Ultra Hd/4k televisions, Do You Own One?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

ponyo

Lifer
Feb 14, 2002
19,688
2,810
126
Which company is leading the 4K TV tech? Sony? LG? Samsung? Panny?
 

Koing

Elite Member <br> Super Moderator<br> Health and F
Oct 11, 2000
16,843
2
0
I don't mind getting one later and being a few years behind the bleeding edge.

1) I save loads of £££
2) Standards get settled, none of that HDTV through component and HDMI transition phase
3) More 4K content is a MUST before I get 4K

My current 50" Panasonic plasma is doing an awesome job. I'd have to go bigger to 65" or bigger and it would have to come in at £2k or so. I can't really justify more :p

Koing
 

abekl

Senior member
Jul 2, 2011
264
0
71
I agree, I am not buying 4k TV until movies start coming out in 4K disks, not that 4k steam crap but actual physical disks.
I'm hoping that flash memory becomes so inexpensive that movies will be distributed on USB sticks. Much more convenient than discs.
 

s44

Diamond Member
Oct 13, 2006
9,427
16
81
Vizio has been delivering good value for a while now, they have been my go-to recommendation to whoever can't get plasma because their room is too bright.

With that said, for the money I would MUCH rather have a mid-level 1080p Panasonic Plasma from last year that beats the Vizio 4k in every picture quality category except brightness and a resolution (that you can't take full advantage of without HDMI 2.0).
Just did a refresh check and the P series will, in fact, have HDMI 2.0 as well as 4K and local dimming.
 

s44

Diamond Member
Oct 13, 2006
9,427
16
81
There we go, the first 4K TV worth the money!!!

:)
Yeah, the thing is that it's actually the *same* money as the edge-lit 1080p sets from 2013. Unless they really really love 3D, the buyers of that got hosed...
 

poofyhairguy

Lifer
Nov 20, 2005
14,612
318
126
If a 2013 buyer wanted max value they should have hoarded a Panasonic before they were gone like the rest of us. ;)




I am just SOOOO relieved that there is a 4K tv I can recommend. I keep getting the questions and I kept saying "wait, just wait. wait." Now I have an answer.

I can't wait to see XBMC at 4K someday. Fonts will look like an iPad.
 

gevorg

Diamond Member
Nov 3, 2004
5,070
1
0
I don't care for 4K, at least for the next few years or so. I'm more interested flat-panel tech that minimizes motion blur.

motion_blur_from_persistence.png
 

BrightCandle

Diamond Member
Mar 15, 2007
4,762
0
76
I don't care for 4K, at least for the next few years or so. I'm more interested flat-panel tech that minimizes motion blur.

motion_blur_from_persistence.png

Well when a TV is mostly using 24hz TV signals the motion blur of the panel isn't really an issue because the amount of blur already in the source material is far worse. But I tend to agree that 4k isn't of interest until its got 120hz+ with it because I have been convinced its beneficial, but for a TV I don't think it matters.
 

poofyhairguy

Lifer
Nov 20, 2005
14,612
318
126
I don't care for 4K, at least for the next few years or so. I'm more interested flat-panel tech that minimizes motion blur.

For TVs that tech is Plasma, and 4K basically killed it.

It would be nice if LED/LCDs could get closer to plasma in that category though.
 

gizbug

Platinum Member
May 14, 2001
2,621
0
76
I'm in the same boat as some of you. I have a 7 year old 46" Samsung LCD TV. I am looking at upgrading in the next few weeks to a 65". But I am torn between the Sony XBR65X850A which is last years model at a good price, or a non-4K (to be determined) 2014 65" model.
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,052
357
126
I agree, I am not buying 4k TV until movies start coming out in 4K disks, not that 4k steam crap but actual physical disks.

Agreed. Even if it's a new format and I need a player, the difference in quality between a compressed 4k stream (even though my internet connection could potentially handle uncompressed streams) and the uncompressed physical copy on a degial media of some type would be worth buying a new player to go with the new UHD TV.
 

bunnyfubbles

Lifer
Sep 3, 2001
12,248
3
0
no point in 4K even if you have 4K content for it unless you plan on buying an abnormally large screen and/or plan to sit abnormally close to said screen

average viewing distance in NA is something like 10', which means you'll need a screen at least ~85" in size, although ideally we're talking well over 100", and this is assuming 20/20 vision...

4K will be great for the computer monitor industry, but is really pretty pointless for home TVs. We're seeing it pushed now because its easy for LCD tech to be scaled to this level. Instead of producing 4 x 42" 1080p LCD TVs, they can produce a single 4K 84" TV and sell it for more than they could with 4 x 1080p units. LCD tech has pretty much hit a wall with other aspects that actually matter more for image quality. Black levels, contrast, color accuracy, etc, LCD has gone about as far as it can go there, plus those features are harder to advertise for, especially when they've been so disingenuous with the specs from the start. With resolution you can't really fudge the numbers when you can go and actually count the pixels. So people "know" that more pixels is better, and the new units are giving them just that, all while remaining in the same blissfully ignorant state that allowed LCD to win out over superior technology like plasma
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,052
357
126
Except I and others can actually see a quality difference between sets including 4k vs 1080p. Yes I am not the only one in the world who can tell.

Don't assume that because of some random statistic about viewing diatance that nobody will be able to see the quality difference.
 

tential

Diamond Member
May 13, 2008
7,348
642
121
Except I and others can actually see a quality difference between sets including 4k vs 1080p. Yes I am not the only one in the world who can tell.

Don't assume that because of some random statistic about viewing diatance that nobody will be able to see the quality difference.

I'm sitting within the viewing distance required for 4K anyway. I sit very close to my TV so I want 4K to come out and become the standard. We'll see what Nvidia/AMD's offerings are this year and how they deal with 4K gaming. I definitely want to make the jump though by the end of 2015 to 4K gaming if it's within "reason" (Under $600 in graphics cards). Then I guess why not really?

Curious to see how x265 and 4K will play on movie file sizes =D. Might need to drastically rethink how far my 14TB will take me when 4K comes out.
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,052
357
126
Gaming will be harder to do but I hope soon we can do ultra settings in most games at 4k. It will reduce the necessity for AA and increase the overall sharpness.
 

Pr0d1gy

Diamond Member
Jan 30, 2005
7,774
0
76
Gaming will be harder to do but I hope soon we can do ultra settings in most games at 4k. It will reduce the necessity for AA and increase the overall sharpness.

Imagine trying to use 4K content with the BS caps internet providers are putting on people now.
 

Ronstang

Lifer
Jul 8, 2000
12,493
18
81
Except I and others can actually see a quality difference between sets including 4k vs 1080p. Yes I am not the only one in the world who can tell.

Don't assume that because of some random statistic about viewing diatance that nobody will be able to see the quality difference.

There is definitely a difference. I recently went shopping for a new TV and had no intention of buying a 4K set but after seeing them on display I changed my mind. I wanted a 60" set but once I saw the 65" 4K TV next to the 65" 1080P TV playing the same content there was NO comparison. With the new models coming out I was able to get the 4K TV for basically the same price as the 1080P so there wasn't much of a decision.

Watching normal cable TV content I can definitely see a huge difference. Everyone that has been over and watched my TV says the same thing....they now want a 4K TV. I had my 55" 1080P TV next to the new 65" 4K TV for a few days and the picture quality on the 4K unit was much better...even though it was a lot bigger. I can't complain, I'm happy.