Any TVs currently on market that accept a 1080p signal? (1 Viewer)

[Sami Kallio]

I think you misunderstood me. There is a difference between 1080i and 1080p native sets. As you see Doug mentioned HD-DVD viewed at 1080i vs. 1080p. 1080p set with 1080i input IS HD-DVD viewed in 1080p, not 1080i. You view HD-DVD in 1080i only on 1080i native sets.

 

[Arthur S]

Sami

Bear with me. I guess I just don't understand how you got from this: "for movies it won't make a difference as they are shot 24 frames per second", to this: "can see the difference between HD DVD viewed on 1080i vs. 1080P, I agree".

 

[Sami Kallio]

1080i60 to 1080p set is the same as 1080p60 to 1080p set if done correctly. However, there is a difference if the set is natively 1080i. Research 3:2 pulldown, that should clear some of this up.

 

[Arthur S]

Thanks Sami

Since 24 fps Phantom of the Opera looked better on 1080P input capable TV, anyone forward thinking should seriously consider 1080P. With new 1080P sets coming out in a couple months, and prices dropping, I have to agree with Allan Jayne.

My pleasure to let you have the last word. I'm talked out .

 

[Sami Kallio]

Since you insist of me having the last word, I will.

If you read the article posted, it mentions nothing about 1080p input capable display, only 1080p native display. 1080p native displays with 1080i input are NOT 1080i displays, they are 1080p, and included in the following sentence: "But the HD DVD Phantom looked especially sharp and detailed when viewed on a set with 1080P native resolution"

That article does not compare the PQ between 1080p set with 1080i input versus 1080p set with 1080p input. The articles that do compare them report little to no difference in PQ.

Hope that clears it up a little.

 

[ChrisWiggles]

I would interpret that quote to be that they were viewing on two different displays, one at 1080i which naturally must be a CRT display driven at 1080i, and another which is a digital display with a native resolution of 1080p. It is not clear at all whether the display accepted 1080p, or whether they were using 1080p output from an HD-DVD player. I would expect they were not outputting 1080p, and were feeding 1080i to a 1080p display. Obviously we have no way of knowing based on this excerprt, and I don't know the whole article so don't know if it is described there.

Regardless, the only thing we can really draw from this quote is that they were most likely viewing one display, a CRT driven at 1080i, and another display, a digital with a native panel resolution of 1080p. The second conclusion is also dubious because we do not know if they are including wobulated "1080p" under the 1080p umbrella.

In anycase, I would only draw conclusions that they saw differences between these two displays, and without more detail in terms of what they were observing, I think healthy skepticism would lead one to think that they were mainly seeing differences between the two displays, and not so much anything to do with native 1080p or not. If they were viewing a 1080p digital, especially a 1080p DLP, the MTF performance of that is much different than the MTF of a CRT, so their statement of "especially sharp and detailed" probably has much more to do with MTF than anything else in particular.

 

[Eric Thrall]

I was just at a store looking at a Mitsubishi WD-57731 and was told that it definitely has 1080p inputs - can anyone confirm that? I might just buy that one...

 

[John_Graz]

My dad just bought a Vizio from Costco. The Costco Website sates this:

http://www.costco.com/Browse/Product.aspx?Prodid=11165572&whse=BC&Ne=4000000&N=4001374&Mo=45&No=30&Nr=P_CatalogName:BC&cat=2341&Ns=P_Price|1||P_SignDesc1&Sp=C&topnav=&mc=79
I don't know alot about HD TVs - Is this TV what you are asking ?

 

[Sami Kallio]

No, it's a native 768p, not 1080p with 1080p inputs. The Mitsubishi he mentioned earlier is 1080p with 1080p inputs.

 

[ChrisWiggles]

As stated, no it's not a 1080p display, and it doesn't sound like it accepts 1080p inputs.

 

[Eric Thrall]

OK - I found the spec for this TV (http://www.mitsubishi-tv.com/img/262190) and it definitely has 1080p inputs, so that clears that issue for me. I've had another issue with this TV (in another thread) but it looks like that has been cleared up, so I will go ahead and have this one delivered to me.

 

[russdog]

No "signal compatability" is a very different issue. That refers only to the type of signal it can "somehow cope with". That set will "cope" by converting input signals into its native resolution. The quality of such conversions can vary widely. Also, notice that the list you quoted does not include 1080p, only 1080i. This means that it cannot even cope with a 1080p input signal.

What people here are arguing about is sets that have a native 1080 res that can accept a 1080p signal. The debate is about whether that is better than taking in 1080i and converting it to 1080p. Some but not all HDTV signals are 1080i, none are 1080p, and that's not gonna change. For those who are worried about 1080p, it's because of concern about HD formats for DVD and/or games.

