Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Community Talk, Chatter & Official Stuff The Lounge 
Thread started 07 Oct 2010 (Thursday) 02:54
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

GKPE 8, Yet more NZ ramblings from some flightless Kiwis.

 
manipula
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,290 posts
Joined Jan 2007
Location: English Wookie in Wellington, NZ.
     
Oct 21, 2010 05:01 |  #136

Paulos75 wrote in post #11136987 (external link)
Anybody got suggestions for a good point and squirt, looking at doing a week long kayak tour round the Bay of Islands at the beginning of next year. Not fussed bout taking my 450D out on the water, not too far off upgrading anyway, just not over enthralled about exposing my lenses to that environment (I think we can all picture in our minds what could go wrong). Besides it's a bit on the big side. So looking for a P&S with good IQ (shoots in raw?), good range from reasonably wide to reasonably long (vague I know:D ) and just a good all-round unit.

For weatherproof and durable, look at the Panasonic FT2 and end there.

If you want good IQ (or better than FT2) and RAW buy an S95 with housing or the S90 and housing. If you want zoom, paddle closer. :D


Cheers, Dave.
www.manipula.co.nz (external link) :: Gear list for the nerds (external link) :: flickr (external link) :: ModelMayhem (external link)
:: insert scathing quip here! ::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
scotttnz
"tick, tick, tick, tick......"
Avatar
3,923 posts
Gallery: 80 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 197
Joined May 2005
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
     
Oct 21, 2010 16:18 as a reply to  @ manipula's post |  #137

tim wrote in post #11136514 (external link)
Guys, i'm redoing my entire lounge from bottom to top and could use some tips, mostly about the electornics. I'm going to buy myself a 50" TV this weekend, give or take 5". I also want a way to stream movies from my PC to the TV wirelessly (can't do wired), so a PS3, blu ray player, or a random device. Also a surround sound system, a nice wide low entertainment unit for it to sit on, coffee table, bookcase, and sofas. Suggestions would be appreciated, especially on the make/model of the TV and the best way to stream movies to it.

Mevunky wrote in post #11136696 (external link)
High end Panasonic Plasma for TV IMO over the all but most expensive LCD offerings which are far to expensive for what are still average blacks.

What format are the movies on the PC? h264 mkv container?

Sound is another kettle of fish, need to outline a budget or ill suggest you buy some Krell and be done with it ;)

Depends how and what you are going to watch on your TV.
Panasonic Plasma is hard ro beat for night time or darker room movies. But I'd probably go with LED if daylight viewing, or gaming was a primary concern.

I recently got a 54" Panasonic Plasma and love it. It is a much better movie experience than the LCD I had before, and that is what I use it for most. I haven't played with the movie streaming etc yet, but will get to that, but I'm not one for pirated movies, so unless I rip my DVD and Blu-ray collection to my PC, which would need a lot of hard drive space, I can't see me making much use of it.

I experimented with a HTPC, but in the end couldn't be bothered with the hassle of having to fiddle with computers after work just to watch TV, so went and got a Tivo which just works. And I have a stand alone Blu-ray player for high def movies.

We have just finished renovating, which resulted in the kids having a "play room" so the old TV and Playstation have moved to there.


Ex CANON 5D owner - defected to m4/3
Bodies: Panasonic G9|GX85 DJI Mavic Pro
Zooms: Panasonic 7-14 f4|12-35 f2.8|35-100 f2.8|100-300 II f4-5.6|14-140 f3.5-5.6
Primes: Panasonic Leica 15 f1.7|25 f1.4|42.5 f1.2 Olympus 60 f2.8 Macro

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tim
Light Bringer
Avatar
50,997 posts
Likes: 364
Joined Nov 2004
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Oct 21, 2010 16:35 |  #138

Thanks Scott. How do you find motion on the plasma? The salesman in the store this morning showed me a demo of birds flying around that showed some "judder" at the bottom of the screen as the camera panned around quickly, but the LCD was really smooth. He wouldn't show me a movie or game though. I think the guy was full of it.

Everywhere i've read says Plasma over LCD for TV and movies, and other than one demo they look much the same for me. 99% of my watching will be at night.

So, for TV, movies, Singstar, and maybe an occasional game like Gran Turismo, Plasma or LCD?


