02-23-2015, 01:01 PM
|
#2
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Victoria, BC
|
I bought a new TV a few months ago. Looked around quite a bit and settled on a Visio. All the 4K 120Hz TV's I looked at sucked, TBH. With that resolution the refresh rate was really noticable. And I think curved TVs are a joke unless we're talking about 100"+.
This was posted over the weekend, has me excited...
http://www.cnet.com/news/vizio-2015-...-for-less-pay/
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to HotHotHeat For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
02-23-2015, 06:48 PM
|
#3
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sunshine Coast
|
I've read that unless you are sitting directly in front of the curved screen the reflections are bad.
I see nothing wrong with going 4K although to get the best results your viewing distance should be considered. Also consider if you are going to use the TV for computer gaming as most of these 4K TVs won't accept 4K at 60Hz with a colour gamut of 4:4:4. The new models are coming out soon so there should be some deals happening.
|
|
|
|
|
02-23-2015, 10:18 PM
|
#4
|
|
Powerplay Quarterback
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Regulator75
|
I have the 50" version, love it. But keep an eye out for sales online, like Newegg or Memory Express. You can get 4K TVs a lot cheaper during sales.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Handsome B. Wonderful For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
02-24-2015, 07:54 AM
|
#5
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SW Ontario
|
I prefer OLED over 4K.
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to dissentowner For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
02-24-2015, 08:00 AM
|
#6
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Behind Nikkor Glass
|
The OLED are nice too, the LG only comes in 55 inch, was hoping for bigger.
Would the picture look better on a 240Hz / 1080P or a 4K at 120Hz?
Mind you I won't be watching much / if any of 4K resolution.
|
|
|
|
|
02-24-2015, 08:15 AM
|
#7
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Virginia
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Regulator75
The OLED are nice too, the LG only comes in 55 inch, was hoping for bigger.
Would the picture look better on a 240Hz / 1080P or a 4K at 120Hz?
Mind you I won't be watching much / if any of 4K resolution.
|
I used to be a bit of an AV hobbyist, and my knowledge is pretty dated.
But, I don't understand any benefit of 240 over 120. All that I would think matters is that you get an exact multiple of the source, which would typically either be 60 or 24. I am guessing all that 240 is used for is that awful motion enhanced that setting that drives me crazy when people leave it on.
My other thoughts are that 4k seems like an absolute waste if you don't have a 4k source. And even if you do, you have to be sitting pretty close to a pretty big tv to be able to see that resolution.
I am also always a believer that the number one factor in a good picture, especially if you watch a lot of movies, is getting the best black level and shadow detail possible. Not something that you usually notice with the bright outdoor demo material on TVs, but once you get home and watch in your living room, it makes a big difference. That was why I was always a fan of plasma TVs, and I guess is where OLEDs out perform the competitors now.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to nfotiu For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
02-24-2015, 10:49 AM
|
#8
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Fernando Valley
|
240 Hz may help (depending on your eye as some people can't tell the difference between 120/240) for sports but for movies it sucks as the motion smoothing leads to the dreaded soap opera affect.
|
|
|
|
|
02-24-2015, 10:55 AM
|
#9
|
|
Has lived the dream!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Where I lay my head is home...
|
I have the 55" of the first TV you listed since Nov. Love it! Course, I was still rocking a tube TV before that, haha.
Was on sale for 1599. Think it's back up to 1899 now. Size probably makes it a no go for you, but all the other features are the same and I've had no problems.
Was worried about the curve being a gimmick, but I really like it. Plus I have it in a corner, so it actually kinda works for the space I have.
Also wondered if I should just wait for the 4k's to come down, or just get one then, but I wanted the higher frame rate and the 3D so I went with that. Shoot, I lived with a tube for so long, I can probably deal with less def for a while if I don't have the funds for an upgrade. Plus, I'm not sure how much difference it makes on the smaller screens, and I really can't fit anything bigger anywhere in the place I have now anyway.
Regarding frame rate, a lot depends on the feed you have and where the show is coming from (IE through what networks). I've seen some commercials and shows that look wildly different not just based on the TV model, but on how the feed is set up, how the show is being broadcast etc. However, one of the biggest advantages is gaming, as those always come through at the same data level depending on your console and connection.
That's my laymans knowledge anyway, I'm sure someone will come on here and correct or fine tune my knowledge a bit on frame rates. Which could be a good thing, I'd like to know more.
Last edited by Daradon; 02-24-2015 at 11:00 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
02-24-2015, 10:59 AM
|
#10
|
|
Franchise Player
|
4K is basically a scam. http://www.cnet.com/news/why-4k-tvs-are-stupid/ and http://www.cnet.com/news/why-ultra-h...-still-stupid/
Essentially unless you're buying an 80 inch 4k TV and sitting less than 10 feet away from it it's a waste of money. If you are doing that, great, but that's not most people.
On the whole, it's a pretty bad time to buy a TV right now, unless you're willing to go OLED. And even then, if you wait, the price will come down.
The other option is to see if anywhere still has a Panasonic VT50, VT60 or a Samsung F8500, which aside from the OLEDs are still the best TVs out there for picture quality.
EDIT: here you go, under 2000 bucks, best TV you're likely to find for anything resembling that price.
http://www.2001audiovideo.com/en/cat...sung-PN60F8500
Last edited by CorsiHockeyLeague; 02-24-2015 at 11:07 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
02-24-2015, 11:57 AM
|
#11
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Sylvan Lake
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Regulator75
|
I can't comment on these TV's but more on Samsungs.
