progressive vs. interlaced where's the difference? motion. any time there is motion (action movies, sports, etc) progressive will give far far far better visual clarity then interlaced. that is why i will be picking up this player instead of the A2.that's all :) progressive vs. interlaced where's the difference? motion. any time there is motion (action movies, sports, etc) progressive will give far far far better visual clarity then interlaced. that is... » Read More progressive vs. interlaced where's the difference? motion. any time there is motion (action movies, sports, etc) progressive will give far far far better visual clarity then interlaced. that is why i will be picking up this player instead of the A2.that's all :) « Show Less
1007232
I don't mean to start an argument here but, some LCD and Plasma panels are available with refresh rates of 72Hz and even 120Hz, and as far as I know, 60Hz refresh rates are the norm for almost all HDTV's.Also, CRT is the only technology that can display interlaced video as such, "fixed pixel" displays paint their pictures progressively.
1007233
"If progressive were recorded at 60 fps, you'd be right. But, it's not, it's only recorded at 30 fps (30 frames per second). While interlaced is recorded at 60 fps, that's twice the motion fidelity, but only at half the vertical resolution (60 field per second)."What you say makes no sense. If progressive were recorded at 30fps and interlaced recorded at 60fps, there would effectively be no difference between them since both would display a complete frame every 30th of a second.
1007234
so should i buy a progressive camcorder or interlaced to record (film) and then upload to YouTube and/or make DVDs? Mostly concert stuff (not sports)
1035472
This guy gives a great comparison. There are some minor but important differences that may matter to you.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkgR_307OEo
1265207
Sorry for the confusion, there is absolutely no difference. Thank you for question..
876448
I just turned my blu ray player from 60Hz to 24Hz and the motion is more smooth in 3d surprisingly. Without this setting the motion was very blur and uneasy on eyes. My TV is 120Hz, it is LG 47LW5300 and the blu ray player is LG BD645. Thanks Jaeckel, I was thinking of returning the tv and player untill I set this option.
1035473
This guy gives a great comparison. There are some minor but important differences that may matter to you. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkgR_307OEo
1863992
I don't watch many 3D items, but it is ok. It takes a bit of adjusting for each 3D movie. In either 3D, or 2D, the higher the Hz, the better the action scenes will look. The 240 Hz is less blurry than 120 Hz, which is less blurry than 60Hz. If you are going to watch a lot of fast action sports, action movies, etc, get the highest Hz you can afford. The 600 Hz refresh rate of a Plasma screened TV will be even better. I watch few sports, or action movies, so I didn't need more than 60Hz for my viewing. I watch mostly murder mysteries, and the like, with little fast action. Some of the more cartoon-y 3D stuff is faster paced, and is not as good in 60 Hz as it would be in 120 Hz, or 240 Hz, or 600 Hz. I watch mostly 2D stuff, but have the 3D capability for when I want it. The price I paid for my Sceptre HDTV was very reasonable, and the set has been functioning very well so far. For fast action movies, get as many Hz as you can afford. Sceptre offered some slightly more expensive models with 120 Hz,and 240 Hz, but I don't watch enough fast action stuff to make it worth my buying such for my typical use. You may be different. If you tend to watch sports, movies like Rambo, Die Hard, etc, you should have higher than 60 Hz...the higher the better.
3418
Hi D.E. Soliday.In regards to your question about live action sports/live action... from what I experienced with the TV is that the TV handles it quite well. Don't get me wrong, it won't look like you're right on the field as some TVs make it seem (not saying this about the quality) the motion interpolation lacks on sports quite a bit.. not too much. Keep in mind this is a budget TV so you should not expect it to look like the ones that are priced on the higher end. But overall, it makes watching sports very fun especially with the 3D turned on. I hope I answered your question.
