4k HDR TV selection - rather baffled!

[sprite-]

what i don't understand is why do PC enthusiasts opt for IPS panels over TN and VA and PLS?

and why do tv enthusiasts opt for VA over IPS?

surely if 1 tech was superior then it would be opted for across the board?

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=85

as you can see many people opting for IPS and specifying they want IPS over others

Entirely different uses.

VA contrast performance is far better than IPS, also IPS will typically have more backlit uniformity issues (Only typically though, LG are worst for this).

The only real thing going for IPS on a TV is viewing angles and VA has improved allot on this area in last 1-2 years, plus most will have a seating position in their lounge which is unaffected by it.

 

[Kenai]

I don't think there are many (if any) sub £1000 TVs with true 10 bit HDR?

 

[Psycho Sonny]

Entirely different uses.

VA contrast performance is far better than IPS, also IPS will typically have more backlit uniformity issues (Only typically though, LG are worst for this).

The only real thing going for IPS on a TV is viewing angles and VA has improved allot on this area in last 1-2 years, plus most will have a seating position in their lounge which is unaffected by it.

doesn't make any sense.

on a monitor you sit head on. tv's more chance of you sitting at an angle.

think how a desk is positioned with the monitor and the chair your head on to it. why would you need viewing angles?

so none of what you said makes any sense tbh. so the only thing going for it is viewing angles yet people who buy monitors favour IPS where they will 99.9% of the time be head on to it

 

[sprite-]

Is the LG 49UH770V not proper HDR?

Their blurb:

Super UHD with HDR Plus for stunning contrast levels
With their unique 'HDR Plus' technology, LG have pushed the abilities of 4K UHD resolution to the max. HDR (High Dynamic Range) Plus extends the range of colours for enhanced realism. It also delivers brighter whites and darker blacks, helping to give this TV stunning levels of contrast.

Dolby Vision for dramatic imaging
Dolby Vision optimises the HDR format to give quite simply the sharpest, most accurate images possible. Dolby vision-equipped TVs, like this LG, can decode both generic HDR content and content that's specifically been encoded in Dolby Vision - a leading format in Hollywood and cinemas. Dolby Vision also adjusts the picture to take full advantage of each display's characteristics and presents an optimized picture for each scene in specially mastered content.

SDR to HDR conversion - the best possible picture from Blu-ray
Another unique feature with LG's HDR Plus technology is the ability to convert SHD (Standard Dynamic Range) video to HDR for near-HDR quality from all your standard High Definition sources. This means that Blu-rays and other FHD content has greater realism, more depth and sharper detail than ever.

In short. Yes and No.

It's got an 8 bit panel plus dither, basically like cheating your way to a 10 bit panel. Not the same.

I think the primary problem is any manufacturer can slam HDR on their set, yet not really give a HDR experience. Which is why the Ultra HD Premium certification came into play, that's not to say your TV needs to be certified (Sony have a 10bit / 1000 nits panel but didn't go for certification).

If you want HDR, actually want to buy a TV and go "Ah, that's why people rave about it". You'll need either a Ultra HD Premiem certified set or one that meets their specification. If you don't, you'll playing HDR content on a TV which doesn't have the colour range and will only pump out around 400nits peak brightness and wonder to yourself what the fuss is about.. As you don't see much difference and be pretty frustrated at yourself to buying it.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

Is the LG 49UH770V not proper HDR?

Their blurb:

Super UHD with HDR Plus for stunning contrast levels
With their unique 'HDR Plus' technology, LG have pushed the abilities of 4K UHD resolution to the max. HDR (High Dynamic Range) Plus extends the range of colours for enhanced realism. It also delivers brighter whites and darker blacks, helping to give this TV stunning levels of contrast.

Dolby Vision for dramatic imaging
Dolby Vision optimises the HDR format to give quite simply the sharpest, most accurate images possible. Dolby vision-equipped TVs, like this LG, can decode both generic HDR content and content that's specifically been encoded in Dolby Vision - a leading format in Hollywood and cinemas. Dolby Vision also adjusts the picture to take full advantage of each display's characteristics and presents an optimized picture for each scene in specially mastered content.

SDR to HDR conversion - the best possible picture from Blu-ray
Another unique feature with LG's HDR Plus technology is the ability to convert SHD (Standard Dynamic Range) video to HDR for near-HDR quality from all your standard High Definition sources. This means that Blu-rays and other FHD content has greater realism, more depth and sharper detail than ever.

it's 8 bit with dither see my post above about what dithering is. it's basically a way of simulating 10 bit through processing or image manipulation but it's not true 10 bit.

the only 10 bit LCD LG make is this

LG 65UH950V

the UH950V range which starts at £2K

 

[sprite-]

doesn't make any sense.

on a monitor you sit head on. tv's more chance of you sitting at an angle.

think how a desk is positioned with the monitor and the chair your head on to it. why would you need viewing angles?

so none of what you said makes any sense tbh. so the only thing going for it is viewing angles yet people who buy monitors favour IPS where they will 99.9% of the time be head on to it

It absolutely makes sense, plenty of people use monitors at off angles. Especially when using them in an office. Anyway the primary difference here is contrast performance, something which is incredibly important on a TV and less so on a computer monitor.