We have had them for the past, I actually don't know how long, and they have been great.
__________________
Captain James P. DeCOSTE, CD, 18 Sep 1993
Corporal Jean-Marc H. BECHARD, 6 Aug 1993
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sliver
Just ignore me...I'm in a mood today.
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-24-2015, 12:05 PM
|
#12
|
|
Lifetime Suspension
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Calgary
|
I used to be a Samsung fanboi, now I've switched to Vizio.
Great TVs and you could get 3 of them with your budget.
I bought this around xmas - http://www.vizio.com/en-ca/m602ib3.html
If I recall correctly, I paid around $1000 including tax.
|
|
|
|
|
02-24-2015, 01:30 PM
|
#13
|
|
Has lived the dream!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Where I lay my head is home...
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
4K is basically a scam. http://www.cnet.com/news/why-4k-tvs-are-stupid/ and http://www.cnet.com/news/why-ultra-h...-still-stupid/
Essentially unless you're buying an 80 inch 4k TV and sitting less than 10 feet away from it it's a waste of money. If you are doing that, great, but that's not most people.
On the whole, it's a pretty bad time to buy a TV right now, unless you're willing to go OLED. And even then, if you wait, the price will come down.
The other option is to see if anywhere still has a Panasonic VT50, VT60 or a Samsung F8500, which aside from the OLEDs are still the best TVs out there for picture quality.
EDIT: here you go, under 2000 bucks, best TV you're likely to find for anything resembling that price.
http://www.2001audiovideo.com/en/cat...sung-PN60F8500 |
Dunno if I'd go as far as calling it a scam, but yeah, that's basically what I heard. The human eye is not going to be able to tell a difference unless you have a very big screen.
|
|
|
|
|
02-24-2015, 02:46 PM
|
#14
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Behind Nikkor Glass
|
Perhaps I'll just stick with a 1080p, makes it easier to choose.
Last edited by Regulator75; 02-24-2015 at 03:01 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
02-24-2015, 02:56 PM
|
#15
|
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daradon
Dunno if I'd go as far as calling it a scam, but yeah, that's basically what I heard. The human eye is not going to be able to tell a difference unless you have a very big screen.
|
You also have to sit really close. The smaller the screen, the closer you must sit. To get to a normal-ish viewing distance your TV would have to be over 100 inches.
Scam might be a bit much but they generally sell these things in stores by having you compare the picture while standing about two feet from the screen. Newsflash: you aren't going to be watching TV from that close to it.
4K makes a ton of sense if you're one of those people with projectors, though.
|
|
|
|
|
02-24-2015, 04:04 PM
|
#16
|
|
My face is a bum!
|
Unless it's problems with the source, I can definitely notice the pixilation on an 80" TV from more than 10' away. It was the first time I went "Huh... so that's why we need 4K".
|
|
|
|
|
02-24-2015, 04:15 PM
|
#17
|
|
Franchise Player
|
By "notice" you mean if you try hard you can detect a difference, or that it's obvious enough to affect your viewing experience? If the latter, you are either some sort of mutant with superman-eyes, or it's psychological.
http://i.i.cbsi.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim/20...tion_chart.jpg
At 80" and 10 feet, the difference is barely perceptible. Shouldn't affect viewing. To get the full benefit of 4K at that distance (assuming non-mutant-Superman eyes) your TV would need to be somewhere in the 100-110" range.
|
|
|
|
|
02-24-2015, 05:19 PM
|
#18
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Virginia
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by hulkrogan
Unless it's problems with the source, I can definitely notice the pixilation on an 80" TV from more than 10' away. It was the first time I went "Huh... so that's why we need 4K".
|
What you are probably talking about are macro blocking and pixilation compression artifacts. You'll see pixelation in overly compressed sources in things like explosions where you'll see it turn from something smooth to brightly colored squares. Macroblocking is similar where you can see rather large blocks.
At 1080p, even on an 80 inch tv, the pixels are less than a mm. So if the pixels you are seeing are less than a mmm, then 4k will make a difference. Bigger than that, it is probably compression artifacts, which are becoming less common with higher bitrate sources and better compression algorithms.
When you see the screen door effect where it looks like you are watching through a screen door, then you are actually seeing the pixels and would benefit from a higher resolution. I see this effect sometimes sitting close to a large projector image or sitting up close in a digital movie theater.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to nfotiu For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
02-24-2015, 11:23 PM
|
#19
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sunshine Coast
|
One thing about 4K TVs is that the top of the line TVs are 4K, so in most cases you will get better picture quality and features with a 4K TV. I have a 4K 40" Samsung HU7000 (American version review) but it's in my den with my computer and sits between 40" and 48" away. The picture quality is great. I don't know if it's because it's 4K or it's just a newer and better TV than my previous 3D Sony 40" TV. It came at a very good price so I decided to check it out.
This argument reminds me of the 720p versus 1080p argument a few years ago. There aren't many 4K sources right now except a few on Youtube and on Netflix but that will change and these TVs do a good job of upconverting.
Here's another graph which makes my decision reasonable as my viewing distance is right in the sweet spot.
Last edited by Vulcan; 02-24-2015 at 11:26 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
02-25-2015, 12:48 AM
|
#20
|
|
Backup Goalie
Join Date: Sep 2003
Exp: 
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:21 PM.
|
|
