Quote:
Originally Posted by Dyne
2.) 60Hz. The others still look like gimmicks right now. I've watched countless programs on other TVs with both 120Hz and 240Hz and they just look screwy, wrong, and permanently fast-forward.
|
This lack of understanding really irks me.
Like 1080p, there's no reason not to go for 120 Hz or 240 Hz now since it's practically standard, and therefore pretty cheap. A faster refresh rate will not change the source image like Dyne is making out, and can only help reduce motion blur. The faster the refresh rate, the better.
What Dyne is complaining about (which is fine if you don't like it) is the Automotion+ etc. (each company has it's own name) that is only available with 120 Hz or 240 Hz TVs. The feature is totally OPTIONAL, you can turn it off at any time and leave it off if you don't like it. However, if you do like it, you will wish you had it. The first time I saw the Automotion+ stuff is the first time I was actually impressed by HDTVs. But it's not perfect, as any post-source algorithm will be, and in that case, you turn it off.
And honestly, if you're going to buy a TV now, I would seriously consider a 3D TV. Like the Automotion+, it's another feature that is completely OPTIONAL. If you get it for the same price, then why not get it? But they're very expensive right now. I would wait 9 months until they come down to standard prices.
Game, the best way to choose a TV is to simply go by reviews online. Barring going to stores and truly test-driving each TV with a proper source image and getting the settings right, using reviews online is the best way. IMO, if you're going to buy a TV for the next 10+ years, go for one that has everything that you might want for the long run. You can get excellent TVs with lots of options for fairly cheap. Last I checked, Sony and Samsung had the best image quality TVs. That may be different now.