Killer Wolf wrote:"only 24fps? "
ONLY?? i thought that was pretty ok, it's the movie standard.
Standard or not, it's lousy! And most annoying is that it causes a speed discrepancy for movies. If I buy a US DVD, it's about 6% slower than the european version. This is nice for the voices...but makes it difficult to decide which version has been more crippled by taking scenes out.
Concerning the blurring: I don't use BR yet, as the discs are simply too costly and there's constant warning about the players needing even much more time to begin playback compared to DVD. However, a good flatscreen TV should not cause such problems. Cheap ones, I can easily imagine that. I've spent quite some time at the stores watching at different models before making my decision on the TV.
Maybe it's a problem that your setup uses 1080i instead of 1080p? Interlaced really can hurt the eye and make things poorly visible during movements. Best experienced with horizontal aligned fast movements and a pause key. I've never been able to understand how interlaced formats could keep alive this long, but then they always tell me my eyes would be too good (and thus suffer from such problems). There are even quite many DVDs which have been poorly mastered, creating very bad quality on the screen. Warner Brothers seems to be an expert at this
Strangely, my old DVD player can only display via SCART instead of HDMI, but the image quality with a disc like Final Fantasy is great, even though it cannot use the TVs maximum resolution.
I strongly recommend testing with more discs, if possible, as there are many factors, including the quality of the movie, which can cause problems.
FYI: I'm using a Sharp Aquos here. Haven't yet found a reason to regret that decision.
Screet
