Just bought an open box 55" LG 4K...

[spacejamz]

A nearby Best Buy was closing and I picked up a 55UB9500 for $1160...missing stand and remote but the screen was in pretty much mint condition...according to my receipt, I saved over $1400 off their regular price, but the TV is on sale this week at best buy and Frys for $1999.

the store closing sale was going for about a week or so before I went so the pickings were pretty slim...most of the remaining sets had scratched screens or some kind of adhesive stuff on them...

I had a 4 year old 55" Sony EX550 in my room that was already wall mounted so I just swapped them out and reprogrammed my remote for the the TV...

I knew there would a little difference, but I was shocked at how much better the picture quality of just blu rays from my PS3 was...

I have a 2 year old 70" Aquos in my living room that I was very happy with until I saw the picture on this 4K set....I was comparing the PQ watching the Laker/Clippers game earlier tonight (from Direct TV) and the difference was also very noticeable....

I was hoping to see if there would be any decent 80" sets on sale on or after Black Friday for around $2K but now I am pretty sure I would be disappointed with any 1080p set...Cant believe I was just looking online at how much a 70" 4K set would go for (Vizio has a full backlit one for $2500 plus tax that has alot good reviews for PQ)...wonder what kind of deals will be available during the holidays for them...

Will a professionally calibrated 1080p set hold a candle to a 4K TV (70" screen at 12 feet)? I went to a different best buy earlier this evening and top sony /samsung 4K sets were noticeably better than their 1080p sets....

I found my receipt for that sony...I bought at Frys in Dec 2010 for $899 so I did get a good deal on that back then...

 

[SickBeast]

It's impossible for the resolution to make an difference when the source is 1080p. Upscaling cannot improve the quality. I always find that native resolution looks best.

You got a really good deal on that TV though. Does it have HDMI 2.0? Is it an IPS panel?

Even at the price you paid, I would rather go with 1080p. I just bought a 1080p 55" LED TV for $550CDN which is probably about $500US. Less than half the price. I sit 8' away and I would not notice any difference if my TV was 4k. 4k is only useful if you have an extremely large TV.

 

[Matt1970]

It's impossible for the resolution to make an difference when the source is 1080p. Upscaling cannot improve the quality. I always find that native resolution looks best.

.

This. I think you might be experiencing 5 year newer technology and going from CCFL-backlit to LED. Saying 1080p content looks better on a 4K TV than it does on a 1080p TV is like saying going 30MPH in a Ferrari is faster than going 30MPH in a Prius.

 

[Raincity]

There is more to 4K than resolution. The Rec 2020 spec for 4K is a big improvement over the aging Rec 709. Not that I am recommending everybody to go out and upgrade. But there is more to it than the resolution argument.

 

[spacejamz]

It's impossible for the resolution to make an difference when the source is 1080p. Upscaling cannot improve the quality. I always find that native resolution looks best.

You got a really good deal on that TV though. Does it have HDMI 2.0? Is it an IPS panel?

Even at the price you paid, I would rather go with 1080p. I just bought a 1080p 55" LED TV for $550CDN which is probably about $500US. Less than half the price. I sit 8' away and I would not notice any difference if my TV was 4k. 4k is only useful if you have an extremely large TV.

one HDMI 2.0 port (3 other HDMI ports) and it is IPS panel...

I don't know what it is but this picture is alot 'smoother' and 'richer' than my other 1080p sets...when you go into best buy, the images on the 4K sets look better than their 1080p counterparts...I can't explain it but it just seems much better...

 

[Raincity]

one HDMI 2.0 port (3 other HDMI ports) and it is IPS panel...

I don't know what it is but this picture is alot 'smoother' and 'richer' than my other 1080p sets...when you go into best buy, the images on the 4K sets look better than their 1080p counterparts...I can't explain it but it just seems much better...

These new 4K sets have pretty good scalers in them so that's where your probably seeing the difference. I am enjoying my new Vizio P in my office while I am still a die hard plasma fan.

