Has anyone seen/bought a 4K (2160P) HDTV? (1 Viewer)

[Sarnoff]

its too early to delve into this technology due to lack of content available

Seriously.

Few have seen uncompressed 1080HD, I'd bet. True 1080 looks way better than the stuff you get via cable, blu-ray, streaming, etc. But no one has the bandwidth to deliver the content. Checking out a set that's playing a real source will obviously look impressive, but, how long will it be until that kind of source is available for viewing at home? Years? Decades?

months?

http://store.sony.com/p/4K-Media-Server/en/p/FMPX1

Still compressed video. Just like with your DVR/cable box/blu-ray, etc. Going to be lots of artifacts and terrible gradients, not really seeing the real picture.

Yeah you mean, compared to all of that uncompressed goodness you see on your TV at home today?

Did you not read what I wrote earlier? I work in uncompressed 1080 HD at the office and can barely stand the compressed crap it turns into once it gets to my house. We have a 4K setup here as well but I barely use it.

I just think it's weird to jump on board so early for a technology like this when we haven't even gotten all the promise out of the old one.

And as far as Andy's apples-to-apples question, I was referring to his viewing 4K at Best Buy, which is probably a better source than one would have if they had a 4K then started regularly watching stuff at home with it.

 

[pats3in4]

Re: Content & Bandwidth

The 4K compression scheme is going to be H.265. Provides better bandwidth than H.264 and much better than MPEG-2, the two current compression standards used for all worldwide digital broadcast content. Right now the market does not have a bunch of cost-effective silicon solutions that can decode 4K H.265 to go into the TVs and set-top boxes, but this will change. Until this change occurs, the content distributors don't have a huge incentive to encode their broadcasts in 4K H.265.

What I do think you'll see first is 1080p H.265 content delivery to at least improve bandwidth, particularly for the guys like AT&T U-Verse who use an IPTV model and are at a significant bandwidth disadvantage (which translates to picture quality) over the cable providers. Plus, the output of the box will still be 1080p which all TVs can support on their HDMI inputs nowadays.

 

[cstu]

TCL making a 50" 4KTV for $999.

 

[BoltBacker]

TCL making a 50" 4KTV for $999.

Cheap 4k televisions with 4k streaming content on the PS4 being released in a few months...

http://gizmodo.com/5987717/sonys-4k-movie-streaming-will-work-on-ps4++at-100gb-a-pop

... yeah, it will be "decades" before this 4k thing catches on.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

TCL making a 50" 4KTV for $999.

Cheap 4k televisions with 4k streaming content on the PS4 being released in a few months...

http://gizmodo.com/5987717/sonys-4k-movie-streaming-will-work-on-ps4++at-100gb-a-pop

... yeah, it will be "decades" before this 4k thing catches on.

You must have a fantastic internet connection to be able to stream 100GB in 2 hours. Congrats.

 

[5 digit know nothing]

ASUS 4K

Decades!

 

[Village Idiot]

NutterButter, on 08 Jun 2013 - 08:59, said:

According to that chart, with a 50 inch screen, 4K just becomes noticeable at 5ft; the tip of the purple rectangle. To get the full benefit, you'd need to be sitting 3 feet away; the purple line.

That chart is garbage, it's overly generalized and assumes everyone has 20/20 vision, it gets passed around as gospel, go to a store and view it, your eyes don't lie - it was unlike anything I had ever seen. Also the Sony is either a 55 or 65" set depending on what you can afford, the 55" lists at $5k.Regardless, will probably go with a 60" Samsung Plasma Here is the 64" version. Better value (compared to the Sony), probably better for sports. As far as Plamas go Pioneer's KURO is still the standard all Plasmas are measured against. Panasonic is coming out with the ZT60 which may challenge the KURO's black levels but that too comes with a hefty price tag.

I was also looking at the Sony ES Projectors (VPL-HW50ES), but I don't think my room is big enough to project a ~100" picture and the price adds up when you add in the cost of a screen, blackout shades and lamp replacements (easily over $5k after a few years).

I saw this set also and the picture was great at varying distances.

The 65" is 7K.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

ASUS 4K

Decades!

Reading comprehension

 

[BoltBacker]

TCL making a 50" 4KTV for $999.

Cheap 4k televisions with 4k streaming content on the PS4 being released in a few months...

http://gizmodo.com/5987717/sonys-4k-movie-streaming-will-work-on-ps4++at-100gb-a-pop

... yeah, it will be "decades" before this 4k thing catches on.

