What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Anyone own a 4K Television (1 Viewer)

Quez said:
I think my kid broke my plasma TV.  I noticed a row of pixels out, and there was a small crack nearby.  For a few months a row of pixels would come and go.  Yesterday it completely died.

Looks like I need to find a new one.  Should I spend $1200-$1300 on a 4k or just get the best led for $800-$900?

Are cable companies going to start broadcasting 4k anytime soon?  I don't even have a BluRay player.  I stream everything.
Click to expand...
The price fluctuates almost monthly but Samsung JS 8500 or 9000 (curved) is almost a perfect tv for most typical guys. 

For the price, you get 4k, HDR, 3D (if you like that), exceptional tv that also happens to be an industry leader as a "gaming" tv (if you like that.  Of course, it is also a "smart" tv but as a streamer, that's nothing to you.  THE THING about these tvs is that they have the one connect box so your purchase is future proofed and that is extremely important at this time as everyone is trying to settle in on a 4K "standard".

Sorry about your plasma. Those are terrific tvs but I think, for the price point, you will never regret my suggestion.

 
Quez said:
I think my kid broke my plasma TV.  I noticed a row of pixels out, and there was a small crack nearby.  For a few months a row of pixels would come and go.  Yesterday it completely died.

Looks like I need to find a new one.  Should I spend $1200-$1300 on a 4k or just get the best led for $800-$900?

Are cable companies going to start broadcasting 4k anytime soon?  I don't even have a BluRay player.  I stream everything.
Click to expand...
DirecTV offers a 4K box, but shocker, it costs more. Not sure it's worth it to upgrade cable to 4K at this time, since there isn't much to watch.

Netflix also offers some shows streaming in 4K, but it's an extra $2/month I believe.

I think it'll be a slow mainstream transition to 4K. There's still channels out there that aren't even HD yet. And even then, there's still stuff that isn't even in 1080. I think going with a 4K TV now isn't terrible, just to future proof yourself. But it's hard to guess when we'll start seeing more content being produced in 4K.

 
Shutout said:
The price fluctuates almost monthly but Samsung JS 8500 or 9000 (curved) is almost a perfect tv for most typical guys. 

For the price, you get 4k, HDR, 3D (if you like that), exceptional tv that also happens to be an industry leader as a "gaming" tv (if you like that.  Of course, it is also a "smart" tv but as a streamer, that's nothing to you.  THE THING about these tvs is that they have the one connect box so your purchase is future proofed and that is extremely important at this time as everyone is trying to settle in on a 4K "standard".

Sorry about your plasma. Those are terrific tvs but I think, for the price point, you will never regret my suggestion.
Click to expand...
Totally disagree, IMO ANY current LED whatever the resolution will not be as good as plasmas were. I would look really hard at the LG OLEDs, you can now get last years 55" on Amazon for under 2k. The picture will beat anything on the LED side hands down every time.

 
I continue to recommend buying the least expensive TV you like because 4K OLED's are coming down in price quickly. I recently saw a 55" 4K OLED for $2300 so if you can wait a year or so you can get a much better TV (nothing compares to OLED to me) for a reasonable price.

 
Hawks64 said:
Totally disagree, IMO ANY current LED whatever the resolution will not be as good as plasmas were. I would look really hard at the LG OLEDs, you can now get last years 55" on Amazon for under 2k. The picture will beat anything on the LED side hands down every time.
Click to expand...
Like I said, I was sorry to hear about his TV because they ARE great. But the reality is we are talking about Price/result analysis here.  At the price point he gave, I challenge anyone to find as good a trade-off of what you get AND (more importantly) the future proofing you get for that price. 

Sure, if you want to spend money akin to fully funding your IRA for a year, you can get exceptional tvs.

Sure, there are tvs out there for the price you said and are last year's models but THE THING you have to watch for is that all those older models are going to be, in 2-3 years, the equivalent of CRT tvs because none of them have the 4k and HDR capabilities which WILL soon be a TV norm.  So, sure, go get a "deal" for $1400 and then buy another one in 3 years if you want.  That's why I mentioned the specific TV that I did. It is one of a very small number that are 2015 models that are built for the future.  All major brands have a few but Samsung happens to be the one I am most familiar with and have and it happens to be the one that met the functions and price point the best.  LG and Panasonic actually have the two I would consider best but at a much higher price and, quite honestly, unless you are a TRUE TV-nit picker, 90% of the people will never know the difference in these tvs that justify the extra dollars. 