843959
That depends... If you are playing something at 1080p 30hz the U-Vision adapter will upscale it to 2160p (4k) 30hz. If you are playing something that is over 30hz you will get an output of 1080p at the same refresh rate as whatever you are playing whether it's 60hz or 120hz. But the converter will give you expanded color depth and some better details. I'm assuming you are using hz and fps interchangeably for the answer above. If not, see below... The screen of the TV itself will always refresh at 120hz no matter the input, what you are limited by is the image processor and hdmi cables bandwidth. If you are displaying something that is 30 frames per second on a TV that refreshes at 120hz each frame of video will be displayed for 4 of the TV frames. If you are watching something that is 60 fps it will show up for 2 of the TV frames. The only way to send a true 120fps signal to a TV is to do so from a computer as far as I know. Tvs that have motion smoothing will interpolate (make up) a frame that is partway between the actual frames that the video source is putting out so that the motion appears smoother. This TV (depending on what firmware you have) does do this. The only downside is that you ha e to access the manufacturer service menu to enable or disable it.
1300682
Mary, these play both, with the added benefit of making most regular DVDs sharper than they ordinarily play as well. We've been really pleased with this aspect, as I hadn't realized this when I purchased it! Hope this helps!
34097
You will not notice any difference when playing HD-DVD's in the A20 or the XA2. The only difference will be the XA2 has analog outputs if you have a non HDMI receiver, and it has the REON chip for DVD upconversion (which is superior to what the A20 has)...If you have an older receiver with analog inputs (no HDMI) and have a lot of older DVD's then definately get the XA2.
1449571
PS2 didn't offer progressive scan..but who buys the cheaper model? it'll be the same as xbox360 -> everyone buys the more expensive one.plus all the first dvd players that cost a lot died pretty quick..
93984
I researched both units. The biggest difference is in the speakers. The Right/Left on the 7200 are the tall-boy units (3 piece instead of 2 piece speakers). On paper they actually perform poorer (lower rated range), but I bet in person reviewers say they are better (especially on mids). Also, the surround speakers are 2-way speakers instead of 1-way.Also, it will upscale video signals to HD(your RCA VHS player, DVD player or game console). Overall, I did not care about the upscaling and the slightly better speakers were not enough of a selling point for the 7200. If you are serious about speakers, you can always upgrade the speakers later on to ones even better than the 7200. I researched both units. The biggest difference is in the speakers. The Right/Left on the 7200 are the tall-boy units (3 piece instead of 2 piece speakers). On paper they actually perform poorer (lower rated range), but I bet in person reviewers say they are better (especially on mids). Also, the surround speakers are 2-way speakers instead of 1-way.Also, it will upscale video signals to HD(your RCA VHS player, DVD player or game console). Overall, I did not care about the upscaling and the slightly better speakers were not enough of a selling point for the 7200. If... » Read More I researched both units. The biggest difference is in the speakers. The Right/Left on the 7200 are the tall-boy units (3 piece instead of 2 piece speakers). On paper they actually perform poorer (lower rated range), but I bet in person reviewers say they are better (especially on mids). Also, the surround speakers are 2-way speakers instead of 1-way.Also, it will upscale video signals to HD(your RCA VHS player, DVD player or game console). Overall, I did not care about the upscaling and the slightly better speakers were not enough of a selling point for the 7200. If you are serious about speakers, you can always upgrade the speakers later on to ones even better than the 7200. « Show Less
891341
That is a reference to the "refresh rate", meaning basically that a higher refresh rate makes for a smoother picture if fast action is involved. Usually sports fans and gamers look for a higher refresh rate.
261344
There appears to be no difference. I have had this player for about a year and a half. The Blu Ray is great. It also does a nice job of upconverting my old DVDs to HD quality. And, we have had no problems playing DVDs from other regions. It is the best player I have owned.
871893
Frankly I can't tell the difference. I questioned others and was told that in a fast action game the picture is smoother with 120hz. Well I watched the same game with two TV's side by side one 60hz and 120hz. I couldn't see the difference. Perhaps an video expert could see it, but I couldn't.
449718
I do not know the exact answer, but my experience as a videographer tells me, that most likely there is no difference. The most significant step up would be Sony DVM 63HD tapes that are of a really higher quality, and can record in two formats. The are also very expensive.
1934848
BTW...yesterday I was in BB and Sony has just released a 32" XBR9 1080p with 120hz Motionflow technology... and it is up on the Sony Style website.. so much for what the salesman tell you that Sony is not going to produce..But compared to the Sony 32" 1080p 60 hz.. I thought the higher priced model with 120hz looked grainy to me. I really didn't see the $200 difference in the (retail price). Perhaps on Blu Ray disc viewing there is a difference.. GLTA