4K, worth bothering ?

[J4CKO]

think I am going to buy a 43 inch Samsung for the back room, limited by the gap as per my other thread, just got to thinking, is it worth getting a 4K at that size, thinking prob not and there arent really any sources and it wasnt like I was unhappy with 1080P anyway.

Have a bigger (55) inch in the front room for gaming and films so would prob go to 4K when I change that.

is there a good reason, other than futureproofing ?

[Frances The Mute]

I did with a Panasonic - mainly because it was the best performing TV when I compared it to others during my research.

I wasn't fusssed on 4K but it's existing spec and PQ ticked all of the boxes for me.

[Troubleatmill]

Well.... all of Netflix new content is 4K and Amazon is following suit.

Depends how much you are spending........

[Joratk]

Bought a 55" 4K TV yesterday as a matter of coincidence. I decided that I may as well go for the latest tech in terms of screen resolution, as we are sort of in an interim period between 1080p and 4K, similar to when we were transitioning from 720p to 1080p, and didn't want to spend over £700 on a TV that would be outdated in 5 years. Plus, more PPI the better, right?

[jmorgan]

Been mooching around a few and upscaling is my first concern, feel the need to get a new TV (HD or UHD). Be using Netflix or sport for the UHD, there are enough HD channels on Freeview now and then the internet TV (to upscale). I expect SD will be awful. Next visit, I want to see that on the demo. And new stock is dropping into John Lewis soon.

New Bluray players due out as well for UHD this year?.

[Phunk]

I wouldn't touch 4K until the proper OLED HDR 4K TV's come out. it's almost like buying an 'HD ready' tv.

[jmorgan]

Some new Samsungs with HDR ready due out looking at the JL site, that is another clincher but it's adding ££.

Looking at the OLED and Samsung, I was underwhelmed with the difference (accepting limitations of a showroom). Now others are starting to get their mitts on the LG panels, it will be interesting to see how their processing works under fire.

Problem is if I wait for the next best, I will be waiting forever.

[Chris Stott]

If the TV you like is 4K, buy it, but if there's a 1080p set that looks better buy that.

There's very little 4K content available, and what there is isn't true 4K - Netflix 4k is highly compressed, and looks no better than 1080p, and 4k blueray players (already out in the US, Europe to follow very soon) will be close to £400 with content c.£20/disc.

When Sky 4K comes out in the next few months it will be like netflix 4k (highly compressed), but should at least be a step up from their current 1080i... though it will make little difference if this is your 2nd TV as even if you have Q, the mini boxes won't do 4K.

4K is nothing like the step up from SD to HD. The real jump in picture quality comes with HDR.

[J4CKO]

Cheers all, not going to bother, just going to get a Smart 1080P 43 inch Samsung to replace the 40 inch non smart one which is ok but a good few years old now, only £350.

Tellys seem to be cheaper now than ever, remember when the biggest CRT was 32 inch and cost over a grand for a decent one ?

[T1berious]

I've been keeping an eye on the standards (HDR, rec.2020 etc.) and it looks like the 2016 units "seem" to tick more of the boxes (HDMI 2.0a, 10 bit panels etc) for the mid price panels.

waiting to see what Sony actually pulls out and Samsung for the mid price units.

Hold fire!

[Foliage]

I wouldn't bother, VR and 360 will hit next year as the next major leap forward/fad

[Phunk]

I had a look at one of of these whilst on a training course a couple of months ago.

http://www.sony.co.uk/pro/product/broadcast-produc...

If this is anything like what 4K tv's are going to be come then they'll be incredible.

Once you see HDR in the flesh it'll blow your socks off. Just a shame that's £22k + VAT

[ecotec]

jmorgan said:

Problem is if I wait for the next best, I will be waiting forever.

I'm doing this too!
currently waiting for the new mid range LGs and Sony's hopefully will be worth the wait!

[Ollerton57]

Phunk said:

I wouldn't touch 4K until the proper OLED HDR 4K TV's come out. it's almost like buying an 'HD ready' tv.

I just picked up the LG 55eg920v from Costco as its in the sale until the beginning of April and has a couple hundred off.

Anyway.. It's a 4K OLED which has the correct hdmi ports to be blueray HDR compatible. Software is already there to support streaming when it comes in.

[Phunk]

Ollerton57 said:

Phunk said:

I wouldn't touch 4K until the proper OLED HDR 4K TV's come out. it's almost like buying an 'HD ready' tv.

I just picked up the LG 55eg920v from Costco as its in the sale until the beginning of April and has a couple hundred off.

Anyway.. It's a 4K OLED which has the correct hdmi ports to be blueray HDR compatible. Software is already there to support streaming when it comes in.

