Jump to content

EDTV vs HDTV.... Show me the light

BobbyDouglas

By BobbyDouglas
in 2005

 Share

Recommended Posts

BobbyDouglas

BobbyDouglas

Posted
Posted

Just got done complaining to someone about the fact WalMart isn't going to have the 42" HDTV version, but instead the EDTV version. I don't plan on watching too much HD, at least for now. I'll be sticking mainly to DVDs for now, and it seems like the EDTV is a better choice for that.

 

I had a strong feeling the 42" EDTV Plasma was going to be a crappy deal, but if it plays DVDs at an awesome quality, I might end up wanting it after all. But $1000 for something just for DVDs and standard TV? Heh, seems a bit too much.

 

Anyone care to comment? This information seems to be a pretty good explanation in general, but I don't want to base my decision only on that.

 

Btw, I CAN wait 6 months, another year, etc., but some deals are too good to pass up. I didn't see RossMan jumping in on this one, so I still am not sure if it is actually worth it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JBKing

JBKing

Posted
Posted

The way I understand it, you will get the same quality from a DVD on either an EDTV set or an HDTV set. Of course, HDTV has much greater potential in picture quality.

 

Personally, I wouldn't waste money on an EDTV set, when you will probably want an HDTV set eventually, especially as more and more HD programming becomes available. To me, the little amount of money you save by buying an EDTV over an HDTV will end up costing you more in the long run (when you have to buy an HDTV set anyway).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Kid Red

Guest Kid Red

Posted
Posted

ED is 520p I believe. It's not HD, it's between regular TV and HD which is 720p. Now, it will look a little better then your regular TV but will never look as good as a HDTV. DVD will look acceptable in an EDTV but next year HD DVDs will be hitting the market, there will be more HD channels, and every TV will have a turner in it, etc. So, ED may be a deal for now, but will not be as sweet in 1-2 years.

 

To summarize, in 1-2 years, you'll be able to get a HD for the same price that will last a lot longer and be a better value. It's a ploy to get prices down so I've always viewed it as a slap in the face to consumers (notice the confusing acronym EDTV is almost like HDTV) and that buying an EDTV is falling victim to manufactures cheating customers plan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gemini

Gemini

Posted
Posted

If I remember correctly, SDTV is 480i, EDTV is 480p, and HDTV is 720p & 1080i (maybe 1080p as well).

Regular DVDs use a resolution of 720x480, so 480p is fine. In general, HDTV is supposed to look better than a DVD because it uses 720p or 1080i.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kshipe

kshipe

Posted
Posted
EDTV is 480P which is DVD quality, but most prime time and lots of other shows are in HD now and the the picture quality between HDTV and EDTV is substantial. Do not waste money on on an EDTV or you will be kicking yourself later. The only time I would consider a non-HDTV at this point is either for a small child or a small TV such as 15".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BobbyDouglas

BobbyDouglas

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Your reasons make sense to get an HD over an ED, but what if you are not going to be using it for HD- and instead mostly use it for DVDs? People are telling me that DVDs are going to actually look better on the EDTV compared to the HD. Of course the HD channels will look a LOT better on the HD than the ED, but that's not what I am going to use the ED for.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
kshipe

kshipe

Posted
Posted
Most panel tvs (lcds and plasma) which are HD run at a native resolution of 720P (or close to it) which means that the panel will have to upconvert the signal from the DVD player (which is 480p if it is a progressive scan player). How well this happens depends on the TV, also a lot of DVD players now do this and will output a 720P signal, it is not true high definition by any means, but it can look nice. If you are certain you are never going to use it for HDTV (and even if you think so now, that will probably change in the future) then ED will be fine for you. In fact standard definition can look worse on an low-end HDTV because the TV may not do a good job of converting the signal to the panels native resolution (this is called scaling, btw). I really wish they did not even make EDTV because as someone else said, it just confuses the situation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waw4

waw4

Posted
Posted

That's why I got an EDTV - to watch DVDs. EDTV is 480p x 720, so the resolution matches current DVDs (no upscaling quality issues) and the progressive display is a noticeable improvement over the 480i (interlaced) display of standard TV (SDTV), especially with film sources.

