RPTV vs. FPTV - choices

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Mike OConnell, Nov 10, 2001.

  1. Mike OConnell

    Mike OConnell Second Unit

    Jun 14, 1999
    Likes Received:
    Overland Park KS
    Real Name:
    I am in the process of trying to decide which set-up is in my best interest given my viewing habits and installation limitations:
    Viewing: 60% TV - almost all sports and news - cable connection, 40% DVD movies - always OAR [​IMG]. Viewing time - probably about 25 hours/week.
    Seating postion: 13.5 feet from RPTV screen, about 15 feet from FPTV
    FPTV #1: 92"-100" Stewart Grayhawk (1.78:1) using wall-mounting - no masking and a Sanyo PLV-60HT. ($6000 +/-).
    FPTV #2: 72" Stewart Grayhawk (1.78:1) with electric 4-way masking system and a Sanyo PLV-60HT. ($7000 +/-).
    RPTV: 73" diagonal top-of-the-line Mitsubishi widescreen ($6000 +/-).
    I see no advantage of the FPTV#2 over the RPTV as the screen size is the same and regular TV viewing, albeit in a stretch type mode, will not shorten FPTV bulb life. I will not be using an HTPC, as this would be way off the wife acceptance factor!
    FPTV#1 probably gives me the best movie experience, but replacement of a bulb every 1 - 1-1/2 years for $450 is a reason for concern.
    Please comment and give me reasons to go one way or the other - and please don't hold back on other suggestions. See my current set-up here:
  2. Brandon B

    Brandon B Second Unit

    Mar 23, 2001
    Likes Received:
    Some thoughts:
    Option 2 is sort of useless, as you state. Since the screen would be 1.5' farther away, it would in fact result in an effectively smaller image.
    This is also a factor in option 1. At 1.5' farther, 100" reduces to about 90" at the RPTV position, so you not gaining a full 28" really.
    In favor of option 1, I assume you have 2 main speakers that will flank the screen. With the FP you will probably have more flexibility in positioning them, and less degradation of your imaging by not having a LARGE box between them. Also, a screen and a 2-10 lb. projector are a lot easier to fiddle around with than a 500-600 lb. TV.
    Downside, though maybe easier to poition your center with the RPTV.
    I personally am pursuing the tube TV + projector option, but if I could afford (and fit) a $6000 RPTV, I might have gone the RPTV route. Given your TV watching levels, I'd lean towards the RPTV. Who want sto use up a $450 bulb watching the news?
  3. Doug_B

    Doug_B Screenwriter

    Feb 11, 2001
    Likes Received:
    I'm debating the same issue, although I am just in the "pre-planning" stages given I'm still working the audio piece. My TV viewing habits are similar with respect to lots of sports, but I gather my percentage of TV viewing is actually higher. Although I'll have the flexibility to watch TV in another room on a reasonably sized old TV (35") for my viewing distance, I'll definitely want to be watching most of the sporting events in my media room with the larger view.
    My two biggest concerns with going the FPTV route are cost and TV viewing (let's assume the FPTV costs would be the same as yours, at a minimum, but the RPTV costs would be between 3-4K for me). One aspect of the TV viewing you didn't mention that is of concern to me is lighting. If I'm going to be watching Sunday football on the large screen, for example, I don't want to watch in the dark; I want my window drapes open (window faces east; I assume you can get your room dark). Although an RPTV is also sensitive to light, I expect it to be markedly better in most cases than a FPTV system. I may be willing to deal with bulb costs, but I would also be concerned with line doubling; from what I am reading, I'm more likely to need an external doubler with FPTV that with RPTV (selection-dependent, though).
    My biggest concern with the RPTV is what was mentioned above, the overall sound of the audio being compromised with a big box between the mains. Given that I will have mains in the 2-3K range, and they might be dipole ribbons, this may be a real concern for me, but I don't know to what extent. I will have my 35" TV between them until I go with larger screen, so I may be able to do a test here, as the 35"er can be moved in after I get the audio set up.
    Since I have yet to do any critical auditioning in video yet, I cannot really offer an experienced opinion; I am as inquisitive about this as you.
    Keep us posted on your progress.
    "Today is a good day to die." ...Old Lodge Skins
  4. Allan Jayne

    Allan Jayne Cinematographer

    Nov 1, 1998
    Likes Received:
    You have a second versus in your question, in other words it is not just an apples to apples comparison between FPTV and RPTV.
    Your second versus is CRT (your chosen RPTV) versus DLP/LCD (your chosen FPTV). THere are also CRT FPTV sets available, they are larger and heavier but can still be mounted on the ceiling.
    WIth CRT you have to spend more time tweaking, especially converging every 6 months or so. There is no bulb to replace but you have to be careful about keeping the contrast down to forestall uneven screen wear (burn-in).
    I am not sure about the details for your chosen FPTV -- whether it is LCD or DLP, what the pixel count is, what the cost of a replacement bulb is. The current crop of DLP's exhibit rainbow fringing as your eyes follow subject motion, some people find it more noticeable than others. The current crop of LCD's don't give a really black black.
    I have an LCD RPTV, I chose it because it needs no convergence adjustments and weighs very little for its size (49" 110 lb)
    More video hints: http://members.aol.com/ajaynejr/video.htm

Share This Page