120Hz is required for 3D effects since you need to double the number of frame required to get the 3D effect. I prefer 120Hz's TV's because who doesn't like more Hz even if I would never touch the 3D effect. However again 120 Hz is the limit, I'd not shell out another dime for a 130 Hz TV or even a 600 Hz TV. I'd take 120 Hz because it represents overhead above the 60 Hz I need to ensure smooth playback of films and TV.Pu-239 wrote:Huh, I heard the benefit of 120Hz TVs was that the frequency was both evenly divisible by 24, 30, and 60 which are common framerates. Sounds like BS to me, since wouldn't anything > 60Hz be sufficient to display w/o weird aliasing effects (Nyquist sampling theorem)?
It's not an issue because all new models are 120 Hz, older models (The one's you get the best deals on) are mostly 60 Hz so buy away if you get a good price, be aware 3D is right out for the 60 Hz TV's.
No you won't see it at either because what they do is either add duplicate frames or remove the excess to convert up and down. IE if you have a 24 fps source an American TV adds 5 extra frames to get it to 29 FPS so it looks right on our TV's. Flip it the other way they yank five frames. If you don't do this conversion but still converted the sizes and signals you'd get TV that ran either to slow (Pal to NSTC) or to fast (NSTC to PAL).Uraniun235 wrote: You're saying that given a 24fps source, we should see telecine judder at 60 but not at 85? Can you explain that to someone who isn't familiar with the sampling theorem?