http://www.costco.com/Browse/Productgroup.aspx?Prodid=11064725&whse=BC&topnav=&cat=4133&hierPath=79*4133*

It looks OK to me (but I'm not all that technical). I bought a WinTV 32" from Micro Center and am very happy with it. It is their own brand so they fix anything wrong. The price was $999 after rebate of $100. It had a built in TV with picture-in-picture, etc. It seems very similar. I think it is a great buy. I did take it in the Micro Center store and hooked up my Z1 before I bought it.

Using component out, I've shown Z1 HDV footage on a 42" LCD rear projection and a 30" widescreen CRT, both Sony's. No comparison. The CRT looks more lifelike, sharper with no motion lag.

Have not tried it on an LCD panel, but suspect the image would be closer to the LCD rear projection than the CRT.

I plan to get a CRT for editing and showing clients.

Mine is an LCD panel -- not a Sony. It is far superior to the rear projection models and light enough to carry. Take your camera in to a store with an LCD panel and try it. Micro Center will be happy to do that for you. I already had a 30" CRT. I gave that to my daughter and son-in-law for their new house. (It took 2 people to move it.) I use the 32" LCD panel about (4" thick) for editing and watching television. I think the colors are more natural but everyone has a different opinion.

Thanks Gerry. I plan to follow up as you suggest.

Did you find the LCD panel as sharp as the CRT?

I think it is. It has a more natural look. On my old crt I watched a lot of regular tv. I see everything on this and poorer quality is more noticeable. For example, I moved my WinTV 250 capture card up to the "Best" setting because the low range, which was ok for burning DVDs, didn't look good enough.

I have everything hooked into this -- computer by DVI, Direct TV box through S video, DVD player through RCA cables (also a Hauppauge MVR), ZI through composite. It all looks good and you haven't edited in Vegas until you do it on a 32" monitor. (Just kidding. There are many better editors than me on this board but doing it on that size screen it a lot easier.)

I run a 50" Sony LCD and a 34" Sony CRT and with my FX1 their is no contest as interlaced footage will most always looks better on an interlaced display rather than a fixed resolution LCD display.

Philips has a refurb 30" 1080i CRT for $418 Click here (http://www.outlet.philips.com/b2c_redesign/b2c/menuHandling.do?query=30PW8402%2F37B&shop=OUTLET&x=19&y=11&AID=10303853&PID=227502) Wal-Mart even has them for under $600 brand new.

IMHO you just cant beat good old CRT, the images are so nice and vivid!

Wow, just noticed that the Philips 30" CRT I linked to above also has free shipping.. You don't see deals like this everyday!

I have a phillips, but it is not true 1080i, it is upscaled. The 1080i can be totally misleading and not indicate true pixel resolution. It looks good, but not as good as it would if I had pixel for pixel monitor.

Yeah, I don't think any of the consumer 1080i CRTs are true 1080i but the FX1 still looks better on a 1080i set since both are native interlaced.

I have a phillips, but it is not true 1080i, it is upscaled. The 1080i can be totally misleading and not indicate true pixel resolution. It looks good, but not as good as it would if I had pixel for pixel monitor.

theres that old saying...what you pay for is what you get.

I to is in a market for a 30-34" for my room and to view my videos off my fx1. Can't decide if I wanna go LCD or CRT. There are no tue 1080i CRTs? I guess I have to settle for an LCD then but fear of the lag cause I do watch a lot of DVDs and play the PS2 a lot.

Fred, I think you would be ok with a 1080i CRT because the FX1 is not true 1080i. :)

btw - You can get Winbook's 32" widescreen HD LCD with a sub 16ms response time for lag free gaming! I believe its right around $1000.

Fred, I think you would be ok with a 1080i CRT because the FX1 is not true 1080i. :)


Really? Then why would Sony say it shoots in 1080i. This whole HD movement is miss leading.

I think I wanna get the Sony "M-Series" lcd due to the less space it occupies.

after researching and browsing...CRT is crossed out of my list. to darn heavy!!! looking into getting a 32" LCD to add to my goodies. any seggestions?? need to have that 1394 input and good response time...you know only the best.

thanks

Really? Then why would Sony say it shoots in 1080i.

Do a search in the HDV forums and you'll see the actual resolution. Yes, it is very confusing!

looking into getting a 32" LCD

Winbook.com has a super cheap 32" LCD but I doubt it has firewire input. The TVs which do have firewire input can only display SD (not HD). At least any that are currently on the market and made for consumers.

after researching and browsing...CRT is crossed out of my list. to darn heavy!!! looking into getting a 32" LCD to add to my goodies. any seggestions?? need to have that 1394 input and good response time...you know only the best.

thanks

Why do you need firewire? If you intend watching clips you've shot straight from the FX-1, then the best result comes from viewing via the COMPONENT input.

As for the CRT vs LCD arguement. Hitch your camera up to the HDTV you're thinking of buying... If the staff at the store aren't interested in seeing what the products they sell are capable of - go somewhere where they will.

My own personal experience as a HDV camcorder owner who has both CRT and LCD HDTVs. I watch the LCD (Sharp Aquos 83cm) all the time - sold on my Panasonic CRT 78cm HDTV (BTW, make sure you get at least 100Hz when going CRT) to my best friend.

I hope he doesn't read this - but now that he's got it, he thinks he has it tuned just right... Unfortunately he keeps changing all the settings I put in, and it doesn't even display 16:9 correctly now - but he swears that he got the better end of the deal, because everyone says CRT is better... BTW - he watches SD on it and reckons that it looks better than HD via the D-Gtec HD set-top box I gave him as well. Ho Hum... The moral of the story is - You can point out a Constellation in the night sky, just don't be surprised to find out that the person you pointed it out to just can't see it, even if they swear they do...

Any LCD panel has to have at least 1280x720 native pixels to be truly worthwhile - contrast and black levels are also worth investigating.
As for the guff elsewhere in this thread about interlaced looking superior on CRT HDTV... must have been a pretty crappy or non-HDTV LCD that was being viewed.

HDTVs - not monitors... HDTVs are designed to accomodate both interlaced and progressive signals. Generally it's the ability of a set-top box to decode the signal that's more likely to present visual differences with interlaced or progressive video. Plug your HDV camcorder in via the component connection and watch HD on a proper HDTV (either CRT or LCD), that even broadcasters would find hard to match in quality.

Too many people here are making their conclusions based upon viewing on substandard or inappropriate equipment. While some computer monitors are capable of showing HD/HDV stuff quite well when set up correctly... the simple fact is that a computer monitor ISN'T the best place to evaluate HD/HDV.

So... whether you decide to CRT or LCD, you need to make sure that there's enough 'Native Resolution', that the refresh rates are high enough, that black levels and colour controls are comprehensive enough to obtain the most natural image possible - and last but not least, that you're getting as much 16:9 screen real-estate for your dollar that you can afford, without having to rebuild your home to fit it in of course!!

All this arguing about which is better is ultimately pointless. There are great HDTVs out there at the moment. Go and check them out for yourselves. If you can't find one that you like yourself - no amount of recommendations from here or anywhere else for that matter will make your viewing experience any better.

If you find one - regardless of whether it's CRT or LCD and you love the way your FX-1/Z1 or HD-10u stuff looks on it... BE HAPPY!! :)