You must have a fantastic internet connection to be able to stream 100GB in 2 hours. Congrats.

With the number of main stream media streaming devices expanding in the market place you think the bandwidth you have today will be the bandwidth you'll be forced to use in the near future? Ridiculous.

 

[17seconds]

ASUS 4K

Decades!

I can't even believe the single review on there is legit that thing is such a ripoff.

 

[[icon]]

TCL making a 50" 4KTV for $999.

Cheap 4k televisions with 4k streaming content on the PS4 being released in a few months...

http://gizmodo.com/5987717/sonys-4k-movie-streaming-will-work-on-ps4++at-100gb-a-pop

... yeah, it will be "decades" before this 4k thing catches on.

You must have a fantastic internet connection to be able to stream 100GB in 2 hours. Congrats.

 

[[icon]]

Best part of these cheap ### 4K TVs is that they'll drive down the price of the TC-PST65 that will blow them out of the water with regards to picture quality.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

TCL making a 50" 4KTV for $999.

Cheap 4k televisions with 4k streaming content on the PS4 being released in a few months...

http://gizmodo.com/5987717/sonys-4k-movie-streaming-will-work-on-ps4++at-100gb-a-pop

... yeah, it will be "decades" before this 4k thing catches on.

You must have a fantastic internet connection to be able to stream 100GB in 2 hours. Congrats.

With the number of main stream media streaming devices expanding in the market place you think the bandwidth you have today will be the bandwidth you'll be forced to use in the near future? Ridiculous.

Go buy that 4K TV in hopes that your bandwidth will catch up with it in a few years. Good luck

Personally, I'll wait a few years (probably closer to 5 or 10 years) till it might actually be feasible to stream a 4K before even thinking about it. But hey, to each their own.

 

[5 digit know nothing]

Re: Content & Bandwidth

The 4K compression scheme is going to be H.265. Provides better bandwidth than H.264 and much better than MPEG-2, the two current compression standards used for all worldwide digital broadcast content. Right now the market does not have a bunch of cost-effective silicon solutions that can decode 4K H.265 to go into the TVs and set-top boxes, but this will change. Until this change occurs, the content distributors don't have a huge incentive to encode their broadcasts in 4K H.265.

What I do think you'll see first is 1080p H.265 content delivery to at least improve bandwidth, particularly for the guys like AT&T U-Verse who use an IPTV model and are at a significant bandwidth disadvantage (which translates to picture quality) over the cable providers. Plus, the output of the box will still be 1080p which all TVs can support on their HDMI inputs nowadays.

In some cases H.265 compresses 50% more compared to H.264

DECADES

 

[5 digit know nothing]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Efficiency_Video_Coding

 

[cstu]

39" for $699.

$639 with code c1137259936.

 

[Dr Oadi]

Please don't laugh, but we have never had a flat screen. We still have a 32 inch Panasonic regular set.

Having said that, we are looking into a large flat screen. But I haven't been following the trends and developments. So things like 3D, this 4K stuff, worry me.

Basically, what type of tech should I purchase in a TV if we but in the next 6 months and not want to repurchase in 3 years?

Get a 4k. If the price is to much for you now wait a year but get a 4k. 3d is in everything. Useless just like the smart tvs. You can get updated rokus, or chromecasts in the future and they will work better than any integrated smart tvs today.

 

[zoonation]

Best part of these cheap ### 4K TVs is that they'll drive down the price of the TC-PST65 that will blow them out of the water with regards to picture quality.

Good posting.

Although, the VT is worth the upgrade.

 

[The Tick]

looks like vizio is getting pretty aggressive with 4K TV's. They are pulling 3d out of their entire line and seem to really be pushing 4k this year. I thought it was only going to be high priced, but the are saying MSRP on their new 4K to be under $1000.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/01/08/ces-vizio-4k-tvs-will-start-at-999-for-the-50-inch-model

 

[17seconds]

decades

 

[lakerstan]

looks like vizio is getting pretty aggressive with 4K TV's. They are pulling 3d out of their entire line and seem to really be pushing 4k this year. I thought it was only going to be high priced, but the are saying MSRP on their new 4K to be under $1000.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/01/08/ces-vizio-4k-tvs-will-start-at-999-for-the-50-inch-model

I'm not a Vizio fan, but am intrigued with their announcement regarding their new "Reference Series" aimed at videophiles. Sounds like they are going after the Panasonic/Samsung marketshare. With Panasonic quitting the plasma business, there is a gap to be filled.