 
Shutout said:
Like I said, I was sorry to hear about his TV because they ARE great. But the reality is we are talking about Price/result analysis here.  At the price point he gave, I challenge anyone to find as good a trade-off of what you get AND (more importantly) the future proofing you get for that price. 

Sure, if you want to spend money akin to fully funding your IRA for a year, you can get exceptional tvs.

Sure, there are tvs out there for the price you said and are last year's models but THE THING you have to watch for is that all those older models are going to be, in 2-3 years, the equivalent of CRT tvs because none of them have the 4k and HDR capabilities which WILL soon be a TV norm.  So, sure, go get a "deal" for $1400 and then buy another one in 3 years if you want.  That's why I mentioned the specific TV that I did. It is one of a very small number that are 2015 models that are built for the future.  All major brands have a few but Samsung happens to be the one I am most familiar with and have and it happens to be the one that met the functions and price point the best.  LG and Panasonic actually have the two I would consider best but at a much higher price and, quite honestly, unless you are a TRUE TV-nit picker, 90% of the people will never know the difference in these tvs that justify the extra dollars. 
Click to expand...
So 1800 for the Samsung UNJS8500 is a better deal than 2000 for the LG 55EG9100? And people will 100% notice that off axis the picture gets dark and sucks. Right now LG is the only OLED mfg and they consistently receive the best picture we ever have tested. It's a no brainer to with the LG I linked to over the Samsung regardless of resolution.

 
Hawks64 said:
So 1800 for the Samsung UNJS8500 is a better deal than 2000 for the LG 55EG9100? And people will 100% notice that off axis the picture gets dark and sucks. Right now LG is the only OLED mfg and they consistently receive the best picture we ever have tested. It's a no brainer to with the LG I linked to over the Samsung regardless of resolution.
Click to expand...
THe JS8500 can be had for about $1300 if you look around for a week or so. Price has fluctuated so i'ts a really closer to a 40% price difference.  In fact, just a month ago, the JS9000 was $1800 and that's more of an oranges to oranges. 

I'm not going to overwhelm the OP with data on this because, quite frankly, I know A LOT about Tvs and, with that, I know that 90% of a person buying a TV comes down to very specific wants and interpretations and COST.

the EG9100 is a great TV. It is. But for everything someone wants to say about this flaw and that highlight, it can be said across every TV you name. There is no perfect TV and there certainly isn't any perfect TV you will buy for less than 2k. The EG9100 is well-known in the industry for its great dark viewing...but it's also known for its "purple haze" issue in bright broadcasting, and its varying luminosity issues in scene changes, as well as its weak uniformity across dark ranges.  It matters to some people. It matters not to others.  Same as if you might love the TV for sports or as a streamer but can't handle the judder if you are hooking up boxes to it.  If you are a serious gamer, you don't like this TV and its 44ms input lag. You love the Samsung and its 23ms as well as other tvs. 

But the one thing that I hope the OP sees and heeds is you simply don't want to get into looking at these tvs (remember, he was asking about 4k) and just nailing it down to :"looks like a great picture and the price is right".  The LG EG9100 has all its components built in as traditional tvs do while the Samsung 9000 has the connect box.  WHAT THIS MEANS is what you buy with most tvs is what you live with...forever.  But the new TVs that have all the hardware on distinct boxes can be upgraded and as tech evolves (as it is certain to do quickly with 4k until the dust settles and we have a clear "standard" in how it will be delivered), people can keep their tv they love and simply adapt to whatever standard wins.  THat is cost savings and continuing to enjoy the picture and TV you love. 

Its all choice.  OP, research the 4k if you are truly interested. There is a lot going on.

 
Shutout said:
THe JS8500 can be had for about $1300 if you look around for a week or so. Price has fluctuated so i'ts a really closer to a 40% price difference.  In fact, just a month ago, the JS9000 was $1800 and that's more of an oranges to oranges. 

I'm not going to overwhelm the OP with data on this because, quite frankly, I know A LOT about Tvs and, with that, I know that 90% of a person buying a TV comes down to very specific wants and interpretations and COST.

the EG9100 is a great TV. It is. But for everything someone wants to say about this flaw and that highlight, it can be said across every TV you name. There is no perfect TV and there certainly isn't any perfect TV you will buy for less than 2k. The EG9100 is well-known in the industry for its great dark viewing...but it's also known for its "purple haze" issue in bright broadcasting, and its varying luminosity issues in scene changes, as well as its weak uniformity across dark ranges.  It matters to some people. It matters not to others.  Same as if you might love the TV for sports or as a streamer but can't handle the judder if you are hooking up boxes to it.  If you are a serious gamer, you don't like this TV and its 44ms input lag. You love the Samsung and its 23ms as well as other tvs. 

But the one thing that I hope the OP sees and heeds is you simply don't want to get into looking at these tvs (remember, he was asking about 4k) and just nailing it down to :"looks like a great picture and the price is right".  The LG EG9100 has all its components built in as traditional tvs do while the Samsung 9000 has the connect box.  WHAT THIS MEANS is what you buy with most tvs is what you live with...forever.  But the new TVs that have all the hardware on distinct boxes can be upgraded and as tech evolves (as it is certain to do quickly with 4k until the dust settles and we have a clear "standard" in how it will be delivered), people can keep their tv they love and simply adapt to whatever standard wins.  THat is cost savings and continuing to enjoy the picture and TV you love. 

Its all choice.  OP, research the 4k if you are truly interested. There is a lot going on.
Click to expand...
Well if you know so much then you know the weaknesses of LED and they will always be worse picture wise than OLED and Plasmas were. Both OLED and Plasma top of the line TVs were better than any LED, even most mid level TVs. My whole point is the better picture OLED can be had under 2k which is a steal. All TVs will have their issues and IMO LEDs suck compared to OLED or Plasma. I would prefer to spend a few hundred more and get accurate colors and black levels over grey and terrible off axis pictures but that's just me.

 
Got my LG 4K 65" OLED being delivered today.  My first new tv since i bout the Kuro plasma back in 2009.

I'm psyched to try streaming 4K straight to this thing from Netflix or Amazon Live :thumbup:

Hawks, any idea what my Pro-151 could be worth on craigslist?

 
joffer said:
Got my LG 4K 65" OLED being delivered today.  My first new tv since i bout the Kuro plasma back in 2009.

I'm psyched to try streaming 4K straight to this thing from Netflix or Amazon Live :thumbup:

Hawks, any idea what my Pro-151 could be worth on craigslist?
Click to expand...
Awesome! Can't wait to hear your thoughts on the OLED.

No idea on the value of that Kuro, looks like they are all over the place on ebay, selling for 500-1300 bucks. Would guess the hours in use will factor in. If you still have the box I would go the ebay route over craigslist. Too bad Audiogon doesn't do video :(

 
joffer said:
Got my LG 4K 65" OLED being delivered today.  My first new tv since i bout the Kuro plasma back in 2009.

I'm psyched to try streaming 4K straight to this thing from Netflix or Amazon Live :thumbup:

Hawks, any idea what my Pro-151 could be worth on craigslist?
Click to expand...


Shutout said:
Like I said, I was sorry to hear about his TV because they ARE great. But the reality is we are talking about Price/result analysis here.  At the price point he gave, I challenge anyone to find as good a trade-off of what you get AND (more importantly) the future proofing you get for that price. 

Sure, if you want to spend money akin to fully funding your IRA for a year, you can get exceptional tvs.

Sure, there are tvs out there for the price you said and are last year's models but THE THING you have to watch for is that all those older models are going to be, in 2-3 years, the equivalent of CRT tvs because none of them have the 4k and HDR capabilities which WILL soon be a TV norm.  So, sure, go get a "deal" for $1400 and then buy another one in 3 years if you want.  That's why I mentioned the specific TV that I did. It is one of a very small number that are 2015 models that are built for the future.  All major brands have a few but Samsung happens to be the one I am most familiar with and have and it happens to be the one that met the functions and price point the best.  LG and Panasonic actually have the two I would consider best but at a much higher price and, quite honestly, unless you are a TRUE TV-nit picker, 90% of the people will never know the difference in these tvs that justify the extra dollars. 
Click to expand...
Buying a 55 inch 1080p OLED for viewing at an appropriate distance will never look bad.  Even when "Ultra HD Premium" (aka HDR) content becomes standard non-HDR OLED's will still look fantastic.  

 
Hawks64 said:
Colors, shadow detail and black levels equal to that Kuro?
Click to expand...
Still a lot of tweaking to do.  Black levels are better I think, and I didn't think I'd ever say that.  shadow detail is too soon to say.  I've heard black crush is one potential issue with these, but I don't usually have a good eye for that.  I'll probably get it calibrated when my guy comes back to Austin in a few months.

 
cstu said:
Buying a 55 inch 1080p OLED for viewing at an appropriate distance will never look bad.  Even when "Ultra HD Premium" (aka HDR) content becomes standard non-HDR OLED's will still look fantastic.  
Click to expand...
Maybe, but someone could have said the same thing about a 30" 720p two years ago and they also wouldn't have been wrong.

TV makers are going to have budget 70+" models soon enough and when you get well above 70" that is when the demand for 4k content and televisions will really grow.

 
joffer said:
Still a lot of tweaking to do.  Black levels are better I think, and I didn't think I'd ever say that.  shadow detail is too soon to say.  I've heard black crush is one potential issue with these, but I don't usually have a good eye for that.  I'll probably get it calibrated when my guy comes back to Austin in a few months.
Click to expand...
Awesome, glad it's living up to the hype! I notice the shadow detail and can see it a lot in the Dark Knight or LOTR movies.

 
joffer said:
I don't like LCD, so i would say yes, but obviously everyone is different.  I'm pretty picky about my tvs.  If there's a BB Magnolia store nearby you can go check it out.
Click to expand...
What differences would justify the over $1k price difference? I gotta put together a presentation for the wife to explain such a purchase.  

I am also looking at this 70" Vizio.

 
Buddy Ball 2K3 said:
What differences would justify the over $1k price difference? I gotta put together a presentation for the wife to explain such a purchase.  

I am also looking at this 70" Vizio.
Click to expand...
black level and contrast ratio.  i watch tv in a dark room, so they are big for me.  when you are watching a movie with the black bars above and below and they are so black that they disappear into the background, i'm in heaven.  viewing angle is really something on this thing too.

 
joffer said:
black level and contrast ratio.  i watch tv in a dark room, so they are big for me.  when you are watching a movie with the black bars above and below and they are so black that they disappear into the background, i'm in heaven.  viewing angle is really something on this thing too.
Click to expand...
Ok that makes sense. This is my current TV and at times when we watch a movie etc the we see black/grey pixeling (not sure if thats the right term) on very dark areas. What is the cause of that?

 
Buddy Ball 2K3 said:
A quick search on Amazon and I see any 65"+ OLED is gonna cost me over $3K.  Are they really that much better than sub $2K 70" Samsung 4k ?
Click to expand...


joffer said:
I don't like LCD, so i would say yes, but obviously everyone is different.  I'm pretty picky about my tvs.  If there's a BB Magnolia store nearby you can go check it out.
Click to expand...
Agree with joffer, for me color accuracy, viewing angles and black levels are really important. Plasmas excelled at those but weren't very bright and some had significant glare. LEDs are great brightness and some are good with color as well. OLEDs take the best of plasmas and LEDs and put them together so you really have a bright and accurate picture. I can't wait to get an OLED now but my Samsung Plasma is only 3 years old so the wife will kill me if I try and get one now.

 
Hawks64 said:
It's black level, LEDs can't quite get there so you get greys instead of black and lose shadow detail.
Click to expand...
It's probably not the black levels, I would guess its either a compression/bandwidth issue from the service provider, or banding (poor color gradient).

ETA: If it is banding, a better TV would solve that problem, if it is a compression or bandwidth issue nothing is going to change with the new TV.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Re: 4K streaming content...

I've seen Netflix content in 4K.  You can tell the difference vs. 1080p when looking at diagonal edges, but the overall experience is not much better.  Often, the content has enough noise in the picture that compression artifacts are unavoidable which brings down the 4K experience to 1080p levels.

I've seen YouTube 4K content.  There are some beautiful test videos, often nature videos with little horizontal panning to minimize compression artifacts and these are often what are used to sell the 4K experience.  But after that there isn't much other than a lot of 4K Go Pro videos which are nice, but get old quickly.

