That is modern sample and hold televisions (LCD, OLED). Motion resolution suffers compared to impulse displays (CRT, Plasma).
OLED has extremely fast response times which are generally a positive, but for those sensitive to motion sometimes the slower blur of LCD is the preferable compromise.
Sony are probably still the best at handling it. The premium end of the market are generally better.
Television finally doubling its frame rate would help. Frame interpolation (creating fake frames in between the real ones) can help, but has artefacts. Backlight strobing (LCD) and Black Frame Insertion (OLED) can help but can have downsides.
Playing with the settings relating to motion handling is the way to find the compromise that works for you
An old plasma is going to be far better at motion. But obviously has its own issues.
Up until mid 2022 I was running a mid-2000s plasma with with an Apple TV unit plugged into HDMI. Streamed Kayo to it using ADSL+ wifi. A lot of money later on new tellies and internet and watching the footy for mine is not that much better.
I still have a 2012 Panasonic in the front room as a second tv. It is very nice for the football, a very nice picture indeed. As long as it is in a darker room.
Sport needs high frame rates, but they have increased the resolution instead which is why the 4K footy stream doesnāt do much for us.
Iām running a Sony from early 2000s. I only ever watch EFC games, but thereās always a distinct lag. More noticeable on specific colours such as red and black. Time to upgrade the telly I think
To be honest though, it isnāt so much a device problem. I have a decentish 4K mini-LED TCL that can handle motion pretty well, and it can put out some pretty amazing 4K content for the F1, NFL etc
The problem is largely how Fox specifically broadcasts AFL, especially through Kayo. ā ā ā ā bitrates, ā ā ā ā servers, garbage broadcasting equipment they will never invest in because they have a monopoly, and server sided content delivery decisions that get to determine the delivery resolution/quality automatically without you having a say in it
Yep, I still have a Pana plasma Th-p42v as a second TV and imo it still stacks up for sport. Obviously not as highly detailed as the new OLeds but itās gotta be at least 15 years old.
There are lots of factors at play but motion resolution is a fundamental problem with sample and hold displays. With all the gains from modern tvs it is something that has taken a step back. Various LCD/OLED models are better or worse at mitigating this deficit to CRT/plasma. My Sony is pretty good at doing so, but it still falls short, on this one metric, compared to my plasma when fee the same signal.
I got a Hisense 52 inch with a built in sound bar, not killer but much better than most stock tv sound . itās around 4 years old and the picture on this tv sensational . I think it was only about 16 to 1700 hundred maybe back then. could not be happier with the quality for the price. Hisense have a really crap cheaper range but if you stick to their version of premium you canāt go wrong
I think thatās right. Those cameras that can shoot the ultra-slow motion with crystal clear images and completely smooth motion are expensive. Use a ā ā ā ā ā ā old camera to shoot the action and no matter how good the TV is at home, the images are going to be ā ā ā ā ā ā . Itās the old garbage in, garbage out rule.
Iāve had a couple of things die. Our Smeg integrated dishwasher, that was only 7 years old, which we are replacing with a freestanding one. Any suggestions?
And tv for rumpus room. I see you can get 2024, 65" Hisense delivered from JB for $1000. As a 2nd tv, at that price, i feel like itās a no brainer.