4K TVs

Discussion in 'Audio Visual' started by Kommandant33, Oct 17, 2013.

  1. Kookooburra

    Kookooburra Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2004
    Messages:
    5,127
    Location:
    Brisbane
    You're a marketers wet dream, they pump up a number and you empty your wallet.
    What 4k content do you produce, is it on a decent camcorder/prosumer device, or a mobile phone{LOL}....

    You're free to live in a fantasy world where cheap TV's with "one" trendy spec trump high end heavily developed 1080p TV's.

    Show me any credible review where cheap and nasty TV's get anywhere near established high end brands.

    A good PQ is down to a number of factors, not just the resolution and is extremely unlikely to make up for deficiencies in other aspects of the TV's electrical performance.

    If you said you wanted to buy the most expensive 4K, at least you'd get a good TV regardless of the impact 4k has, and at 50in or below, I very much doubt it would have any impact for video{would have significant impact for hi-rez photo's/2D images, but not for 3D images unless the entire TV was well designed to maximize PQ}
     
  2. Kookooburra

    Kookooburra Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2004
    Messages:
    5,127
    Location:
    Brisbane
    I'm of the view that 1080p at 42in is worthwhile, but not sure about $800 worthwhile:p
    If my Pana died, I'd actually try and source a 2013 model Panasonic 50in 2nd hand, they were supposed to be epic TV's.
     
  3. philscomputerlab

    philscomputerlab Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2014
    Messages:
    1,843
    I don't see how? I'm not wanting to upgrade because of 4K. That's not what I'm saying but I don't think you are listening or have put me in a box already. I'm in the market for a cheap 65" TV and if I can get one with 4K for the same or similar price I will go with the 4K screen.

    Again, not what I'm claiming and not the purchase decision I'm making. The total absence of reviews of "cheap and nasty" TVs doesn't help the situation though. I wonder why that is...
     
  4. Sarsippius

    Sarsippius Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    855
    Location:
    Darwin
    From that link it looks like it's going to be a good 2+ years before I upgrade my tv if they're predicting the LG OLED TVs to remain expensive all year.
    Bought a LG 50" FHD Plasma about 2.5 years ago and will wait for a 60-70" OLED to reach a reasonable price. Thinking ~$1,500-2,000 so could be a long wait lol.
    I expect FHD won't exist by that point in time so guess it will be 4K but there's nothing to really buy 4K for at the moment in Aus as mentioned by VirtualNinja above.
     
  5. stevo4

    stevo4 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    10,631
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Canon EOS-1D C

    Still early days for manufacturers providing that feature.

    atm I'm still with you on the need for a 4K TV.
    I'll take the better PQ 1080p and save my money for when 4K TV's are worth having.
    Anything you buy 4K atm, you will have replaced by then.

    While 4K is good for still shots and demo's, largely pointless in an action movie where you are not going to notice difference unless you are watching on an IMAX or VMAX screen.
     
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2015
  6. Kookooburra

    Kookooburra Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2004
    Messages:
    5,127
    Location:
    Brisbane
    I saw a Beyonce bluray running thru a 64 in samsung plasma, and it looked tight, tight, tight{BB}, so I question the need for 4k pixels on even a 65in TV, however, what's always important for PQ is the black levels, the screen uniformity, the useable brightness, the video processing chip etc, and those features are down to the panel quality as determined by the manufacturer and the PRICE, iow, there's no such thing as a good cheap 4k TV vs a high end 1080p.

    OTHO, what we all need is a higher bitrate, for example if free turd to air{FTA} and Foxtel were broadcast at 1920x1080i+17mbps, the last thing you'd be concerned with was better PQ.....plus, bluray is usually 25mbps+ as well, so it's mainly FTA/Foxtel that suck for PQ.
     
  7. philscomputerlab

    philscomputerlab Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2014
    Messages:
    1,843
    I'm not in the market for a high end TV, thought I made that clear. I will be looking at the cheaper and of the market and if I can get a 4K TV then I will grab one.
     
  8. nav

    nav Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2001
    Messages:
    4,330
    Location:
    melbourne
    Is your name Tuco Salamanca?

    -nav.
     
  9. Kookooburra

    Kookooburra Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2004
    Messages:
    5,127
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Got him Gustav
     
  10. ?HILTHY

    ?HILTHY Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2001
    Messages:
    1,062
    Location:
    shadows
    4k is so last year.. im waiting for 8k
     
  11. neoprint

    neoprint Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    444
    Location:
    Cairns
    u wot m8? I'm watching satellite Foxtel right now in HD...
     
  12. MR CHILLED

    MR CHILLED D'oh!

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2002
    Messages:
    158,365
    Location:
    Omicron Persei 8
    When there's even less content than 4K which is virtually non existent anyways? :p
     
  13. Diode

    Diode Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Messages:
    1,736
    Location:
    Melbourne
    The first bit is correct. With so many TV channels on MPEG2 compression, the video quality looks as bad as 480p youtube clips, especially in rural areas where the channel bandwidth is even lower than metro.

    Second part is wrong, you can get Foxtel HD on Satellite. and 4k broadcast is already being delivered by satellite companies. It's easier to do via satellite than it is cable. http://www.ses.com/ultra-hd
     
  14. philscomputerlab

    philscomputerlab Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2014
    Messages:
    1,843
    Codecs is the real issue. They could have easily stuck with DVDs but with new decoder chips and H264 and for BR move to H265. XVid/DivX on a single CD does a better job than rural SD TV :(
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2015
  15. cbb1935

    cbb1935 Guest

    How cheap is cheap? I recently paid under $1500 for an LG 55" 4K TV.

    Price made it hard to argue VS a 65" non 4K TV.
     
  16. philscomputerlab

    philscomputerlab Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2014
    Messages:
    1,843
    Size and price is the main thing that matters. I'd like a glossy panel like my current TCL. It needs to have 1:1 pixel mode because I hook up my PC for all media and the PS4 and that's it. Don't care for Smart TV, WLAN, Media playback and any of that.

    I was tempted getting that Seiki 65" 4k on special for $1099. The reviews on the smaller models are quite good but I couldn't find anything in the 65" range. Plus I got burnt when I ordered a Plasma from JB in 2012 (I live in the bush) and it arrived cracked. So buying local means the range is much smaller and the prices are higher. I think the best deals we had locally was a 65" TCL for around $1700 or something like that but it was matt finish and I really didn't like the picture on it.

    Why are there no reviews on the cheap units? All you find are some YouTube videos and comments on forums but nothing solid.
     
  17. cbb1935

    cbb1935 Guest

    LG 55" is definitely glossy, and does 1:1 mapping I believe.

    I haven't set ours up yet though (recently moved and bought it new), but on paper it had some quality specs and was at a good price.

    I got warned off some of the cheap brands. Hisense are REALLY nice, but the way to change inputs on them is apparently quite fiddly.

    Panasonic and Samsung had a 4K, but contrast wise the LG left them for dead.
     
  18. nico6

    nico6 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    1,687
    Location:
    melb.vic.au
    Because the cheap brands don't give the industry devices to test
     
  19. Kookooburra

    Kookooburra Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2004
    Messages:
    5,127
    Location:
    Brisbane
    So 1080p looks better on a smaller 4k screen?
     
  20. the_antipop

    the_antipop Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Messages:
    2,371
    Location:
    Gold Coast
    Has anyone tested the Kogan 65" 4k TV?
     

Share This Page

Advertisement: