# Sony starts delivering 4K downloads with Video Unlimited 4K service



## Athlon646464 (Feb 23, 2007)

Sony starts delivering 4K downloads with Video Unlimited 4K service

Sony's betting big on 4K, with its movie studios shooting movies and television in 4K using its pro cameras. And now, to get that content to all those Ultra HD TVs, the company is rolling out its long-awaited Video Unlimited 4K download service.

As of today, there are 70 native 4K movies and shows available -- Sony's aiming to have over 100 by the end of the year -- and users can rent or buy content through the service. Of course, you'll need one of Sony's FMP-X1 media players and an appropriately rezzed Sony screen to actually consume said video.

Single show episodes are $3.99, with movie rentals starting at $7.99 for a 24-hour viewing window. Looking to buy? $29.99 gets you any film for good.

Full Story Here


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Well, it's a start!


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I wonder how long it takes to download a 4K movie... and how much of your internet bandwidth it takes (for those with low caps).


----------



## argonaut (Dec 16, 2006)

In the footnotes of this page: http://store.sony.com/p/4K-Media-Server/en/p/FMPX1#features

3. ...snip... *Storage of 45 movies is based on average movie file size of approximately 38 GB per movie. *Individual movie and video file sizes vary.
4. Download times will vary based on internet connection speed and bandwidth. Due to the large file size of videos in 4K Ultra HD, downloads may require several hours for completion. *A broadband connection of at least 10Mbps is recommended* for the best experience.

On a 10 Mbps connection accounting for some TCP overhead ... *8 hours 41 minutes *Assuming you use it for nothing else the entire time.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Yeah, for me in the country with U-verse à la DSL speeds, I'd need to plan several days or weeks in advance to start my downloads!


----------



## curbside (Jun 30, 2007)

Single shows for $3.99 and movies for $7.99? The prices just keep going up. Is it really worth it?


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

they can make all the units they want, but till theres content that blows peopels minds, it wont be mainstream.. this is a great start. I predict directv will jump in in a couple years, if not next year with a ppv channel.


----------



## HDlover (Jul 28, 2006)

If 38GB, why not put them on Blu-ray?


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

curbside said:


> Single shows for $3.99 and movies for $7.99? The prices just keep going up. Is it really worth it?


And those are rental prices too.... not purchase prices... so not exactly what cord-cutters would hope for!


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

HDlover said:


> If 38GB, why not put them on Blu-ray?


They will be put on disks as well, just not called blu-ray....


----------



## PrinceLH (Feb 18, 2003)

Interesting. Still the price point is the killer here. Unless it falls inline with prices for PPV's, on services like Directv, I think that it'll be a tough sell. Blu Ray is a better portal for this.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

inkahauts said:


> they can make all the units they want, but till theres content that blows peopels minds, it wont be mainstream..


Ya. According to the calculator at the bottom of this page, I'd have to sit 5' away from my 65" 4k screen to see the benefits of 4k. At my normal 10-12' viewing distance, 1080p and 4k will look the same. IMHO, until > 65" screen sizes become the norm, the consumer mass market would be foolish to pay more for bandwidth to stream or store movies that don't look any better than they're watching now.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Right, but that won't stop a number of folk....


----------



## Athlon646464 (Feb 23, 2007)

Laxguy said:


> Right, but that won't stop a number of folk....


+1


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Ya. According to the calculator at the bottom of this page, I'd have to sit 5' away from my 65" 4k screen to see the benefits of 4k. At my normal 10-12' viewing distance, 1080p and 4k will look the same. IMHO, until > 65" screen sizes become the norm, the consumer mass market would be foolish to pay more for bandwidth to stream or store movies that don't look any better than they're watching now.

That stuff with calculators is short sighted to me. It often just looks at a still image. Motion changes everything plus different people have different eyes. And what to say color wont be a lot better on a 4k tv too?

With that said who knows I haven't seen a 4k with a true verifiable 4k signal myself. Only in theaters. So till I do ill reserve final judgment. But I just don't buy into calculators. They just don't account for motion and such and variances between tv models.

Sent from my iPhone using DBSTalk mobile app


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Steve said:


> Ya. According to the calculator at the bottom of this page, I'd have to sit 5' away from my 65" 4k screen to see the benefits of 4k. At my normal 10-12' viewing distance, 1080p and 4k will look the same. IMHO, until > 65" screen sizes become the norm, the consumer mass market would be foolish to pay more for bandwidth to stream or store movies that don't look any better than they're watching now.


I believe that's for full benefits, whatever that means. And you would easily tell the difference between a 1080p and 4K at 12 feet. At least I thought I could at last year's CES.

But, that doesn't change your conclusion.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

I haven't been in a position to compare them side by side myself yet, but I've done a couple of 720p vs. 1080p comparisons displaying the same Bluray content, and that Bales calculator seems to jive with what I observed. Looking at 50" 720p vs. 1080p screens about 8' away, PQ was virtually identical.

That said, here's what Sony's FAQs for their 65" 4k display have to say, at the bottom of this Amazon sales page:



> *How close to the TV must I sit to appreciate 4K?*
> The short answer is that between 5 and 6 ft. is the ideal viewing distance for a 55" or 65" Sony 4K Ultra HD TV.
> 
> However, on a 55", you can now sit as close as 3.6 ft and enjoy a visibly smoother and more detailed picture (e.g you won't see the individual pixels). On a 65" TV, you can sit as close as 4.2 ft. to appreciate 4K.


I now normally sit about 12' away from my calibrated 65" 1080- display, so I'm not sure I'd appreciate the increased resolution. I have 20/20 vision and I'm guessing I'd need to go to 85" or more to see a difference at that distance. Who knows? The way prices on these displays drop over time, 85" might be very affordable in 3-4 years.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Steve said:


> I haven't been in a position to compare them side by side myself yet, but I've done a couple of 720p vs. 1080p comparisons displaying the same Bluray content, and that Bales calculator seems to jive with what I observed. Looking at 50" 720p vs. 1080p screens about 8' away, PQ was virtually identical.


Not surprising! But the source was the same, save for resolution output. 4K sets will be working with much higher rez files to output. Still, not a shocking improvement at most viewing stations!


----------