 

[SickBeast]

As long as you're happy with it, OP, that's all that matters. You got a very good deal considering the fact that the TV has an HDMI 2.0 port, which most don't. It sounds good to me. IPS panels are good but apparently the newer VA panels are better.

It sounds like you got a great TV. It's very future proof. The best is yet to come for 4k. There is no content yet. It's going to take several years.

 

[jacktesterson]

As long as you're happy with it, OP, that's all that matters. You got a very good deal considering the fact that the TV has an HDMI 2.0 port, which most don't. It sounds good to me. IPS panels are good but apparently the newer VA panels are better.

It sounds like you got a great TV. It's very future proof. The best is yet to come for 4k. There is no content yet. It's going to take several years.

4K Blu Rays and players will be hitting shelves before long. 2015 at the latest.

You can buy some optimized titles now too, like this: (Although more of a marketing scheme)

http://www.bestbuy.ca/en-CA/product...ray-disc/m2207254.aspx?cmp=pla-blu-ray_movies

 

[SickBeast]

4K Blu Rays and players will be hitting shelves before long. 2015 at the latest.

You can buy some optimized titles now too, like this: (Although more of a marketing scheme)

http://www.bestbuy.ca/en-CA/product...ray-disc/m2207254.aspx?cmp=pla-blu-ray_movies

It's going to be years and years before we have significant content. We still don't even have 1080p TV broadcasts and you're expecting them to go to 4k? No way. I can see it happening for movies but not for TV, not any time soon. My guess is it will probably take another 10 years, perhaps even longer than that.

For me personally I just can't live with a 4k display at 30hz. I tried running my current TV at 30hz and I thought my eyes were going to fall out.

 

[mmntech]

There's a couple reasons why 1080i is preferred for broadcast. For starters, peak bandwidth requirements are lower since it sends less data at a time. Makes a difference when you're broadcasting from an antenna. In the past, it also tended to be better with fast motion. Though not so much today, since very few people still have analogue HDTVs.

Using 720p is purely a bandwidth issue.

4K content is going to be a tougher sell than HD. Maybe not quite as tough as 3D was though. Part of the issue is the new hardware requirements. While the Bluray standard supports it using conventional dual layer discs, most players don't have the juice to decode H.265. The PS4 and Xbox One will probably get a firmware update to support 4K BD. Even though neither has HDMI 2.0, movies only need to run at 24fps. I'd be surprised if the TVs themselves aren't doing frame doubling to smooth out flicker.

For streaming, the biggest barriers are data caps and slow internet infrastructure. H.265 is good with compression, but not that good. ISPs are going to freak out when more people try to watch 4K content. Probably why they're pushing hard to end net neutrality. They're going to want to charge heavy 4K streamers more money. Ie everybody in the next couple of years.

As for broadcast, it can be done. Cable/Satellite really need to strip out the old SD channels and put priority on HD and UHD content. Why the SD stations are still there is beyond me, since most boxes can downscale high def content for older TVs. The big issue comes at the station level. Networks aren't spending on capital right now. Broadcast equipment is very expensive and requires multi-year investment. That's why the HD transition took so long. That's back when they had the money.

 

[poofyhairguy]

There's a couple reasons why 1080i is preferred for broadcast. For starters, peak bandwidth requirements are lower since it sends less data at a time. Makes a difference when you're broadcasting from an antenna. In the past, it also tended to be better with fast motion.

I will admit that doesn't make sense to me as a temporal resolution of 50 or 60 interlaced fields per second seems like it would capture fast motion worse than a progressive source of a solid 60 frames per second, even if the resolution is only 720p.

 

[SickBeast]

One thing I do notice it that HDTV shows are looking much better recently. It's probably just my cable provider improving their compression; perhaps they moved to MPEG4 from MPEG2. I just find that there are much less compression artifacts. The image still looks soft but there is no getting around that when you're putting a 720p image on a 55" screen.

 

[Matt1970]

It's going to be a while before we have any real quantity of 4K content. As mentioned there are bandwidth and hardware issues but the content itself is going to be limited. When HD came out, all we had to do is go back and scan the original film from old movies and shows as film doesn't have a resolution. A lot of stuff being shot today is digital and that has a fixed resolution.