 

[Parker Clack]

Eric:

I have a Mits WD 62625 and would really like to upgrade it to the new WD 65731. They are right at the same width in size at 58 1/4 inches vs. 58 1/2 inches respectively.

 

[RAF]

A couple of clarifications regarding some of the comments made here:

Yes, a 1080p set will display a 1080p picture from all sources (including if it is limited to 1080i input and below) since it uses internal scaling to produce the 1080p image. Thus a 1080p set without 1080p input is still a 1080p set. However, there is one important caveat: If the set is limited to 1080i input then you are at the mercy of the display's internal scaler for the final picture. If the 1080p set (like my HP MD5880n display) accepts 1080p input then you can use an external scaler to produce the 1080p picture. This not only will produce a better result (I'm using a DVDO VP30 HD scaler to achieve 1080p from lesser sources) but it also allows you to upgrade the electronics without tossing the display. And, of course, 1080p native material (I use an HTPC for this to deliver 1080p WMVHD native material) is outstanding. Blu-ray, we are told, will add to this list of 1080p sources shortly.

Another item to consider is the acceptance of 1080p/24 signals. Granted, 1080i film sources scaled up to 1080p can be quite nice since the progressive images come from two identical interlaced fields (unlike video where slightly offset fields can result in motion artifacts when comparing i to p) but the best result will occur if a player (like the upcoming Pioneer Blu-ray) will output 1080p at 24 frames per second (1080p/24) thus matching the frame rate of the film source. The ideal 1080p display will be one that accepts 1080p at a variety of frame rates including 24fps or multiples thereof. In those cases there will be no need to apply a 2:3 pull down to synchronize the frame rate with a 60Hz display (film sources only, of course.) Once again, my HP display will accept 1080p/24/30/60 so I'm looking forward to seeing 1080p/24 source material.

The bottom line, if we are going to look for the best possible monitor for the future formats (within a reasonable time frame) would be to try to get a monitor that accepts native 1080p at frames rates of 24, 30 and 60. That will cover most of the signals that will be available and result in the best of all worlds in digital display.

 

[Mike_Craft]

I work at Future shop in the TV section. All TVs on the market are deffenitly NOT 1080P. All the 1080P sets out now are simply "virtual" and the signal is upconverted to 1080p. To claim this is true 1080p is like claiming that watching a regular DVD upconverted to 720p is like watching an hdDVD/Bluy ray movie.

The true 1080P tvs must have HDMI 1.3. That specification was only finalized a couple months ago. At work, Im told that the new sets are all coming in a couple months which have true 1080p support with hdmi 1.3. Go ask around at your local tv store. If the employess know anything, they can confirm that all TVs have HDMI 1.2 ports. And BTW, the PS3 will have HDMI 1.3 output of course.

 

[Sami Kallio]

Mike, hopefully I don't come out as rude but you really need to do some research, it will help you in your job. 1080i interlaced to 1080p is capable of delivering identical image to the 1080p input device due to source limitations. And you don't need HDMI 1.3 for 1080p, the biggest thing for that version are the HD soundtracks.

 

[Mike_Craft]

ok then.. perhaps your right. But all the tvs We sell right now are listed as virtual 1080p

 

[Sami Kallio]

Hitachi's? Those would be native 720p sets, not 1080p.

 

[ChrisWiggles]

AS pointed out this is not correct at all.

DVI and HDMI since its inception has been capable of transmitting 1080p60 (and beyond for some computer resolutions I believe). There is no need for HDMI 1.3 to allow for this capability. However, many displays do not have the electronic capability to accept 1080p signals, this is especially true with consumer displays which although they may be 1080p native sets, only accept 1080i. That has nothing to do with the HDMI version at all. This, however, may also not be that restrictive, because IF (and that's a big if) the display can do proper inverse telecine, you end up with the full 1080p image reconstructed even with a 1080i output from a 1080p source (such as the toshiba HDDVD player). In cases where a display does IVT correctly, you are actually looking at the full 1080p native source as it is encoded on the disc at 1080p24.

 

[RAF]

As others have correctly pointed out your statement is filled with inaccuracies. Not only do I own a 1080p set that displays a 1080p picture from 1080p sources (the HP MD5880n showing 1080p content from WMVHD discs via an HTPC) but I've also personally auditioned the Brillian RPM that also accepts and displays native 1080p. True, there is still not a lot of native 1080p material out there (until Sony and Pioneer Blu-ray players hit the market) but you are totally off base when you claim that all sets upscale to 1080p.

And you are also completely off the mark with your statement that you must have HDMI 1.3 to display 1080p. The current sets that accept 1080p native input do so over HDMI 1.1 connections. 1.3 increases some of the video bandwidth but 1.1 and 1.2 are completely capable of sending 1080p signals uncompressed to such a set. The major thrust of 1.3 are the new audio modes and this format won't really be in major use until, I estimate 3Q 2007 or so.

Please check your facts before making pronouncements.