Sony, Samsung both claim "world's first" 200Hz LCD TV
By Donald Melanson 
posted Sep 2nd 2008 3:27PM
posted Sep 2nd 2008 3:27PM
We already caught sight of Sony's Bravia Z4500 LCD TV with 200Hz "MotionFlow" before and after it was officially unveiled at IFA, but it wasn't the only such set on the scene, with Samsung also touting a "world's first" 200Hz LCD TV of its own. Apparently, the distinction is that Samsung supposedly had the world's first prototype, while Sony will actually be the first to market with one. All this is also slightly further complicated by the fact that Sony and Samsung have each also already introduced 240Hz LCD TVs in Japan, although we're chalking those up to the usual 50 / 60Hz, NTSC / PAL differences. One thing that is clear, however, is that both sets sure are impressive, and you can get a taste of each by checking out Engadget en Español's round-up at the link below.
mandelbaum!
I'm guess this is a Jerry Seinfeld thing?
So who? was first?
Dude?! Did you even read it at all?
"....Apparently, the distinction is that Samsung supposedly had the world's first prototype, while Sony will actually be the first to market with one...."
Simmer, I was just trying to make a funny. You ruined it.
Seanross never ruined the joke, because there was nothing funny in the first place...
Ha, LOLz. I gets it now.
"who? was first" = 'who?' is him!
funny indeed!
Don't Sony and Samsung make LCDs together in a joint cooperation?
I don't think so...
what's sure is that I'm gonna be the first one not to give a goddam crap about it
Sony : All your 200Mhz technology are belong to us
Samsung: Someone set up us the bomb!!
I don't think it matters who had it first, the quality has to be there as well.
Yup.
Which it won't be. We don't even have anything decent to watch at 30 Hz.
I guess they got tired of their BS "contrast ratio" lies, so now they're touting worthless frame rates.
Thanks to the FCC, almost everything we watch is still interlaced, compressed-to-hell garbage that completely wastes the capability of today's (or even yesterday's) displays.
GOOD QUALITY = DEAD
I still don't get the 24p vs 200Hz part? What's the sense in 200Hz? Anybody care to enlighten me? Thanks...
...Marketing hype?
LCD pixels don't switch on and off as quicly as in other display technologies, so even though you might be changing the picture at 60 frames per second (in 60Hz countries), the pixels don't switch that quickly so you see a noticable "blur" in scenes with lots of motion.
Last year they came out with 120 Hz LCDs to combat this problem; they do some image processing to figure out what to display in the alternate frames (since the source material probably isn't 120 fps).
I guess now there's some "one-up-man-ship" in increasing this refresh rate to 4x (200 fps in PAL, 240 fps in NTSC).
The difference between 60 and 120 is noticeable in sports programs. I'd have to see if the difference between 120 and 240 is noticeable at all....
The point is that 200 Hz has 8 frames in the same timespan of a single 25 Hz frame or 4 frames if the source material is 50 Hz. Those added frames can be used to add motion interpolation to the video which makes it look silky smooth.
But I think it looks fake and not like the original was intended to be seen. I'd much rather get a TV that supported 24 Hz and 25 Hz instead of this one.
And it's not about blur because that is caused by the pixel response time, and response times have fallen to 2 ms or lower which is good for 500 Hz or more.
it will be very good news for people using shutterglasses to view stereoscopic 3d
Actually it's mostly meant to improve the playback of 24p films on blu-ray. Films are natively shot in 24fps but that doesn't translate well to 60Hz tvs, so you get 24 x 5 equals 120. 240 would just be double that, 200 would not help in this case.
@slyecho
Capturing 24 frames out of a moving scene and displaying it is actually less realistic than guessing and displaying highly probable in between frames. Ideally we'd be able to capture and show 200 frames per second but we cant. But for many situations the "in between frames guess" would be indistinguishable from if the action was captured at 200 fps. Showing the guessed frames actually provides a more "true to real" experience than not showing it. You can think of the placing of in between frames as a form of compression.
Actually our own brain does this guessing too .. if it didn't .. we wouldn't be able to experience movies or see watch LED scrollers.