 

[SickBeast]

It's going to be a while before we have any real quantity of 4K content. As mentioned there are bandwidth and hardware issues but the content itself is going to be limited. When HD came out, all we had to do is go back and scan the original film from old movies and shows as film doesn't have a resolution. A lot of stuff being shot today is digital and that has a fixed resolution.

Apparently Sony has over 200 4k movies that you can stream through their service. Unfortunately it's expensive and it only works with Sony TVs which really sucks. Other than that there are two crappy shows on Netflix in 4k. That's all.

I can see movies very easily going to 4k resolution. It's TV that will be stuck at 1080i/720p for years to come.

I say give it another year and 4k will start to become worthwhile. If you only had to pay $200 extra for 4k and it had HDMI 2.0 wouldn't you do it? I know I would. Right now the manufacturers are charging a hefty premium for 4k; it doesn't cost them much more to make a 4k panel compared to 1080p.

 

[Matt1970]

Apparently Sony has over 200 4k movies that you can stream through their service. Unfortunately it's expensive and it only works with Sony TVs which really sucks. Other than that there are two crappy shows on Netflix in 4k. That's all.

I can see movies very easily going to 4k resolution. It's TV that will be stuck at 1080i/720p for years to come.

I say give it another year and 4k will start to become worthwhile. If you only had to pay $200 extra for 4k and it had HDMI 2.0 wouldn't you do it? I know I would. Right now the manufacturers are charging a hefty premium for 4k; it doesn't cost them much more to make a 4k panel compared to 1080p.

Oh that's cool. I wouldn't get my hopes up much with Netflix. They can barely stream 1080p in a lot of locations. One other thing to consider is you need to really get a 40" or larger TV to even notice a difference between 720 and 1080. I think I saw you need an 85" to notice a difference between 1080 and 4K.

 

[SickBeast]

Oh that's cool. I wouldn't get my hopes up much with Netflix. They can barely stream 1080p in a lot of locations. One other thing to consider is you need to really get a 40" or larger TV to even notice a difference between 720 and 1080. I think I saw you need an 85" to notice a difference between 1080 and 4K.

It depends on the viewing distance. With my 55" 1080p TV, from 8 feet away it looks perfect and 4k would make no difference. If I got a bigger screen, though, I would start to notice a difference. Really though for 4k you should get at least a 65" screen if not even bigger. That's what I'm holding out for. An 84" 4k TV. I'm sure I will be waiting a long time for them to become affordable.

 

[mmntech]

I will admit that doesn't make sense to me as a temporal resolution of 50 or 60 interlaced fields per second seems like it would capture fast motion worse than a progressive source of a solid 60 frames per second, even if the resolution is only 720p.

I'm not a broadcast engineer, but that's how it was explained to me back when I was studying television production in college. 1080p supposedly uses more bandwidth than 1080i. It just became the good enough standard for HDTV. It's also backwards compatible with older HD CRT sets.

 

[Matt1970]

It depends on the viewing distance. With my 55" 1080p TV, from 8 feet away it looks perfect and 4k would make no difference. If I got a bigger screen, though, I would start to notice a difference. Really though for 4k you should get at least a 65" screen if not even bigger. That's what I'm holding out for. An 84" 4k TV. I'm sure I will be waiting a long time for them to become affordable.

I am going to use that as my excuse to get a 70"

Or maybe a Jumbotron.....

 

[SickBeast]

I am going to use that as my excuse to get a 70"

Or maybe a Jumbotron.....

Just make sure you wait for the prices to come down. It could take awhile, it's really hard to predict.

I'm telling you guys though, a 55" TV is really nice. They are a great deal right now. I'm surprised how much I enjoy mine compared to my old 46" TV. LED backlighting really brightens up the picture. I mostly watch hockey on mine and I'm really enjoying it.