 

[17seconds]

Vizio changed their strategy over 2 years ago to become a top end brand. They are fighting against their initial image but making nice TVs now.

 

[lakerstan]

I would probably disagree with Vizio being a top end brand, picture-wise. They do make nice TV's, and represent a very good value for most people. But I am a self-admitted TV snob - and they would have to improve picture quality a bit before beating out the likes of Sony, LG, Panasonic or Samsung.

 

[James Daulton]

I'll wait for the 8k sets.

 

[Bri]

4k has been around a long time in design studios, 8k will be in TVs soon enough.

 

[[icon]]

12k is where its at chumps

 

[Emerson Biggens]

Best part of these cheap ### 4K TVs is that they'll drive down the price of the TC-PST65 that will blow them out of the water with regards to picture quality.

Is there a non 3D non "smart" one of these that has the same picture quality without those extra bells and whistles?

 

[Raider Nation]

How long before there is enough 4K content on cable/Directv to make this television worthwhile?

 

[fantasycurse42]

How long before there is enough 4K content on cable/Directv to make this television worthwhile?

There still isn't 1080p broadcast outside of PPV, so a long time.

 

[Raider Nation]

Will your basic blu-ray disc bring out the full capability of this TV?

 

[joffer]

Will your basic blu-ray disc bring out the full capability of this TV?

no, but there are blu-ray players that upscale 1080p to 4k

 

[fantasycurse42]

Short answer sorta... They upscale to bring the most out... 4k specific blu ray players are coming to market in the next few months.

You can get a 4K TV for almost the same cost as other TVs. I saw Best Buy promoting a 55 Samsung for Bkack Friday for like $800, so you might as well get it. In terms of watching broadcasts via cable, there just isn't the bandwirh for 4k (or even 1080p) and it won't be here for a while. You can wait on the newer blu Ray players to come out next year if you get the TV.

 

[Raider Nation]

So watching the content which is offered now on a 4K TV won't look bad?

Remember how awful SD transmissions looked on a HDTV in the early days? It's not like that, right?

 

[fantasycurse42]

No it'll be fine. It'll broadcast on your TV depending on your settings at 1080i or 720p, basically looking exactly as it does now.

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

Re: Content & Bandwidth

The 4K compression scheme is going to be H.265. Provides better bandwidth than H.264 and much better than MPEG-2, the two current compression standards used for all worldwide digital broadcast content. Right now the market does not have a bunch of cost-effective silicon solutions that can decode 4K H.265 to go into the TVs and set-top boxes, but this will change. Until this change occurs, the content distributors don't have a huge incentive to encode their broadcasts in 4K H.265.

What I do think you'll see first is 1080p H.265 content delivery to at least improve bandwidth, particularly for the guys like AT&T U-Verse who use an IPTV model and are at a significant bandwidth disadvantage (which translates to picture quality) over the cable providers. Plus, the output of the box will still be 1080p which all TVs can support on their HDMI inputs nowadays.

In some cases H.265 compresses 50% more compared to H.264

DECADES

update? we're 16 months removed from this post and we still don't have very much movement on 1080p being the broadcast norm for cable or satellite. Since "decades" was a ridiculous prediction from where you sit, let's get a prediction from you on a date when you think the majority of the Nielson top 20 shows will be broadcast in 4K by a majority of TV providers (not OTA).

 

[pats3in4]

Re: Content & Bandwidth

The 4K compression scheme is going to be H.265. Provides better bandwidth than H.264 and much better than MPEG-2, the two current compression standards used for all worldwide digital broadcast content. Right now the market does not have a bunch of cost-effective silicon solutions that can decode 4K H.265 to go into the TVs and set-top boxes, but this will change. Until this change occurs, the content distributors don't have a huge incentive to encode their broadcasts in 4K H.265.

What I do think you'll see first is 1080p H.265 content delivery to at least improve bandwidth, particularly for the guys like AT&T U-Verse who use an IPTV model and are at a significant bandwidth disadvantage (which translates to picture quality) over the cable providers. Plus, the output of the box will still be 1080p which all TVs can support on their HDMI inputs nowadays.

In some cases H.265 compresses 50% more compared to H.264

DECADES

update? we're 16 months removed from this post and we still don't have very much movement on 1080p being the broadcast norm for cable or satellite. Since "decades" was a ridiculous prediction from where you sit, let's get a prediction from you on a date when you think the majority of the Nielson top 20 shows will be broadcast in 4K by a majority of TV providers (not OTA).