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lil_miss
Goldmember
Avatar
4,075 posts
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Auckland, NZ
     
Oct 21, 2010 16:50 |  #139

I think he might have been full of it too...

We have a Panasonic Viera plasma - only 42 inch and about 3 years old now.. its good.. although not full HD... also have a PS3 hooked up and use both during wedding consults etc... Blu Rays are awesome on it though even though its only 720p. JB Hifi seems to have the cheapest prices around..... be careful though as some of them say "HD" and theyre not :D


A bunch of Canon bits and pieces.

Blog (external link) :: Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tim
Light Bringer
Avatar
50,997 posts
Likes: 364
Joined Nov 2004
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Oct 21, 2010 16:53 |  #140

They have to say "Full HD", otherwise they can be only 1024 pixels wide instead of 1920. 55in and 1024 pixels is 50ppi.. not really all that much. 1920 isn't a lot better though, it's just easier to have a big TV in a big room.

So the PS3 games look good on the plasma? Good to know. That was his main reason to try to get me to spend more on an LCD. I didn't like the design of the Sony LCD, it has a silver strip down the bottom, I like the simple black surround on the plasma.


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
scotttnz
"tick, tick, tick, tick......"
Avatar
3,923 posts
Gallery: 80 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 197
Joined May 2005
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
     
Oct 21, 2010 17:35 |  #141

tim wrote in post #11140436 (external link)
Thanks Scott. How do you find motion on the plasma? The salesman in the store this morning showed me a demo of birds flying around that showed some "judder" at the bottom of the screen as the camera panned around quickly, but the LCD was really smooth. He wouldn't show me a movie or game though. I think the guy was full of it.

Everywhere i've read says Plasma over LCD for TV and movies, and other than one demo they look much the same for me. 99% of my watching will be at night.

So, for TV, movies, Singstar, and maybe an occasional game like Gran Turismo, Plasma or LCD?

Motion on the Plasma is much better than the 4 year old LCD, and as good as anything else I have seen. If you are going to be watching Blu-ray make sure the TV and the Blu-ray player are capable of 1080P/24 - ie they can display 24 frames per second as that is what movies are recorded at. Many of the cheaper ones cannot, so the TV or player have to create extra frames to display the movies at 50 or 100Hz, which is where the judder comes from. My TV displays 24FPS at 96Hz - ie each frame 4 times = nice and smooth. You have to enable it on the Blu-ray player though.

tim wrote in post #11140566 (external link)
They have to say "Full HD", otherwise they can be only 1024 pixels wide instead of 1920. 55in and 1024 pixels is 50ppi.. not really all that much. 1920 isn't a lot better though, it's just easier to have a big TV in a big room.

So the PS3 games look good on the plasma? Good to know. That was his main reason to try to get me to spend more on an LCD. I didn't like the design of the Sony LCD, it has a silver strip down the bottom, I like the simple black surround on the plasma.

Gaming is one thing that LCD is generally recommended over Plasma for. LCD\LED tends tio look sharper than Plasma.
I have also heard that lots of gaming can still cause burnin on plasmas, especially games with static screens. But it is nowhere near the issue it was with earlier plasmas.
I haven't hooked up the ps3 to the new TV, so can't tell you how good it looks.


Ex CANON 5D owner - defected to m4/3
Bodies: Panasonic G9|GX85 DJI Mavic Pro
Zooms: Panasonic 7-14 f4|12-35 f2.8|35-100 f2.8|100-300 II f4-5.6|14-140 f3.5-5.6
Primes: Panasonic Leica 15 f1.7|25 f1.4|42.5 f1.2 Olympus 60 f2.8 Macro

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tim
Light Bringer
Avatar
50,997 posts
Likes: 364
Joined Nov 2004
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Oct 21, 2010 17:47 |  #142

That 24 thing could potentially be why the plasma looked like it was shuddering. The Panasonic Plasma (external link) seems like it can do 1080/24p, if it's set up right, as does the Sony LCD (external link). I'm not concerned about burn in, it's mostly for TV with occasional gaming, but the scene changes all the time.

I guess i'll just go look at them both some more, with different stuff on it.

Thanks again Scott :) Given i'm spending $5K or so I just want to make sure I buy something decent and don't waste my money.