 

[tential]

It depends on the viewing distance. With my 55" 1080p TV, from 8 feet away it looks perfect and 4k would make no difference. If I got a bigger screen, though, I would start to notice a difference. Really though for 4k you should get at least a 65" screen if not even bigger. That's what I'm holding out for. An 84" 4k TV. I'm sure I will be waiting a long time for them to become affordable.

Our best chance at a reasonably priced 4K HDTV above 70 inches was vizio and they stopped the P Series line at 70. I hope next year they hit 80 at 3K though.

Really though, I think I'll use a 4K Projector. I been using an 80 inch screen with my projector about the same distance you're doing 8 feet and it's great. If I could upgrade to 4K though.....

 

[SickBeast]

There is way too much sunlight in my living room to even consider a projector.

 

[Matt1970]

Just make sure you wait for the prices to come down. It could take awhile, it's really hard to predict.

I'm telling you guys though, a 55" TV is really nice. They are a great deal right now. I'm surprised how much I enjoy mine compared to my old 46" TV. LED backlighting really brightens up the picture. I mostly watch hockey on mine and I'm really enjoying it.

I hear ya. I have a 55" DLP which is still ok, a 52" LED LCD I am getting a main board for and an older 37" LCD for the bedroom. I got the girlfriend hooked on big screens too which works out nice for me. She has a 50" LCD projection for the basement workout room which the Wii is hooked up to. Her living room has a 50" LED and her bedroom has a 40" LCD.

 

[spacejamz]

It depends on the viewing distance. With my 55" 1080p TV, from 8 feet away it looks perfect and 4k would make no difference. If I got a bigger screen, though, I would start to notice a difference. Really though for 4k you should get at least a 65" screen if not even bigger. That's what I'm holding out for. An 84" 4k TV. I'm sure I will be waiting a long time for them to become affordable.

As I stated earlier, the PQ on a 4K display seems much better than 1080p display to me even though the 4K screen is just displaying 1080p content...

For those that say that 4K can't make 1080p better, have you seen the 4K displays in a store? why do the 4K Sonys and Samsungs look better than the 1080p sets? Don't get me wrong, the PQ on a 1080p still looks great, but the 4K stuff just looks better (at least to me)....

 

[SickBeast]

As I stated earlier, the PQ on a 4K display seems much better than 1080p display to me even though the 4K screen is just displaying 1080p content...

For those that say that 4K can't make 1080p better, have you seen the 4K displays in a store? why do the 4K Sonys and Samsungs look better than the 1080p sets? Don't get me wrong, the PQ on a 1080p still looks great, but the 4K stuff just looks better (at least to me)....

How do they look better? Are you looking at a 4k source from 2 feet away? In that case of course the 4k TVs will look much better, four times better in fact. The problem is, however, that no one in their right mind sits 2 feet away from their TV. For most people it's at least around 8 feet. At 8 feet viewing distance, a 55" 1080p TV is basically a "retina" display. Your eyes cannot resolve more detail than that. 4k becomes useless.

Does it look better because the colors are more vibrant? That could be because of the Rec 2020 spec as Raincity said. It could also be that they tweaked the picture on the 4k sets so that more people would buy them. I would not put that past them at the store. I'm sure that their margins are 4 times higher on a 4k TV.

 

[spacejamz]

How do they look better? Are you looking at a 4k source from 2 feet away? In that case of course the 4k TVs will look much better, four times better in fact. The problem is, however, that no one in their right mind sits 2 feet away from their TV. For most people it's at least around 8 feet. At 8 feet viewing distance, a 55" 1080p TV is basically a "retina" display. Your eyes cannot resolve more detail than that. 4k becomes useless.

Does it look better because the colors are more vibrant? That could be because of the Rec 2020 spec as Raincity said. It could also be that they tweaked the picture on the 4k sets so that more people would buy them. I would not put that past them at the store. I'm sure that their margins are 4 times higher on a 4k TV.

At home, the PQ on the 4K is noticeably better on both bluray playback on a PS3 and DirectTV than on my 70" 1080p Aquos (and the PQ on the aqous ain't too shabby)...

might be calibration or something but the PQ on the 4k is just richer and 'pops' more...I do use a slight amount of motion flow stuff on both sets....