos use for upscaling? I also heard the Sanyos have picture lag when watching DVDs in progressive.

Ah, a decent question finally. I actually don't know what chip they use. And yes, I've read about the picture lag but some have it and others don't (they haven't tracked it down to just progressive afaik - might be a particular input somehow). Walmarts are really good about taking stuff back as well from what I've heard.

 

[PC-Engine]

The Zenith has NO choice but to be in 16:9 when in 1080i. Most 16:9 can zoom (some good, some not so good) so no, it won't be the same comparison.

But it still isn't a complete solution. Some people prefer a 4:3 tv and some a 16:9. You can't have both without tradeoffs. The way you state things seems to indicate one is better than the other which isn't the case. Regardless you're not even factoring the extra money you have to pay for the 30" widescreen over the 27" 4:3. As a matter of fact if Deepak had more money to spend, getting a 32" 4:3 gives you the same size 16:9 picture as a 30" native 16:9 set. Not only that but the native 16:9 set will only have a measely 25" 4:3 picture. So in the end a bigger 4:3 set that costs the same as a smaller 16:9 is actually a better choice

 

[Ty]

But it still isn't a complete solution. Some people prefer a 4:3 tv and some a 16:9. You can't have both without tradeoffs.

I absolutely agree with this which is why I was trying to ask the questions that I did earlier that essentially boil down to, "What are your plans for this TV?"

The way you state things seems to indicate one is better than the other which isn't the case. Regardless you're not even factoring the extra money you have to pay for the 30" widescreen over the 27" 4:3.

Yes, the comparison was apples to oranges.