# New TV. HDTV or 4K



## 1953 (Feb 7, 2006)

Want to update our current Sony HDTV. Question is, should we stick with the great price's available on 1080 or go for a 4K? The screen size will be a maximum of 50". My seat is almost 11' away so I've been told 4K will not look any better than 1080. My wife sits at about 6' so she would see a difference. Your thoughts please.


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

If I have to buy a new TV it will be a 2160p. They are not much more than the 1080p for that size.
Go to the Samsung site and you will see that not many of the 1080p sets are even available on their site.


----------



## dmspen (Dec 1, 2006)

Get the 4K. You're proofed against advances for a while.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

1953 said:


> Want to update our current Sony HDTV. Question is, should we stick with the great price's available on 1080 or go for a 4K? The screen size will be a maximum of 50". My seat is almost 11' away so I've been told 4K will not look any better than 1080. My wife sits at about 6' so she would see a difference. Your thoughts please.


Don't let the BS about distance bother you. You'll see the difference between 4K and 1080p at any distance in your room. Also, a tip from someone who actually bought several 4Ks and learned from the experience. Don't go for a set that has a 120 refresh rate, especially a Samsung. You want the highest refresh rate a manufacturer lists. I tried two Samsungs with the 120 refresh rate and took both back. I'd really recommend a Samsung, I tried an LG and a Sony and took both back because of PQ, or the lack thereof, and ended up with a 240 refresh rate JS8500. Yeah, you have to wait for a sale to get one at a reasonable price (about $2,000 is reasonable for a 65" set), but it's worth the wait. I'd also recommend buying the set at either Amazon or Crutchfield. Had a bad experience with Best Buy (I always seem to have bad experiences there) and wouldn't even consider buying a TV from them in the future. Crutchfield has a 60 day return policy on TVs, with some caveats.

Good luck, getting a 4K now is a good thing, no matter what folks (who don't own one) tell you.

Rich


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Hey rich the key reason the refresh for the Samsung at 120 is bad is because it's not really 120. It's 60. They mess with stuff digitally and double the actuals in their advertising. Pretty much all companies are doing that right now. It's ridiculous.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

inkahauts said:


> Hey rich the key reason the refresh for the Samsung at 120 is bad is because it's not really 120. It's 60. They mess with stuff digitally and double the actuals in their advertising. Pretty much all companies are doing that right now. It's ridiculous.


You'll note that I did not say the TVs had a 120Hz panel, I said 120 refresh rate. I know what they do, my 1080p plasma has a 56Hz panel and a refresh rate about 600. I've been aware of this for quite some time. I find it...disingenuous of manufacturers (especially Samsung) who put a refresh rate on their boxes and don't explain what that means. Good argument to have here for those who are just getting into 4K. I should have been clearer in my post. Thanx.

Rich


----------



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

1953, what is your budget? For about $2000 you can get a 55" 1080 LG OLED, for $3,000 you can get a 55" 2160 LG OLED. If your budget permits definetly go for a OLED, its far superior to any LCD. But if your budget doesn't allow Samsung makes some very nice LCD tv's for $1000-1500. The main difference you will see with OLED over LCD is black level. OLED's are able to produce true black which makes everything pop.

Also LCD's tend to have pretty bad off angle viewing (I deal with this at my house). If you aren't seated directly in front the colors and black level tend to wash out. OLED is like Plasma in this regard, off angle viewing is not an issue.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Rich said:


> You'll note that I did not say the TVs had a 120Hz panel, I said 120 refresh rate. I know what they do, my 1080p plasma has a 56Hz panel and a refresh rate about 600. I've been aware of this for quite some time. I find it...disingenuous of manufacturers (especially Samsung) who put a refresh rate on their boxes and don't explain what that means. Good argument to have here for those who are just getting into 4K. I should have been clearer in my post. Thanx.
> 
> Rich


Yeah I thought you knew but for the sake of people who don't reading this thread thought it should be mentioned. Disingenuous is a very kind way to say it IMHO.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

jclangston said:


> 1953, what is your budget? For about $2000 you can get a 55" 1080 LG OLED, for $3,000 you can get a 55" 2160 LG OLED. If your budget permits definetly go for a OLED, its far superior to any LCD. But if your budget doesn't allow Samsung makes some very nice LCD tv's for $1000-1500. The main difference you will see with OLED over LCD is black level. OLED's are able to produce true black which makes everything pop.
> 
> _*Also LCD's tend to have pretty bad off angle viewing*_ (I deal with this at my house). _*If you aren't seated directly in front the colors and black level tend to wash out.*_ OLED is like Plasma in this regard, off angle viewing is not an issue.


I really don't see that on my JS8500 and it's an LCD. It's more like a plasma than I thought it could be. Samsung does make some really nice LCDs, but you have to be prepared for the price. $1000 to $1500 isn't gonna get you an exceptional set.

One other thing to consider about the OLEDs, they're made by LG and LG sets just don't render red as it should be. Perhaps the OLEDs don't have this problem, but they're still made by LG and after what I went thru with a pricey 4K LG...well, I'm not about to spend that kind of money on an LG anytime soon. Unless they'd like to send me one to try for a couple weeks.

Rich


----------



## 1953 (Feb 7, 2006)

Currently 50" is the largest screen for the space. I will really measure again for a 55". Have no firm budget.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

The size is often a bit different than the last tv people had when seeing if something would fit because the bezels have become so small. So bigger tvs often fit that wouldn't have before. It's amazing how thin some are now.


----------



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

Yes that is very true, most all tv's these days have very thin bezels. I suggest spending an hour or two in a best buy comparing the OLED to the LCD. Fyi, their sales changes every Sunday so keep an eye on their website each week because prices do change from week to week. Also the best part about Best Buy is their return policy, if you get a tv home and aren't happy with it they will let you return it for a refund or exchange.


----------



## camo (Apr 15, 2010)

Be careful of refresh rates claimed and actual. You need at least true 120Hz to prevent motion blur for most brains.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

1953 said:


> Currently 50" is the largest screen for the space. I will really measure again for a 55". Have no firm budget.


I bought a 55" 4K Samsung first, then a 60" 4K Samsung, then a 1080p 65" Samsung. After going thru all that, I decided the 65" was the size I wanted. All 3 of those sets were the 120 refresh rate sets and there was enough juddering of the picture for me to quickly return them. Even the 1080p set, which the salesman assured me would not judder. I then went thru a couple 65" sets and settled on the 65" JS8500.

What I'm trying to point out is that bigger is better when it comes to a 4K set, I think. My 1080p 60" plasma was actually physically as large (or larger, never really compared them closely, just a quick measurement) than the 65" 4K.

Rich


----------



## camo (Apr 15, 2010)

Here is a list of actual rates and advertised from 2015. Everyone sees motion blur a little differently its all up to the individuals own brain.


----------



## camo (Apr 15, 2010)

I'm considering 2016 Sharp model when they arrive. Up-converting 1080i on 2015 models was top notch along with excellent colors. 2016's should also excel with HDR available this year also. 
Best bang for the buck IMO are Sharp TV's. Coming soon...

http://www.heronfidelity.com/blog/best-2016-lcds-sharp.html


----------



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

The thing I have noticed about blurr is that every tv that isn't Plasma is going to exhibit it. Obviously most modern tv's have anti blurr technology built in which makes the picture looks fake to me, so I turn it off and deal with blurr. I'm looking forward to getting a 4K BR player in a few weeks, I'm not sure when 60 fps movies will be released but that should improve blurr a lot.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

camo said:


> I'm considering 2016 Sharp model when they arrive. Up-converting 1080i on 2015 models was top notch along with excellent colors. 2016's should also excel with HDR available this year also.
> Best bang for the buck IMO are Sharp TV's. Coming soon...
> 
> http://www.heronfidelity.com/blog/best-2016-lcds-sharp.html


I thought about waiting, but instead just bight a 2015 model. I got the Sharp 70UH30 THX model and couldn't be happier.