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mevunky
Goldmember
Avatar
1,110 posts
Joined Apr 2008
     
Oct 22, 2010 03:05 |  #143

LCD suffers from movement blur worse than Plasma in general, the stuttering as stated above is from dropping frames due to 50/60 not devising 23.976/29/30 fps well.

So yes he was full of it, the only way to truly get rid of the stutter is to match FPS to refresh rate and only a computer can do that properly as TV's dont offer sync rates natively for every FPS out there but since most movies are 23.976 fps 24p is quite useful.


flickr (external link) - So much gear, so little skill.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tim
Light Bringer
Avatar
50,997 posts
Likes: 364
Joined Nov 2004
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Oct 22, 2010 05:20 |  #144

As you can tell I don't know a lot of detail about this stuff, all I know is what my eyes tell me, and that was that LCD looked better playing a nature blu ray DVD with whatever settings they used. It's really just the panning that looked worse on the plasma, which isn't used hugely in the stuff I watch, no sports or anything.

I'll definitely try to get a different source playing through both a plasma and an LCD in another store

I was going to apologise for taking this thread off topic, but i'm not sure we have a topic to get off.


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gkuenning
Goldmember
Avatar
1,471 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 5
Joined Jan 2005
Location: Claremont (near LA), California
     
Oct 22, 2010 05:57 |  #145

Mevunky wrote in post #11143336 (external link)
...but since most movies are 23.976 fps 24p is quite useful.

OK, this confuses me even more. I have known for a while that American TV is 29.97 fps instead of the nominal 30 fps, and that the difference can cause drifting problems if (for example) you play video at 30 fps while syncing to a soundtrack recorded for 29.97. I hadn't known that movies are 23.976 instead of 24. (And I don't know the precise Kiwi frame rate; please forgive my Yankee naivete.)

In the case of movies, which were/are mechanical, and where the sound rate was physically linked to the frame rate, I can see how technical limitations would have kept things from running at precisely 24.000 fps. In fact, I suspect that the projectors in the theaters where I worked as a kid might have been off by quite a bit, maybe even in the 23.75-24.25 range.

What I don't understand in the movie case is why they would have settled on 23.976 as the official rate instead of going up by 0.1% to the nominal rate. It's not like any humans are going to notice (perhaps excepting people with amazingly good absolute pitch who are watching concert films).

And in the TV case, I don't understand how 29.97 could have ever been achieved. The frame rate in both the U.S. and in 50-Hz countries is (well, was) tied to the power-line frequency, and that frequency is VERY tightly controlled because it has traditionally been used for time synchronization (see Wikipedia (external link), "Stability" subhead).

There must be somebody on this thread who understands these numbers well enough to explain them...


Geoff
All I want is a 10-2000 f/0.5L with no distortion that weighs 100 grams, fits in my pocket, and costs $300. Is that too much to ask?

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
weka2000
Is that a 300mm in your pocket?
Avatar
20,904 posts
Gallery: 66 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 239
Joined Sep 2005
Location: Auckland
     
Oct 22, 2010 15:15 as a reply to  @ gkuenning's post |  #146

We got a Sony Bravia 40" X series LCD and I cant fault it. Mind you for $5k a year ago it better be great. No issues with PS3 or Blu Ray. Plenty out inputs and out puts


https://500px.com/tony​searle/galleries (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mevunky
Goldmember
Avatar
1,110 posts
Joined Apr 2008
     
Oct 22, 2010 17:34 |  #147

tim wrote in post #11143586 (external link)
As you can tell I don't know a lot of detail about this stuff, all I know is what my eyes tell me, and that was that LCD looked better playing a nature blu ray DVD with whatever settings they used. It's really just the panning that looked worse on the plasma, which isn't used hugely in the stuff I watch, no sports or anything.

I'll definitely try to get a different source playing through both a plasma and an LCD in another store

I was going to apologise for taking this thread off topic, but i'm not sure we have a topic to get off.

The settings in the store are about as useful as shooting a camera at a white wall for testing and saying ITS SHARP! So you really have almost no benchmark in store.

Add to the fact Plasma does not perform well under bright fluro bulbs but LCD loves it has it hides the lack of true blacks so this is another issue.