Another issue is that all of TV is never an exact duplication. Real life is not 1080 pixels and certainly doesn't happen at 24fps.
ok, so 200Hz is mainly targeting 50Hz market... let's wait till see who come up with 600Hz then... one panel to rule them all...
Can't they just be tied for first?
Somehow I don't think a big flashy sign with the words "Tied with [insert rival company name here] for the first 200Hz LCD in the world!!" would go over too well with the company's respective marketing execs.
a tie is like kissing your sister
not kissing your sister specifically, but someone kissing their own sister, thats equal to ending up in a tie
Wait, wait. So would a 'win win' be when each of you guys' sisters start making out in front of you? ;-O
You're right. Totally uncalled for.
I think Samsung has a record for the most failed "firsts"...
Can we just call them both douchebags for calling "FIRST!!!" and move on?
...or, we can low rank them?
Exactly the same as the North Carolina/Ohio battle of "First in Flight" vs "Birthplace of Aviation."
Which, clearly, Ohio won, because all the research, development, and construction took place there.
Side note: I do happen to live in Ohio.
First flight? But Richard Pearse lives here in New Zealand?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Pearse
World's first to be over priced, sony is.
Engadget machine translates articles from their own daughter blog?
FIRST POST!!1!1!oneone!1!@!!1
Oh, sorry ignore the over 20 comments above me.
who carezzz ... FIRST POST BUDDYYYY YEAH!11@!!!
Ha, LOLz. I gets it now.
"who? was first" = 'who?' is him!
funny indeed!
Ahh, the LCD marketing machine is at it again. I'll stick with my plasma and it's "inferior" refresh rate.
Now, how about some 200fps source material?
After 120hz, the only "upgrade" I could care about is 300Hz, for viewing 24, 50, and 60 Hz content natively. Then again, I don't watch 50Hz stuff. Nevermind.
300 doesn't divide by 24 evenly. The lowest rate that would work for 24, 50 and 60 is 600Hz.
whoever came up with it, it's cool, and keeps TV's on the high end of tech (if only oleds would save the planet!)
First!
I love how Sony actually produce products while Samsung claim they have! Just like the Micro four thirds Camera spectrum, Panasonic/Olympus have promise to have the cameras ready by the end of this year but Samsung being Samsung claims they have theirs but will release them in 2010. That is super Samsung keep up the hard work!
Why are they talking about Sony and Samsung with these 240hz TV's? Panasonic just announced and are about to release a 480hz TV, the TH42PZ80 Plasma!
"All this is also slightly further complicated by the fact that Sony and Samsung have each also already introduced 240Hz LCD TVs in Japan, although we're chalking those up to the usual 50 / 60Hz, NTSC / PAL differences"
Say what? Japan and the US both use NTSC.
The article makes no mention of the US, so I'm not sure where you're coming from.
I think your confusion stems from the fact that these 200Hz TVs were introduced at IFA, which if you weren't aware, is held annually in Germany. Website below.
http://www1.messe-berlin.de/vip8_1/website/MesseBerlin/htdocs/www.ifa-berlin.de/fset_home_e.html
So 240Hz for Japan (and the US, although neither company has announced these TVs for the US or other NTSC markets yet), and 200Hz for our European cousins. And just to clear things up further, regular NTSC = 60Hz, regular PAL = 50Hz.
"All this is also slightly further complicated by the fact that Sony and Samsung have each also already introduced 240Hz LCD TVs in Japan, although we're chalking those up to the usual 50 / 60Hz, NTSC / PAL differences."
Japan uses NTSC.
wake me up when an LCD can actually display 120 frames per second while hooked up to a computer via HDMI with the graphics card set at 120hz.
oh, so I'll be sleeping forever? Good thing I still have this 24 inch widescreen CRT, then, cuz it looks like nothing is gonna surpass it in the next 5 years.
i didn't get this --> "... introduced 240Hz LCD TVs in Japan, although we're chalking those up to the usual 50 / 60Hz, NTSC / PAL differences." SO is it 240hz or 50/60hz ???