1. Guest,
    If you need help getting to know Xenforo, please see our guide here. If you have feedback or questions, please post those here.
    Dismiss Notice

Diff between today's progressive scan players vs. the first ones (5109)?

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Gregg Hart, Oct 21, 2001.

  1. Gregg Hart

    Gregg Hart Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 1999
    Messages:
    170
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have a Toshiba 5109 that I think looks killer on my 16X9 TV. I was wondering how much better the technology has gotten in 2 years since their debut. I am considering the Panny RP91. Is the progressive scan technology in that piece really going to make much a diff than the 5109? Thanks for your thoughts.
    Gregg
     
  2. Gregg Loewen

    Gregg Loewen Video Standards Instructor, THX Ltd.
    Insider

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 1999
    Messages:
    6,379
    Likes Received:
    32
    Location:
    New England
    Real Name:
    Gregg Loewen
    HI!
    IMHO, not much difference between the 5109 and the 6200 and the Panny 91 when talking about image quality. I have never used a 5109 but I have been told the 5109= the 6200 which I did own up to few weeks ago.
    The Panny give you DVD-A capability and it also has the auto zoom feature for non anamorphic material. It is for these 2 reasons that the RP-91 is such a hot seller. I got mine at etronics.com for $419 plus $21 to ship.
    FWIW,
    Gregg
    ------------------
    The Sonodome
    The Newest Sonotube
    Gregg's DVDs
    The Family Units
    [Edited last by Gregg Loewen on October 21, 2001 at 07:39 PM]
     
  3. Gregg Hart

    Gregg Hart Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 1999
    Messages:
    170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks Gregg. I guess I am trying to justify spending $450 for an increase in video quality from what I already have.
    Gregg
     
  4. Scott Merryfield

    Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 1998
    Messages:
    11,449
    Likes Received:
    651
    Location:
    Michigan
    I upgraded from the Toshiba 6200 to the RP-91, and am very happy with the results. I still own over 80 non-anamorphic widescreen DVD's, and the RP-91 provides a vastly superior picture for this type of material. Also, the 6200 had problems playing a few titles (T2:UE and Rocky:SE, to name two). The Panny has yet to have any problems.
    Picture quality on anamorphic or full frame material is a slight improvement, IMO, but nothing earth shattering. If you are bothered by the chroma bug, though, the RP-91 does not have this problem (I rarely noticed it on the Toshiba 6200 attached to a Toshiba 56H80 monitor, though).
    ------------------
    My DVD Collection
    AFI 100 Films to watch: 40 -> 4
     
  5. Gregg Hart

    Gregg Hart Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 1999
    Messages:
    170
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am unfamiliar with the Chroma Bug. Ignorance is bliss. Since I don't have any complaints about my picture quality I don't think fixing the Chroma bug would matter to me.
    ------------------
    My Home Theater
     
  6. Scott Merryfield

    Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 1998
    Messages:
    11,449
    Likes Received:
    651
    Location:
    Michigan
    The chroma bug was not a driving force in my decision to upgrade to the RP-91, either. The scaling feature was my main reason. Not only does this improve the picture quality of non-anamorphic widescreen material, but it is also a great convenience when viewing supplemental material on discs. I did not enjoy constantly changing my monitor's viewing mode as the supplements would change between full frame, anamorphic and non-anamorphic widescreen. Now, I simply leave my TV in FULL mode and let the RP-91 automatically handle the format changes.
    ------------------
    My DVD Collection
    AFI 100 Films to watch: 40 -> 4
     
  7. Allan Jayne

    Allan Jayne Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 1998
    Messages:
    2,406
    Likes Received:
    0
    Over the years improvements to progressive scan players have been in the area of dealing with video that is not 24 fps film with 3-2 pulldown. Still, some players de-interlace it much better than others.
    A progressive player that de-interlaces first and then does the conversion for 4:3 TV sets is capable of better downconversion quality, but only on the progressive output (unless it re-derives the interlaced output from the progressive frames). Not to say all the modern players do it that well.
    Other video hints: http://members.aol.com/ajaynejr/video.htm
     

Share This Page