I suspect as more 100+mbps internet infrastructure becomes ubiquitous and more streaming renderers (Chromecast, Roku, Apple TV, etc.) support both 4K and have the Wi-Fi connection to support the higher speeds needed for quality 4K transmission (802.11ac), a lot of content will be encoded with more bits, creating less compression artifacts and improving the 4K viewing experience.  In the 1080p world, Netflix started off with the worst compression artifacts in their streaming service, then got better as time went on.  I think the same will happen in 4K as well. 

 
Buddy Ball 2K3 said:
haha ok. saw the option on Amazon and had to ask. I think this is the last question...

LG Electronics 65EF9500 65-Inch 4K Ultra HD Flat Smart OLED TV (2015 Model) $3,333 

vs

LG Electronics OLED65B6P Flat 65-Inch 4K Ultra HD Smart OLED TV (2016 Model) $4,497
Click to expand...
2nd one is a far better tv on picture quality.  2nd gen vs. 1st gen.  Again, it depends how picky you are.

I'll put it this way, the last gen Pioneer Kuro plasma from 7-8 years ago has been the holy grail of picture quality since they discontinued plasma the next year.  there's a reason you can still get $1K on ebay for them.  the consensus is that the latest LG is the first tv that passes it.  i didn't spend much time researching the EF model once the reviews started coming in.  my advice would be to find a store that has both and see if you can tell a difference.

 
So camelcamelcamel popped up with an absurdly low price on a large 2015 TV I was "watching." Like too good to be true but my watch price was based on those huge price dips you see on the graph sometimes for a few hours. 

Checked the seller and the site had just launched, zero feedback and the TV said unavailable. Ok. So today it says 3 left. 

Gotta be a scam right? More of a hassle risk than a real risk with a credit card. 

 
For what it's worth, we're often watching television in a room with light from the outside windows (blinds not closed) and lamps on.  For those, it seems to me the additional brightness of the Samsung SUHD Quantum Dot sets is an upside.  On occasion we do watch TV in a dark room, and I could see the blacker blacks of LED being better there.  But it seems like these two things cancel out, at least in my mind, and don't justify the added $1k-$1500 in cost for OLED.

 
Otis said:
For what it's worth, we're often watching television in a room with light from the outside windows (blinds not closed) and lamps on.  For those, it seems to me the additional brightness of the Samsung SUHD Quantum Dot sets is an upside.  On occasion we do watch TV in a dark room, and I could see the blacker blacks of LED being better there.  But it seems like these two things cancel out, at least in my mind, and don't justify the added $1k-$1500 in cost for OLED.
Click to expand...
Have you changed any of the settings from what they were out of the box?

 
joffer said:
Otis said:
For what it's worth, we're often watching television in a room with light from the outside windows (blinds not closed) and lamps on.  For those, it seems to me the additional brightness of the Samsung SUHD Quantum Dot sets is an upside.  On occasion we do watch TV in a dark room, and I could see the blacker blacks of LED being better there.  But it seems like these two things cancel out, at least in my mind, and don't justify the added $1k-$1500 in cost for OLED.
Click to expand...
Have you changed any of the settings from what they were out of the box?
Click to expand...
Well OLED and LED are equally bright, plasmas has issues in bright rooms for sure but haven't heard of any issues with OLED and bright rooms.

 
There was a guy in line behind me at CostCo the other day and he had a Vizio 60" 4K Smart TV that was only $550.  :shock:

 
johnnyrock62000 said:
So camelcamelcamel popped up with an absurdly low price on a large 2015 TV I was "watching." Like too good to be true but my watch price was based on those huge price dips you see on the graph sometimes for a few hours. 

Checked the seller and the site had just launched, zero feedback and the TV said unavailable. Ok. So today it says 3 left. 

Gotta be a scam right? More of a hassle risk than a real risk with a credit card. 
Click to expand...
amazon? probably a scam

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

H
Streaming TV advice - Primary home - rental home
Replies
17
Views
812
houston
H
skol asylum
PC Gamers - need help on new rig
Replies
30
Views
530
skol asylum
skol asylum
Psychopav
XBone Game Suggestions?
Replies
12
Views
431
madshot31
madshot31

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top