Discussion in 'Audio Visual' started by aokman, Oct 3, 2018.
Imho even though Hisense don't have the best software that's a steal o f a price
Yeah, I don't really care for TV software as I use a VodafoneTV box for my App needs and Xbox One X for gaming and Blue-ray. I watch very little FTA TV. Last night I watched The Fifth Element and The Last Jedi Ultra HD's. Wow! Amazing clarity and detail.
If only video stores hadn't died out, I'd be back renting UltraHD's! I'm not going to go down the path of the past buying DVD's, then HD-DVD's and Blue-Rays again. I did pick up a few classics from the recent JB 20% off.
Of course now I want a new 4K AVR.
Hoping that PX65 will come down more, currently $2199 + shipping.
It went up, they added $85 shipping cost since last week.
Seeing more 8k TVs being tested now. I'd love to see 8k on 65"+ OLED, given that 4k is supposed to be viewed on a 30" monitor we're not really getting the true UHD experience on big screen TVs.
realistically though, first question.....will there be that much difference? And if there is it worth the change away from a 4K OLED? I'd say probably no to both of those questions.
I'm far more interested in VRR, HDR and HFR technologies than multiplying the pixels by 4 again. Is there even much 8k content floating about? I'm sure my HTPC wouldn't like driving at that res for games.
Wait, what? Viewing distance for a 30" monitor and a 65" TV are obviously very different....if you're more than 1.25m away from 65" screen, you'd need well above average eyesight to resolve individual pixels on a 4K panel.
For comfortable viewing you generally want a TV to cover around 30 degrees of your field of view, and not more than about 40 degrees. For a 65" display, that comes out to viewing distances between about 2 metres and 3 metres.
Put those two thoughts together and you'll note that at 2 metres you're already too far away to appreciate the full sharpness of a 4K panel. Unless you're sitting absurdly close you don't need 8K at home TV sizes.
75"+ screens need a higher res than 4k to produce 4k levels of sharpness, does that make sense?
Viewing distance doesn't matter, increasing screen size without increasing resolution results in PQ loss and yeah telling customer to "sit further away" if they wan't a sharp image isn't going to cut it.
Hisense = no Dolby Vision
Movies and TV won't be getting the benefit of 8K for a looooong time.
Would you really want to be an early adopter of 8K? The first 4K TVs would be classed as garbage compared to the current OLEDs and they are dropping down in price all the time.
Bit like buying Full HD on a 50" inch panel or 4K 55" TV or 8K 65"..... Pissing money down the drain for no real benefit.
No, I care about bang for buck and I'm not about to spend $10,000-$20,000 on a TV.
The 2020 Olympics will be broadcast in 8k, what I would like to see is 8k replacing 4k on higher end big TVs in the near future (65ish and up,) that's all.
I can't see 8K worth paying a premium for that's my issue, it would literally be a useless feature on a 65" panel and I can't see traditional TVs getting much bigger, talking around 90" or so and 4K would still do the job at that size anyway.
I'd suggest looking into why 8K exists... it certainly is not useless having an 8K panel. Early adopter is never recommended though...
Anyway, back to OLED's.
You might have to spell out the benefits I have no idea what your on about.
My issue is that where and when are you going to derive a benefit?
Is their enough bandwidth to supply the stream I.e Tokoyo?
https://www.samsung.com/au/tvs/qled-q900r-row/QA65Q900RBWXXY/ 65" QLED $10,000
Sony have OLEDs, $70,000 US for the BIG screen.
Bugger all 8k content around but still.
Get the feeling it'll be like the tail end of the 1080P plasma era and people sticking with their screens despite the onset of 4K LCDs.... the comparison here could be 4K OLED vs 8K qled/led/lecd, given the choice it won't be a hard one to make IMO....
Just speculating but you could have "cheap" 8k lcds, 4k oleds and bloody expensive 8k oleds in a few years.
most channels around here aren't even broadcast above 1080p yet anyway....
I haven't watched broadcast since 2012 or something?
We're only barely starting to get into 4K.
OK, apparently you won't do the math for yourself, so let's step through this. This will take a while, and I fully expect you'll ignore it, but maybe somebody will find this informative, so here goes....
We'll take a 75" TV, just to swing things your way as much as possible.
A human with 20/20 vision has visual acuity equivalent to angular resolution of about 1/60th of a degree. Putting that the other way around, you can resolve about 60 pixels per degree in the centre of your field of view.
For 4K, that means we can cover a field of view that is: 3840 pixels / 60 pixels per degree = 64 degrees.
Now, without even working that through, I can tell you that will equate to an uncomfortable viewing distance for any size screen. I already brought up the rules of thumb in my previous post - TV's feel "normal" when they subtend about 30 degrees of your field of view, and people pushing for a "cinematic" experience (i.e. good for movies, but bloody weird for talking heads on the news) will go up to 40 degrees. 64 degrees is literally double the "normal" size and still a good deal larger than the "cinematic" end of the scale.
But I said we'd do the math, so let's keep going. First, let's work out the width of that 75" screen. Pythagorus tells us that A² + B² = C² . Taking A and B as 16 and 9 respectively, we find C = √(16² + 9²) = √337.
The square root of 337 divided by 16 = 1.147. 75" / 1.147 = a bit over 65 inches = 1.66 metres
OK, now let's take an isosceles triangle with base 1.66 metres and included angle of 64 degrees. The height of the triangle is the optimal viewing distance for a 75" 4K TV.
That triangle has the same height as a right triangle with base 0.83 metres and opposite angle 32 degrees. SOHCAHTOA to the rescue... We have an angle, the opposite side, and we'd like to know the adjacent side, so Tan it is. Tan(32°) = 0.83 / x , so x = 0.83 / Tan(32°) = 0.83 / 0.625 = 1.32 metres.
Yep. The furthest a human with 20/20 vision can sit from a 75" TV and resolve all the pixels is 1.32 metres.
So tell me again how we need more pixels?