The silicon for 4K decode in TVs and cable boxes is now cost-effective and will be mainstream in the next-gen products, especially the cable boxes. But all that does is future-proof the hardware for the coming content which has no consensus target on going mainstream. Europe and Korea are taking the lead on 4K content rollout this coming year. What the US operators do is still up in the air.

 

[jon_mx]

So watching the content which is offered now on a 4K TV won't look bad?

Remember how awful SD transmissions looked on a HDTV in the early days? It's not like that, right?

No. When HDTV came out, upscaling video processing was terrible. The technology has come a long ways. There will be some learning curve going from HDTV to 4k, but a lot of what was learned going from SD to HD can still be applied. There will be improvements in the years to come, but a lot of that will be improvements in speed which will allow more and better video processing to be performed as well as dropping prices as the technology becomes more common place.

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

Re: Content & Bandwidth

The 4K compression scheme is going to be H.265. Provides better bandwidth than H.264 and much better than MPEG-2, the two current compression standards used for all worldwide digital broadcast content. Right now the market does not have a bunch of cost-effective silicon solutions that can decode 4K H.265 to go into the TVs and set-top boxes, but this will change. Until this change occurs, the content distributors don't have a huge incentive to encode their broadcasts in 4K H.265.

What I do think you'll see first is 1080p H.265 content delivery to at least improve bandwidth, particularly for the guys like AT&T U-Verse who use an IPTV model and are at a significant bandwidth disadvantage (which translates to picture quality) over the cable providers. Plus, the output of the box will still be 1080p which all TVs can support on their HDMI inputs nowadays.

In some cases H.265 compresses 50% more compared to H.264

DECADES

update? we're 16 months removed from this post and we still don't have very much movement on 1080p being the broadcast norm for cable or satellite. Since "decades" was a ridiculous prediction from where you sit, let's get a prediction from you on a date when you think the majority of the Nielson top 20 shows will be broadcast in 4K by a majority of TV providers (not OTA).

The silicon for 4K decode in TVs and cable boxes is now cost-effective and will be mainstream in the next-gen products, especially the cable boxes. But all that does is future-proof the hardware for the coming content which has no consensus target on going mainstream. Europe and Korea are taking the lead on 4K content rollout this coming year. What the US operators do is still up in the air.

I'd still like a prediction date from 5DKN. I know at some point it is coming , and I'm sure I'll embrace it when the time is right. I'll stand by my position that Summer 2013 was not the time to buy in.

 

[Buck Bradcanon]

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/samsung-55-class-54-5-8-diag--led-curved-2160p-smart-4k-ultra-hd-tv-black/8218007.p?id=1219317031737&skuId=8218007

Does regular HD programming look OK on a 4k tv? Pretend I barely know how to turn on my computer.

 

[[icon]]

I'm holding out for 128k

 

[[icon]]

DirectTV is first to market with 4K content...Samsung RVU Only though.

Complete waste of $$$$ right now.... MAYBE Christmas 2015. Maybe.

 

[Raider Nation]

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/samsung-55-class-54-5-8-diag--led-curved-2160p-smart-4k-ultra-hd-tv-black/8218007.p?id=1219317031737&skuId=8218007

Does regular HD programming look OK on a 4k tv? Pretend I barely know how to turn on my computer.

Do you barely know how to scroll two posts up?

 

[Buck Bradcanon]

Thanks.

 

[culdeus]

Re: Content & Bandwidth

The 4K compression scheme is going to be H.265. Provides better bandwidth than H.264 and much better than MPEG-2, the two current compression standards used for all worldwide digital broadcast content. Right now the market does not have a bunch of cost-effective silicon solutions that can decode 4K H.265 to go into the TVs and set-top boxes, but this will change. Until this change occurs, the content distributors don't have a huge incentive to encode their broadcasts in 4K H.265.

What I do think you'll see first is 1080p H.265 content delivery to at least improve bandwidth, particularly for the guys like AT&T U-Verse who use an IPTV model and are at a significant bandwidth disadvantage (which translates to picture quality) over the cable providers. Plus, the output of the box will still be 1080p which all TVs can support on their HDMI inputs nowadays.