 

I didn't go HDTV as: 1) there's not much current HD programming in which I'm interested; 2) HD DVD players will be too expensive for me to consider in the near term ($1,000 2006) and there are still 2 competing HD DVD formats; 3) You must get a display which is HDCP capable, likely with a HDMI connection, but the design of these connectors may change and there are or will be soon various versions (1.1, 1.2, etc.) of HDMI which raise compatibility issues.

 

Everybody says you're a dummy to get EDTV, but I've had mine for a year and love it. Current DVDs look great, no worries over whether the TV or the DVD player has a good upscaler, and standard TV (480i) looks as good as it can (on HDTV sets it can look worse).

 

If your goal is to watch current DVDs at their best and you aren't interested in broadcast HDTV, I think you'll be happy with EDTV. Just decide how much you are willing to pay for great looking DVDs. Happy Viewing!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TvBob

TvBob

Posted
Posted

"Everybody says you're a dummy to get EDTV, but I've had mine for a year and love it. Current DVDs look great, no worries over whether the TV or the DVD player has a good upscaler, and standard TV (480i) looks as good as it can (on HDTV sets it can look worse)."

 

It's funny, over at the avsforums, of course they have some regular people, but they have an awful lot of tv gurus and when this debate comes up, edtv gets a lot of support, probably more than hdtv.

 

But we covered this extensively in the tv thread. My view, like many others, is that you are not a dummy at all if you buy an edtv. The fact is edtvs can do things better than hdtvs, not just that they are a cheap shorterm solution. Standard tv looks better on higher end edtvs, and dvds in some cases as well. You can decide to invest in the future, but is it worth it to suffer with poorer sdtv for who knows how much longer, especially when hdtv still looks great on edtv?

 

I laugh when people say most tv is not in HD, that's just not true at all. Even people with the most hd channels, and many others do not have any particularly since satellite companies don't plan to offer universal hd anytime soon, still watch standard tv for a vast majority of the time....keep in mind most hd channels still have relatively few hd programs. This is changing, but not nearly as fast as some like to believe....hdtv has been a painfully slow spreading technology.

 

But I always say don't be so fixated on whether it's an edtv or hdtv. Just try to look for a deal on a higher end model, a higher end edtv will always be better than a low end hdtv. There is more to the quality of a set than resolution.

 

"Of course the HD channels will look a LOT better on the HD than the ED, but that's not what I am going to use the ED for."

 

Alot better? Hardly, please go to the store and compare. I highly disagree that the picture quality between hdtv and edtv is substantial. More substantial is when you are comparing a lousy brand model to a good model regardless of whether its edtv or hdtv. Despite what resolutions it technically supports, its not like hdtv doesn't look much better than standard tv on edtvs. Most people can't tell the difference when an hdtv program is being broadcasted on both types of sets, and this is not likely to change for several years, until hd broadcasts at ultra high resolutions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BobbyDouglas

BobbyDouglas

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Just wanted to quote some good information from the post Ross linked to earlier.

 

Content also affects perceived image quality. Digital TVs are fixed-pixel displays--the screen resolution is hard-wired, so content has to be scaled, or adjusted, to fit the screen resolution. Not surprisingly, most television content is most attractive when displayed at its native resolution. That's why today's DVD movies, which reproduce the original film at 480 lines of progressive-scan video, may look better on an Enhanced Definition TV than on an HDTV: EDTV has the same screen resolution (480p) that DVDs have, while HDTV must scale the number of lines to 720p or 1080p (depending on the set), usually via software interpolation.

Also, doesn't appear that the pinned threads are getting much attention now, at least the DVD/TV one, which still has two questions unanswered :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...