Gonk, thank you for your response.

I see as a serious flaw of the TV set if different calibration would be required for different inputs. One should be able to switch them freely, right? As such, I'm puzzeld that what's so good for component is not for HDMI and am looking for an explanation outside the TV set.

In my comparison I wanted to be "fair", and I compared Oppo's 480p output in component vs HDMI versions. Have you done the same?

I expected HDMI to be better as it was offering a full digital path, with no D/A and A/D conversions and, in spite of the electrical abomination the HDMI cable is, to work OK over 6'.

I'll try better HDMI cables, but I'm skeptical...

Don't bother trying different HDMI cables for that length - they are not the problem, as you are getting the video data delivered successfully.

I would not see it as a flaw (serious or otherwise) if the display needs some different settings between a component video input and an HDMI input. For one thing, many newer displays store separate settings for different inputs. Mine doesn't offer this, and while it works out OK there are some differences in settings - I calibrate the DVI for my highest quality sources and count myself lucky that the HDTV broadcasts work reasonably well with it. If your display does offer this, the HDMI input may not be calibrated at all even though you adjusted the component input using your old Onkyo. Even if it doesn't, though, you have two different video signal paths (one with an A/D conversion that you have calibrated for and one without that conversion that you haven't calibrated for), and just like with analog vs. digital audio that may be affecting the output. I'd recommend re-visiting your calibration with the 980H and the HDMI connection together before making any final judgment. Otherwise, you may very well have something out of adjustment, which would very easily produce the findings you've reported, and a little time spent calibrating the video could give you a better picture than either input type is presently providing.

I went for the '981 because of it's better processing chip(s). Unless you NEED component output spend the extra bucks for the 981 (IMHO). I love the picture this player gives!!

As for hdmi to component conversion ... I don't understand why this is viewed as taboo. ALL DVD players output analog component video (maybe with macro vision crud attached) so why should outputting an up-sampled version be illegal? Hell, even BD players are putting out analog component video IN HD!! (again, maybe with macro crud).

My TV has 4 hdmi inputs, and the audio is included, so why not just use a single cable? I do have the optical sdiff output going to my av receiver so I can make use of the dobly digital soundtrack. The only reason NOT to get the '981 is if you have a DLP based TV and don't want to deal with the macro blocking.

I'm not sure that there is a really reasonable reason for HDMI to component conversion outside of a source player, but that doesn't change the fact that the movie industry has concluded that allowing any sort of outboard manipulation of a digital video signal (such as to convert to analog) is too great of a piracy risk. It's related to the (equally screwy) logic that defined component video output as "the analog hole" in their anti-piracy security (perhaps because component video pre-dates more modern security measures like HDCP and thus can't effectively be made to support new, more severe measures), resulting in both HD-DVD and Blu-ray offering the image constraint token (ICT) which can be enabled when mastering an HD-DVD or Blu-ray disc and will result in component output of that 1080p source to be capped at 540p (one fourth of the original resolution). Internet consumer outrage has kept any studios from actually using the ICT, but it was still included in both specs and can be used.

Internet consumer outrage has kept any studios from actually using the ICT, but it was still included in both specs and can be used.
One reason for that would be that if it was suddenly impossible to output HD video over component a LOT of whole house video switching systems that distribute video over cat5 would suddenly stop working and PISS OFF a lot of high end customers.
(maybe enough to pick up a lawyer and SUE).

There are also a lot of early and not-so-early HD adopters running displays that lack an HDMI input or a DVI-HDCP input, which was the primary source of vocal opposition a year and a half and more ago (when the ICT was a significant topic of discussion). I'm sure custom installers who had put in a number of such systems (for customers who in many cases weren't likely to follow the lead-up to the format war) chimed in as well for fear of hearing eventual complaints from their customers, though.

Here is a funny thought... I understand that the content producers don't want any of the new HD stuff to get out via analog from fear of piracy.

But if they restrict an UPSCALER from outputting over component anything over 480p, this is like saying that up-scaled SD video rivals HD video and one might start selling pirated up-scaled SD video as HD video. This thought won't help their efforts to push HD DVD or Blu Ray through, let alone the format war. There are enough voices out there questioning how compelling moving to HD video on disk is, considering how good up-scaled SD may look and how worthless a lot of video content is.

On a different note now, gong was right, as expected, and recalibrating my system did the job. HDMI works just fine and after a proper recalibration my Oppo 980H is giving me very good picture over 1080p, the best I've seen from my DVD collection (a very limited one as I find pretty hard to find a movie really worth buying, renting them only once being enough).

As far as 980H vs. 981H goes, I heard various opinions, some saying that 981's image is a bit soft whereas 980 delivers a crisper one. 981 might fare better with very difficult content, but, by and large, the two are both very good performers and the difference in picture quality between them might be even hard to detect by untrained eyes, like mine.

Gonk, please accept my apologies for misspelling your ID as gong.

No apologies needed, Alex - you should see some of the mis-spellings (and mis-pronunciations) that my last name has yielded over the years!