It may be 'Compatible' but it sure as heck isn't a HDR screen.

[varsas]

Phunk said:

Ollerton57 said:

Phunk said:

I wouldn't touch 4K until the proper OLED HDR 4K TV's come out. it's almost like buying an 'HD ready' tv.

I just picked up the LG 55eg920v from Costco as its in the sale until the beginning of April and has a couple hundred off.

Anyway.. It's a 4K OLED which has the correct hdmi ports to be blueray HDR compatible. Software is already there to support streaming when it comes in.

It may be 'Compatible' but it sure as heck isn't a HDR screen.

So where do you draw the line? What is an 'HDR' screen? One with the HDR premium sticker, which itself is just an arbitrary set of numbers chosen by no one more impartial than the TV manufacturers themselves? The performance a screen needs to have to 'earn' one falls very far short of the levels the material is mastered for, you only need something like 1/10th the brightness and less than 70% of the colour space.

Surely an HDR screen is one with 4k resolution, that can understand the HDR metadata and supports at least HDR 10 10bit colour encoding, can display greater than 100nits of brightness and is capable of exceeding the Rec. 709 colour gamut. The 920v and similar are 4k, have HDMI 2.0a, can go to about 450 nits, and display about 85% of the DCI P3 colour space. I'd call that an HDR screen.

[Phunk]

varsas said:

Phunk said:

Ollerton57 said:

Phunk said:

I wouldn't touch 4K until the proper OLED HDR 4K TV's come out. it's almost like buying an 'HD ready' tv.

I just picked up the LG 55eg920v from Costco as its in the sale until the beginning of April and has a couple hundred off.

Anyway.. It's a 4K OLED which has the correct hdmi ports to be blueray HDR compatible. Software is already there to support streaming when it comes in.

It may be 'Compatible' but it sure as heck isn't a HDR screen.

So where do you draw the line? What is an 'HDR' screen? One with the HDR premium sticker, which itself is just an arbitrary set of numbers chosen by no one more impartial than the TV manufacturers themselves? The performance a screen needs to have to 'earn' one falls very far short of the levels the material is mastered for, you only need something like 1/10th the brightness and less than 70% of the colour space.

Surely an HDR screen is one with 4k resolution, that can understand the HDR metadata and supports at least HDR 10 10bit colour encoding, can display greater than 100nits of brightness and is capable of exceeding the Rec. 709 colour gamut. The 920v and similar are 4k, have HDMI 2.0a, can go to about 450 nits, and display about 85% of the DCI P3 colour space. I'd call that an HDR screen.

It's a lot more than that:

http://www.trustedreviews.com/opinions/hdr-tv-high...

[jmorgan]

From what I understand of HDR, it is something I want. So future proofing when I buy if the loot allows.

[varsas]

Phunk said:

varsas said:

Phunk said:

Ollerton57 said:

Phunk said:

I wouldn't touch 4K until the proper OLED HDR 4K TV's come out. it's almost like buying an 'HD ready' tv.

I just picked up the LG 55eg920v from Costco as its in the sale until the beginning of April and has a couple hundred off.

Anyway.. It's a 4K OLED which has the correct hdmi ports to be blueray HDR compatible. Software is already there to support streaming when it comes in.

It may be 'Compatible' but it sure as heck isn't a HDR screen.

So where do you draw the line? What is an 'HDR' screen? One with the HDR premium sticker, which itself is just an arbitrary set of numbers chosen by no one more impartial than the TV manufacturers themselves? The performance a screen needs to have to 'earn' one falls very far short of the levels the material is mastered for, you only need something like 1/10th the brightness and less than 70% of the colour space.

Surely an HDR screen is one with 4k resolution, that can understand the HDR metadata and supports at least HDR 10 10bit colour encoding, can display greater than 100nits of brightness and is capable of exceeding the Rec. 709 colour gamut. The 920v and similar are 4k, have HDMI 2.0a, can go to about 450 nits, and display about 85% of the DCI P3 colour space. I'd call that an HDR screen.

It's a lot more than that:

http://www.trustedreviews.com/opinions/hdr-tv-high...

Pre-empting what I expected you to say, I have already explained why I don't think the UHD premium label should be equated with HDR. I have also taken the time to explained why I do think the TV we're talking about is HDR.

The article says:

"In a nutshell, it’s the ability to display a wider and richer range of colours, much brighter whites, and much deeper, darker blacks."

Which is exactly what the 4K OLED's give you.

[Moily]

jmorgan said:

From what I understand of HDR, it is something I want. So future proofing when I buy if the loot allows.

Ditto here.

Currently awaiting the UK launch of the 2016 HiSense range. Competitive with the usual brands but won't need a 2nd mortgage to get one!