Those with 4:3 HDTVs, would you switch to 16:9 HDTV if you could (and vice versa)?

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by elMalloc, Jan 23, 2002.

  1. elMalloc

    elMalloc Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2001
    Messages:
    787
    Likes Received:
    0
    Mainly is the big benefit of 16:9 HDTV that they are future proof and that the black bars are not as large? (Even though for 4:3 stuff they are).

    I play games (PS2, XBOX, GC) and DVD movies (90% in widescreen) as much as I watch cable TV.

    What should I get a 16:9 or 4:3 HDTV? I almost feel guilty saying I'd like the extra room in a 4:3 HDTV for video games (are all xbox and gamecube games able to display in 16:9 mode?).

    How much do I lose with a 55" 4:3 HDTV playing a widescreen movie vs a 47" 16:9 HDTV in widescreen? I presume a lot, can you still take advantage of anamorphic movies on a 4:3 HDTV?

    Thanks for the input,

    ELmO :b
     
  2. John Morris

    John Morris Guest

    Hi,
    Go HERE to compare image sized on 4:3 vs 16:9 TVs.
    I had a 50" 4:3 and recently upgraded to a 16:9 HDTV. It was the best money that I ever spent on my home theater! Once you go HDTV, you will never want to watch any other TV.
     
  3. elMalloc

    elMalloc Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2001
    Messages:
    787
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks for the link!

    I was comparing 4:3 HDTV vs 16:9 HDTV though, but I'll look at the link now.

    The thing is I would not be using it for only home theater, though that isa huge reason for me going to an HDTV (progressive scan too). But, I'm having a hard time deciding, I still use cable TV (4:3) and I think most games are still 4:3 even though some gamecube games (and I thikn all xbox games) are 480p (but not sure if that means 16:9 also?). Also I'm not sure if 4:3 HDTVs can take advantage of anamorphic DVDs.

    I would also say going from a regular rear projection to an HDTV is a big step..but what's the step of a 4:3 HDTV to 16:9 HDTV?

    Thanks!

    ELmO
     
  4. Clinton McClure

    Clinton McClure Casual Enthusiast

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 1999
    Messages:
    4,283
    Likes Received:
    353
    Location:
    Central Arkansas
    Real Name:
    Clint
    For several years, I was using a 50" 4:3 RPTV. I went out and bought a 40" 16:9 RPTV and found the picture size between the two (after matting the 4:3 for letterbox images) was within about 2 inches of each other. I can sacrifice 2 inches for a 200% picture improvement. [​IMG]
     
  5. John Morris

    John Morris Guest

    Elmo: Go HERE and see if you can get OTA HD broadcasts.
     
  6. elMalloc

    elMalloc Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2001
    Messages:
    787
    Likes Received:
    0
    Clinton, but I'm saying more than half my content isn't 16:9(widescreen), most of my games are still 4:3 I believe and my cable TV is still 4:3. Now compare your larger 4:3 set size with the 4:3 picture your 16:9 is putting out and tell me what I should choose if both were HDTV?

    I'm stumped because although I do love DVDs, if games aren't taking advantage of 16:9 then I wouldn't do it..I play more games than I do watch DVDs.

    Thanks for the links,

    ElmO
     
  7. Philip Hamm

    Philip Hamm Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 1999
    Messages:
    6,873
    Likes Received:
    2
    People, please pay attention to the question. [​IMG]
    He's contemplating between a 4x3 HDTV and a 16x9 HDTV, not a 4x3 NTSC and a 16x9 HD.
    I say for your use a 4x3 that can do 16x9 HD would be the best purchase. Don't feel "guilty" for watching 4x3 material, that's just plain silly.
     
  8. John Royster

    John Royster Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2001
    Messages:
    1,088
    Likes Received:
    0
    Most of my PS2 and Xbox (all of them?) games can be displayed 16x9. Hope that helps. If you're curious about it maybe ask in game forum?

    Believe it or not one of the primary reasons i got a 16x9 HDTV was games. That and HD, DVDs.
     
  9. elMalloc

    elMalloc Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2001
    Messages:
    787
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wow, now I do know Xbox games are 480P, though does 480p automatically mean 16:9? Someone posted a screenshot of Halo on a 16:9 set and they were debating whether it was stretched or it was really in 16:9.

    4:3 just look larger for games than 16:9...especially if the 4:3 game doesn't support 16:9. I'll go ask some gamers now.

    -ELmO
     
  10. Michael St. Clair

    Joined:
    May 3, 1999
    Messages:
    6,001
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have a 53" 4:3 HDTV with a true 16:9 mode for 480p and 1080i. When I watch 16:9 material I have a 48.6" virtual screen. I have converged and tweaked it and the picture is fantastic in all modes, and even NTSC sources (like sports!) look great on it. I don't currently have room for a wider set than this one, so basically my set is just 'tall', not 'narrow'. I of course watch everything in OAR.
    It is totally future-proof because all anamorphic and HD material is shown correctly.
    I have no desire to switch. Depending on your viewing habits, 4:3 HD sets can be fantastic.
    Yet I know that some people with 40" Toshiba and 47" Panasonic 16:9 sets that would sneer at me and tell that I bought an antique and that I didn't know what I was doing. [​IMG] The truth of the matter is that sports is the killer app for HDTV and most sports fans would be better off with a 4:3 HD set even if they also happen to be movie fans.
    ps IMAX films look fantastic =)
    pps All XBox games are 480p but most are not 16:9. I do play mine in 16:9 when I feel like it...and 4:3 at other times. Since I have a true anamorphic 480p squeeze mode, it works great either way. http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htfo...&threadid=8539
     
