RE: Sky HD - a must have

["Paul Gale" <groups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree - had it for a couple of weeks now - very impressive. Just a
shame =
there aren't too many channels yet. Sky HD is a bit of a con too - seems
th=
at less than =BD the progs are HD the rest are SD :-(

=20

Paul.=20

=20

________________________________

From: ukha_d@xxxxxxx [mailto:ukha_d@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of C=
hristian Cundall
Sent: 22 June 2006 20:08
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subject: [ukha_d] Sky HD - a must have

=20

Hi Group

Had Sky HD nstalled today, and must say I am vry impressed with the picture
quality. You have always been able to see colour banding on Sky, this has
been removed with Sky HD.

I always thought Sky+ was always poor picture quality when connected via
scart to my plasma and did not hold up much hope for Sky HD.
However the 5 HD channels are magnificent and watching the Magic
Roundabout=
,
the quality is better than watching an upscalled DVD of the same film
(unexpected).
Sports is also an added boon, watching golf, the quality of fine details
such as grass etc is outstanding.

The box itself will feel familiar with anyone with SKY+ (in fact the remote
is the same), there are slight differences - you have better sound options:
output in DolbyD or normal, and specify a delay in ms.
The installers menu is exactly as Sky+ as are the EPG.

On quality, normal channels win too: as the feed is not going from digital
down to analog (scart) and back to digital inside the TV, there is a
noticable quality gain in standard channels.

Worth =A3300 - have to say YES.

Hope this helps make your mind up if you were on the fence. I have always
been disapointed with Sky's quality .... not now.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

=20



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]