Sent from my iPad Pro using Tapatalk


----------



## Beerstalker (Feb 9, 2009)

I'm still not 100% sold on buying a 4K TV specifically for the 4K feature. Seems like there is still too much change happening there. That said I did just help out my brother in law in purchasing a new TV. I ended up getting him the Vizio M60-C3 at Sam's Club for $930. I didn't recommend it to him because of 4K, but because it is one of the best 60" TVs out there period in the $1000 price range. 

I installed it on a full motion wall mount for him last Saturday, then started off with the settings posted at RTINGS.COM and adjusted from there with my Disney WOW disc. I have to say the picture is pretty darn great for the price. Now I just have to help him decide on what to do about sound. I loaned him my old Denon AVR-3808 CI and installed it and his cable box and Blu-Ray player in the storage room on the other side of the wall from the TV so it is all hidden. Used a cheap IR repeater to get the remote codes to the devices and have it all working pretty well. Right now we just have his old Yamaha CLS-200 setup with 4 NS-A200X speakers (missing the center channel). Trying to decide if he wants to stick with those and wall mount them (just sitting on the floor with wires hanging through the wall for now), or go with smaller speakers, or in wall speakers. If anyone here has recommendations send me a PM, or maybe I'll start a thread here or at AVSForum when I get a chance.


----------



## camo (Apr 15, 2010)

lparsons21 said:


> I thought about waiting, but instead just bight a 2015 model. I got the Sharp 70UH30 THX model and couldn't be happier.
> 
> Sent from my iPad Pro using Tapatalk


Excellent choice.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

lparsons21 said:


> I thought about waiting, but instead just bight a 2015 model. I got the Sharp 70UH30 THX model and couldn't be happier.
> 
> Sent from my iPad Pro using Tapatalk


That model is great isn't it? Especially for any sports.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

inkahauts said:


> That model is great isn't it? Especially for any sports.


It sure is! For most shows and movies that I've watched in both up scaled 1080 and actual 4K the differences are slight. IOW both are superb. Of corse hi bitrate 4K clips just pop. 
I've found that selecting THX Movie mode for dark room is nearly perfect so calibration just isn't a big deal. The only downside is that the Android TVos needs a reboot now and then because some of the smart apps get hinky if you don't. Wouldn't hurt if they had Amazon Prime video app though!

Sent from my iPad Pro using Tapatalk


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

What about HDCP 2.2 compliance for 4k?


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

dpeters11 said:


> What about HDCP 2.2 compliance for 4k?


On this Sharp TV? Yes it is compliant, but no HDR support.

Sent from my iPad Pro using Tapatalk


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

lparsons21 said:


> On this Sharp TV? Yes it is compliant, but no HDR support.
> 
> Sent from my iPad Pro using Tapatalk


Not specifically on that one, was mainly making sure that it was something that was a needed "checkmark" when someone was looking at a 4k.


----------



## 1953 (Feb 7, 2006)

A 55" would only be a bit over 7" wider than our current 46". Very surprised especially since that is only 3.5" wider on each end.


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

1953 said:


> A 55" would only be a bit over 7" wider than our current 46". Very surprised especially since that is only 3.5" wider on each end.


Same thing or less for my 46" Samsung. Part of that is because my set has a frame around the picture that is at least 2-1/4" wide and the new ones are just 3/8" to 5/8" wide.


----------



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

1953, did you get the wife a new tv for V Day?


----------



## 1953 (Feb 7, 2006)

No and to be honest she is all that interested. I've got the fever.


----------



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

You can always take advantage of 0% for 24 months that Best Buy usually offers on TV's. Maybe not dropping a few grand all at once will help her become more interested. When you do buy one I would suggest going 4K, I just got an email on Friday that my UHD 4K BR player shipped. Finally content is becoming more available, I even noticed Better Call Saul on Netflix is streaming in 4K.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

I will say my wife wasn't all that interested until our Panny Plasma was installed. Going to try to hold out a few more years, wasn't that long ago that I paid off the three year Best Buy deal.


----------