  11. ChrisMatson

    ChrisMatson Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2000
    Messages:
    2,181
    Likes Received:
    0
    I chose the Sony 36XBR450 over a slighlty larger widescreen HDTV for several reasons:
    1. 1. The physical space available was limited to roughly 40 inches to fit my speakers and component rack in the living room of my apartment.[/list=1]
      • 2. I use my TV for gaming and I didn't want to worry about burn-in.[/list=2]
        • 3. I still watch mostly 4:3 cable television and will not be able to switch to satellite.[/list=3]
          • 4. The 16:9 mode is great for anamorphic DVDs and I can watch HDTV in the future when I eventually purchase a receiver.[/list=4]



            Consider what your uses will be and how long you plan on keeping the TV (including when you have to move it).



            -Chris
     
  12. elMalloc

    elMalloc Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2001
    Messages:
    787
    Likes Received:
    0
    Like Madden on gamecube says it supports 16:9 so you can see the whole field at once.

    When you switch to 16:9 on your 4:3 HDTV, it appears fine right (but with black bars)?

    Your TV is able to squeeze for anamorphic broadcasts, what TV do you have? I'm looking for a 47"+ TV that is capable of all that you say. You are losing practically nothing when going to 16:9 and that's what I want, I don't want to lose space when watching 4:3 on a 16:9 because currently I watch 4:3 a lot more than 16:9 stuff.

    Thanks,

    ELmO
     
  13. Jantzen

    Jantzen Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Messages:
    97
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well I own a 61" 4:3 Sony HDTV...
    I've had it for about 1 1/2 years and the main reason I went this route was that most of my viewing is still going to be in 4:3 for a while - plus the set does the 16:9 squeeze so in my eyes I get the best of both worlds.
    I really did want a 16:9 set though - mostly because it looked really cool - but the above reasons and most importantly the cost differrence at the time to get a 16:9 made it a no-brainer for me. (about $1000 difference!)
    No doubt - my next TV will be 16:9 but for now I don't regret the 4:3 HDTV.
    I use it for Progressive Scan DVD, HDTV, XBOX and Gamecube and all look wonderful - and it's nice to play the 4:3 games full screen - but I still prefer the 16:9 games they just look better to me. Oh here's a list of 16:9 and 480p games for all systems here
    I think the only regret that I have is not enough 480P/1080i inputs. I only have 1 and need to use a Radio Shack switch box to share the input. I don't know what the current HDTV's have input wise but the more the better! Unless you have a receiver that can handle switching HDTV Component Signals...
    Anyway I don't think that you can go wrong either way.
     
  14. John Morris

    John Morris Guest

    To answer your header question, No, not if it cost me money.
     
  15. elMalloc

    elMalloc Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2001
    Messages:
    787
    Likes Received:
    0
    Jantzen- that link took me to an odd thread, you sure that's the right link for a list of games supported by 16:9/480p?

    Thanks,

    ELmO
     
  16. Jantzen

    Jantzen Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Messages:
    97
    Likes Received:
    0
    I fixed the link above..

    Sorry about that - I cut and paste and lost the last digit in the process so it went to the wrong thread ID...
     
  17. Richard Burzynski

    Richard Burzynski Second Unit

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 1997
    Messages:
    466
    Likes Received:
    0
    elMalloc:

    It is very likely that premium HD programming (HBO, SHO, etc.) signals will be encrypted in near future. With the exception of Mitsubishi, there will be no retro upgrade path for existing HD set owners once the new standards are finalized. What will will happen is that exisiting HD sets will only be able to display a down-rezzed version of these premium channels. The two possible interface formats are firewire and dvi.

    If you want to watch DVD's via a progressive DVD player and/or if you're lucky enough to receive HD OTA broadcasts, and if you decide to get an HD satellite hookup, then you have very good reason to get an HD set.

    But if you think that today's HD sets are "future-proof", you may be more than a little disappointed down the road.

    Rich B.
     
  18. elMalloc

    elMalloc Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2001
    Messages:
    787
    Likes Received:
    0
    Good, because I really don't care about the future concerning Televisions - I'm concerned about the PRESENT.

    I don't buy a TV to watch it in full glory 3 years from now.

    People are telling me it's for the future (16x9), but I'm not looking for that - I'm looking for games played at their best PRESENTLY, DVDs looking amazing (black bars or none), and acceptable CABLE.

    -ELmO
     
  19. Rich Malloy

    Rich Malloy Producer

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2000
    Messages:
    3,998
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  20. JohnnyHK

    JohnnyHK Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    105
    Likes Received:
    0
    I've had my 16x9 HDTV for a couple months now and there is absolutely no way I would ever go back. I watch probably 50/40/10 TV/DVD/HDTV and it all looks great. I think the key is getting a set with excellent stretch modes for 4x3 material. My Pioneer's "Natural Wide" stretch mode is fantastic. I've had people come over and ask why the image isn't stretched. It's that good. I also like the fact that my TV is optimized for viewing the best available sources (DVD and HDTV). It just makes sense...to me anyway.
    I see 4x3 TVs in the stores now and they look so dated. [​IMG]
    All smiles and 0 regrets from this wide-screener.
    John
     

Share This Page