24HZ vs. 120 HZ?

[TimmothyMcPiddles]

That's what I figured. Now I don't know if anyone else here agrees with me, but it seems that 120 Hz only minorly affects the judder in movies during panning shots (this is me comparing a 120 set to my kdl-40v3000 with 1080/24p playback). It also has little effect on blurring. Is it correct for me to assume that response time is much more important when trying to minimize blurring?

[stockstar1138]

Originally Posted by TimmothyMcPiddles

That's what I figured. Now I don't know if anyone else here agrees with me, but it seems that 120 Hz only minorly affects the judder in movies during panning shots (this is me comparing a 120 set to my kdl-40v3000 with 1080/24p playback). It also has little effect on blurring. Is it correct for me to assume that response time is much more important when trying to minimize blurring?

Thats because judder is a natural part of film. What a TV does that can display 24p is get rid of the uneven judder that is caused by an 3:2 pulldown on a 60hz HDTV.

i don't know if you are a gamer, but gamers tend to prefer 60fps for video games. We get upset when a game only has 30fps, because it isn't as smooth. Now those movies encoded at 24fps have 20% less frames than a 30fps video game, which of course does not look smooth at all and has judder during pan shots.

[TimmothyMcPiddles]

Yeah, the reason I got an LCD was because of the fact that I game...a lot. Haha.

I still think that movies on my TV, that are played through my PS3, look amazing and the detail is mindblowing. I don't mind the judder very much, especially when I have 24p playback enabled (I kind of think it gives me a theater feel).
All in all I think 120 Hz along with motion enhancement is not worth the extra grand.

What does everyone else think?

[hc666]

Originally Posted by TimmothyMcPiddles

Yeah, the reason I got an LCD was because of the fact that I game...a lot. Haha.

I still think that movies on my TV, that are played through my PS3, look amazing and the detail is mindblowing. I don't mind the judder very much, especially when I have 24p playback enabled (I kind of think it gives me a theater feel).
All in all I think 120 Hz along with motion enhancement is not worth the extra grand.

What does everyone else think?

I feel the 120Hz is a gimmick that raises the price a grand... just like 1080P did when it was first being advertised. So when 120Hz sets go down a grand... there will be some other stupid gimmick that will raise the price back up and so on and so on......................... it will never end... always keep ppl upgrading just like computers.

[TimmothyMcPiddles]

If you're not rich and you realize that the "gimmicks" aren't really worth much (at least not near as much as they want you to pay), then you will end up making a very financially conscious buy, however the buy will be very satisfying and you'll find yourself enjoying movies and games more than you have ever before.

[kingofgrills]

Originally Posted by TimmothyMcPiddles

Yeah, the reason I got an LCD was because of the fact that I game...a lot. Haha.

I still think that movies on my TV, that are played through my PS3, look amazing and the detail is mindblowing. I don't mind the judder very much, especially when I have 24p playback enabled (I kind of think it gives me a theater feel).
All in all I think 120 Hz along with motion enhancement is not worth the extra grand.

What does everyone else think?

I'd much rather have a 60 Hz tv that was 1080p / 24 Hz capable than a 120 Hz set with motion enhancement. 120 Hz is a pure sales gimmick that retailers can use along with oversaturated colors and blooming contrast to catch the eye of buyers.

At least with a 1080p/ 24 Hz capable set you can view films accurately as they were intended when shot. It's pure and simple.