In some cases H.265 compresses 50% more compared to H.264

DECADES

update? we're 16 months removed from this post and we still don't have very much movement on 1080p being the broadcast norm for cable or satellite. Since "decades" was a ridiculous prediction from where you sit, let's get a prediction from you on a date when you think the majority of the Nielson top 20 shows will be broadcast in 4K by a majority of TV providers (not OTA).

Why is this the goalpost? The networks broadcast in 1080p now and cable companies very rarely get close to that even today.

They could start doing OTA 4k broadcasts tomorrow and that won't change anything about cable.

The real date is when you see the big 4 and ESPN sent in 4k by sat providers. Because IPTV really is still decades away on 90% of their installs.

My guess is DTV does true 4k, not half ### compressed 4k in 2020. The problem is going to be determining what is true 4k because even the sats are going to have to launch birds for this effort.

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

Re: Content & Bandwidth

The 4K compression scheme is going to be H.265. Provides better bandwidth than H.264 and much better than MPEG-2, the two current compression standards used for all worldwide digital broadcast content. Right now the market does not have a bunch of cost-effective silicon solutions that can decode 4K H.265 to go into the TVs and set-top boxes, but this will change. Until this change occurs, the content distributors don't have a huge incentive to encode their broadcasts in 4K H.265.

What I do think you'll see first is 1080p H.265 content delivery to at least improve bandwidth, particularly for the guys like AT&T U-Verse who use an IPTV model and are at a significant bandwidth disadvantage (which translates to picture quality) over the cable providers. Plus, the output of the box will still be 1080p which all TVs can support on their HDMI inputs nowadays.

In some cases H.265 compresses 50% more compared to H.264

DECADES

update? we're 16 months removed from this post and we still don't have very much movement on 1080p being the broadcast norm for cable or satellite. Since "decades" was a ridiculous prediction from where you sit, let's get a prediction from you on a date when you think the majority of the Nielson top 20 shows will be broadcast in 4K by a majority of TV providers (not OTA).

Why is this the goalpost? The networks broadcast in 1080p now and cable companies very rarely get close to that even today.

They could start doing OTA 4k broadcasts tomorrow and that won't change anything about cable.

The real date is when you see the big 4 and ESPN sent in 4k by sat providers. Because IPTV really is still decades away on 90% of their installs.

My guess is DTV does true 4k, not half ### compressed 4k in 2020. The problem is going to be determining what is true 4k because even the sats are going to have to launch birds for this effort.

By "TV Providers" I meant Sat, Cable, streaming. Not broadcast companies.

I think we agree, other than me not being clear earlier.

 

[Drifter]

Where are we at? My old Samsung A650 LCD bit the dust this week. What should I be targeting now? 4k? At least 240mhz? Although I know 3d looks like it never will catch on it's not a deal breaker to have it in a set, right?

 

[Cliff Clavin]

Where are we at? My old Samsung A650 LCD bit the dust this week. What should I be targeting now? 4k? At least 240mhz? Although I know 3d looks like it never will catch on it's not a deal breaker to have it in a set, right?

What do you plan on watching that is in 4K?

 

[Drifter]

Where are we at? My old Samsung A650 LCD bit the dust this week. What should I be targeting now? 4k? At least 240mhz? Although I know 3d looks like it never will catch on it's not a deal breaker to have it in a set, right?

What do you plan on watching that is in 4K

This TV would be the gaming/theater TV so mostly streaming movies, blu ray (for which I'm aware 4k is coming) and games. More looking at this with an eye to the future. I won't buy another TV until this one is dead

 

[pats3in4]

Where are we at? My old Samsung A650 LCD bit the dust this week. What should I be targeting now? 4k? At least 240mhz? Although I know 3d looks like it never will catch on it's not a deal breaker to have it in a set, right?

What do you plan on watching that is in 4K

This TV would be the gaming/theater TV so mostly streaming movies, blu ray (for which I'm aware 4k is coming) and games. More looking at this with an eye to the future. I won't buy another TV until this one is dead

If you are looking for TV to last well into the future, then get a 4K TV as you'll probably own it long enough for the 4K content roll out. The TV makers bundle a lot of features together depending on the SKU, so you might get features with 4K (like internet features or 3D) whether you want them or not.

 

[joffer]

Where are we at? My old Samsung A650 LCD bit the dust this week. What should I be targeting now? 4k? At least 240mhz? Although I know 3d looks like it never will catch on it's not a deal breaker to have it in a set, right?

thats too slow. you want > 1Ghz