Sky hd - is it worth it?

Marty999

I have a basic Sky box (and no Sky Sports) so I went to watch the football on my neighbour's Sky HD last night. The picture quality was fantastic and when I came home to my 32" Sony Bravia, I watched the goals on the news in SD and the picture was very fuzzy in comparison.

I find that certain programmes look much better than others, I think the broadcast quality makes a lot of difference. We watch Lost in SD but the picture really is very good. I have a feeling they actually broadcast it in HD over the SD channel (I could be wrong here) so that could be the reason.

The Freeview picture from our Sony's built-in digital tuner is usually better than Sky SD over a SCART lead. I'd really like to get HD but can't afford it at the moment...

turbobob

roddydogs wrote: »

No they cant, a 720p set is HD ready, but it cant show 1080i, it must be, either 1080i, or whats called "Full"HD which is 1080p, this refers to the DISPLAYED resulution, NOT what the TV can accept.
Any decent HD set (not usually the "Cheapies") will upscale the normal SD signal well and look better than a non HD set.

OK but as far as the man on the street is concerned a non 1080p HD Ready TV will work perfectly well with Sky HD (1080i broadcast) and it will be noticeably more detailed than standard definition TV.

No panel display will show an interlaced 1080i picture. The only "native" 1080i sets available would be CRTs. When an LCD/plasma is fed with a 1080i signal it will be de-interlaced (the alternate fields will be blended together by some algorithm) and displayed at the sets resolution.

BigBouncyBall

Conor wrote: »

You're completely wrong. It's got nothing to do with what situation it's used for and everything to do with the cost of the panel. 1080p costs a lot more because it requires far more bandwidth and VRAM due to the massive jump in the pixel count. Basically, the cheaper more widely available chips can handle 1080i fine.

Considering pretty much everything is recorded at 24FPS (Cinema) or 25FPS(Broadcast TV), having higher framerates is irrelevent.

You may want to go do some research...

wow did you just slap me round the face with a leather glove!?

You might like to consider doing some research yourself and find me a program shot at 25p. Few programs are shot at 25p for the rather objectionable motion judder it produces. Most things in this country are shot in 50i digibeta. Most of the American TV shows are being shot in some form of HD, but (i think) some of the major television companies still shoot in SD or at best 720p.

Most TV shows are also being shot in 16:9 but 4:3 safe to cater for people who still have 4:3 aspect ratio televisions! HD is still a good few years away yet for mainstream television in this country.

BigBouncyBall

turbobob wrote: »

OK but as far as the man on the street is concerned a non 1080p HD Ready TV will work perfectly well with Sky HD (1080i broadcast) and it will be noticeably more detailed than standard definition TV.

This is true. Don't get me wrong a nice big 42" HD TV produces some stunning footage, I just don't personally see the point in going for Sky HD yet. Save the money, get a Blu-Ray DVD player and enjoy hi-def movies.

donnajunkie

turbobob wrote: »

Nothing is broadcast in 1080p (p=progressive) though. All HD broadcasts are in 1080i (i=interlaced) which any TV with the HD Ready logo can show.

surely if the specification for your tv says it is only 720 then that is all you will get? you will be able to watch a 1080 broadcast but it will be only to the standard of your tv i.e. 720. when i first got my xbox 360 i set it to 1080 but it didnt look any better than when i set it to 720 because my tv is only 720.

donnajunkie

Conor wrote: »

Utter tosh. Even 720p is a vast improvement over SD. Unless you've got a TV larger than 42", you'll have all hell on telling the difference between 1080i and 1080p.

i said there isnt much difference because a relative has sky hd and i cant see any difference. when we got sky+ last year the engineer said that it isnt worth it unless your tv is 1080 and until more channels become hd.

sideysid

There is always so much misinterpreted information on mse, on any AV subject, so much so I don't actually bother to reply here much, but sometimes things grate enough for me to post.

1080p is marketing hype on any panel below 42", and resolution isn't the deciding factor.

Have a look at this article explaining resolution importance.

Have a look at this table and decide if you would even see a benefit.

gsy1

Well, i've just asked to OH and he thinks it's a 720p - he's the amazon page that i've rooted out

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sony-KDL32S3000-Widescreen-Bravia-Freeview/dp/B000OQBUC2/ref=pd_sbs_ce?ie=UTF8&qid=1207164103&sr=8-1

Matt_Nixon

For those of you waiting for Freeview HD, you will have to wait at least until the digtial switchover starting in 2009 (could be 2012 in London) & purchase a new set-top box!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7328029.stm

Sky HD is worth it, especially if you subsidise it with £5/Month Broadband.

BigBouncyBall

sideysid wrote: »

There is always so much misinterpreted information on mse, on any AV subject, so much so I don't actually bother to reply here much, but sometimes things grate enough for me to post.

1080p is marketing hype on any panel below 42", and resolution isn't the deciding factor.

Have a look at this article explaining resolution importance.

Have a look at this table and decide if you would even see a benefit.

Thats hardly the most scientific chart i've ever seen?! It doesn't even mean anything - someone's just drawn some lines and put some numbers around it 'claiming' points when different resolutions become visibly distinguishable. If thats supposed to be a sweeping argument to shut us all up then i think you need to try again!