You are better to read expert reviews as people don't tend to own 5 tv's or have the luxury to test them in a dark room. So long as the TV supports 24p they will be as smooth as each other when playing 23.9 fps movies which is what you care about most I suspect, for gaming ive never seen any issues on either.


flickr (external link) - So much gear, so little skill.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mevunky
Goldmember
Avatar
1,110 posts
Joined Apr 2008
     
Oct 22, 2010 17:43 |  #148

gkuenning wrote in post #11143662 (external link)
OK, this confuses me even more. I have known for a while that American TV is 29.97 fps instead of the nominal 30 fps, and that the difference can cause drifting problems if (for example) you play video at 30 fps while syncing to a soundtrack recorded for 29.97. I hadn't known that movies are 23.976 instead of 24. (And I don't know the precise Kiwi frame rate; please forgive my Yankee naivete.)

SNIP

These are your best bets (links below as its quite complex), basically a lot of stems from the dark ages and the worst part living here is we don't often get real PAL stuff but converted NTSC content which is worse than both natively. So people always say yay PAL is better (which in some ways it is) but the trick is most TV and almost all movies are American 23.9 so if we watch something that has been converted we are being shafted to put it lightly. Conversion results in sound speedup, usually detail loss and usually added stuttering.

Due to digital cinema the sound linkage isn't really a problem anymore either, you can get almost anything done where before as you say the sound was on the edge of the film in an analog form and had to run in sync but even later on the sound on the film edge was digital on the reel and decoded on separate processors (SDDS, DD, DTS etc).

In January 1950, the Committee was reconstituted to standardize color television. In December 1953, it unanimously approved what is now called the NTSC color television standard (later defined as RS-170a). The "compatible color" standard retained full backward compatibility with existing black-and-white television sets. Color information was added to the black-and-white image by adding a color subcarrier of 4.5 × 455/572 MHz (approximately 3.58 MHz) to the video signal. To reduce the visibility of interference between the chrominance signal and FM sound carrier required a slight reduction of the frame rate from 30 frames per second to approximately 29.97 frames per second, and changing the line frequency from 15,750 Hz to 15,734.26 Hz.

http://en.wikipedia.or​g/wiki/24p (external link)

http://en.wikipedia.or​g/wiki/Ntsc (external link)

http://en.wikipedia.or​g/wiki/Pal (external link)

It looks like in future we might all be watching 60p, some sports in the US are already broadcast with this standard and it looks lovely smooth especially for sports. The other issue you have is FPS = bandwidth which is generally also limited in some shape or form or costs involved at the minimum.


flickr (external link) - So much gear, so little skill.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tim
Light Bringer
Avatar
50,997 posts
Likes: 364
Joined Nov 2004
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Oct 22, 2010 18:09 |  #149

I went to LV Martin this morning, they were MUCH more helpful than JB. They played anything I want on any device, including from my USB stick.

I've decided on a Samsung 50" Plasma that's 3D capable, at around $2800 on sale. The PS50C7000 I think it is. The 55" LCD was nice too, but I think i'll sacrifice a small amount of size for the addition of 3D. The high end plasmas don't judder like the lower end ones, they pan nice and smoothly.

Now I just need to choose my receiver. I'm leaning toward Onkyo with $500 starter speaker set. That'll do for now, and speakers are very easy to upgrade.


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Paulos75
Senior Member
Avatar
541 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Tauranga - New Zealand
     
Oct 23, 2010 15:48 |  #150

manipula wrote in post #11137098 (external link)
For weatherproof and durable, look at the Panasonic FT2 and end there.

If you want good IQ (or better than FT2) and RAW buy an S95 with housing or the S90 and housing. If you want zoom, paddle closer. :D

Cheers Dave,

S95 it is. What's your take on generic nb-6l batteries?

Nice choice on the Sammy Tim, I've got the same one. My only gripe is the lack of 3D titles that are available at the mo, which is next to none but I suppose that'll improve over time.


Cheers, Paul.
If it moves, shoot it. If it shoots back, get a bigger lens.
Gear: A slowly but surely growing list of mainly Canon bits and pieces.
Flickr (external link)
Website (external link)Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,049,413 views & 1,432 likes for this thread
GKPE 8, Yet more NZ ramblings from some flightless Kiwis.
FORUMS Community Talk, Chatter & Official Stuff The Lounge 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is saulcreative
863 guests, 343 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.