 

[hughtrimble]

In short. Yes and No.

It's got an 8 bit panel plus dither, basically like cheating your way to a 10 bit panel. Not the same.

I think the primary problem is any manufacturer can slam HDR on their set, yet not really give a HDR experience. Which is why the Ultra HD Premium certification came into play, that's not to say your TV needs to be certified (Sony have a 10bit / 1000 nits panel but didn't go for certification).

If you want HDR, actually want to buy a TV and go "Ah, that's why people rave about it". You'll need either a Ultra HD Premiem certified set or one that meets their specification. If you don't, you'll playing HDR content on a TV which doesn't have the colour range and will only pump out around 400nits peak brightness and wonder to yourself what the fuss is about.. As you don't see much difference and be pretty frustrated at yourself to buying it.

The little scrotes! You're quite right, just hunting around and LG themselves have stated it's 8 bit panel with dithering...How they can say it's that Dolby stuff (which I thought needed a 12 bit panel) is beyond me.

Basically I don't care about HDR then, as I'm not spending 1k on a telly. The fake HDR stuff just irks me greatly.

I just want a 40-50 inch 4k TV! I don't give a rats about the other stuff now.

 

[stewski]

doesn't make any sense.

on a monitor you sit head on. tv's more chance of you sitting at an angle.

think how a desk is positioned with the monitor and the chair your head on to it. why would you need viewing angles?

so none of what you said makes any sense tbh. so the only thing going for it is viewing angles yet people who buy monitors favour IPS where they will 99.9% of the time be head on to it

If I share a monitor (and I do on occasion) it will typically involve far more acute angles than our TV.

 

[hughtrimble]

it's 8 bit with dither see my post above about what dithering is. it's basically a way of simulating 10 bit through processing or image manipulation but it's not true 10 bit.

the only 10 bit LCD LG make is this

LG 65UH950V

the UH950V range which starts at £2K

Cheers Sonny, just found that out. I find it incredibly frustrating that they just try and con you into thinking it's full blow HDR when it simply isn't.

I'm ignoring anything HDR related in the sales blurb now.

 

[sprite-]

I don't think there are many (if any) sub £1000 TVs with true 10 bit HDR?

My Samsung UE55KS7000 was £899, was that at Richersounds, Currys and JL. Think it's around 1050 now. The 49" version can still be had for under 1k and the Sony one was on offer a couple of days ago also. Just need to keep your eye out.

 

[Kenai]

If you don't, you'll playing HDR content on a TV which doesn't have the colour range and will only pump out around 400nits peak brightness and wonder to yourself what the fuss is about.. As you don't see much difference and be pretty frustrated at yourself to buying it.

It's probably worth mentioning though, like 4K, it's pretty much got to the point where above £300 it's hard to find a TV that isn't labelled HDR.

As long as you go into the purchase realising that a £600 'HDR' TV is not the same thing as a £1500 'HDR' TV, then you should be ok. It's not something that should frustrate you as it's not as if most of these TVs are available as a £150 cheaper non-HDR version anyway.

 

[sprite-]

Cheers Sonny, just found that out. I find it incredibly frustrating that they just try and con you into thinking it's full blow HDR when it simply isn't.

I'm ignoring anything HDR related in the sales blurb now.

Completely agree. It annoys the hell out of me. Had a few colleagues who bought cheaper "HDR" sets over holidays, they really aren't happy.

 

[stewski]

The little scrotes! You're quite right, just hunting around and LG themselves have stated it's 8 bit panel with dithering...How they can say it's that Dolby stuff (which I thought needed a 12 bit panel) is beyond me.

Basically I don't care about HDR then, as I'm not spending 1k on a telly. The fake HDR stuff just irks me greatly.

I just want a 40-50 inch 4k TV! I don't give a rats about the other stuff now.

As I said at this point in time (re specifications) and with reasonable costs to oled around the corner, I can see no reason to invest heavily in 4k LCD.

 

[sprite-]

It's probably worth mentioning though, like 4K, it's pretty much got to the point where above £300 it's hard to find a TV that isn't labelled HDR.

As long as you go into the purchase realising that a £600 'HDR' TV is not the same thing as a £1500 'HDR' TV, then you should be ok. It's not something that should frustrate you as it's not as if most of these TVs are available as a £150 cheaper non-HDR version anyway.

Yup. I think it's more frustration on the impact that will have on content. As somebody who enjoys HDR with a proper HDR TV, id prefer other consumers aren't mislead by it. That way content will grow instead of people developing a point of view that it's "Not that much different" - but when watched in the right way it's bloody fantastic.

 

[sprite-]

As I said at this point in time (re specifications) and with reasonable costs to oled around the corner, I can see no reason to invest heavily in 4k LCD.

I wouldn't agree tbh, providing you get a decent LCD...

OLED has had plenty of its own problems, still does. At its current price point, it really needs to iron those out.

2 more years and I'll look at OLED... Going to be interesting to see how long it'll take them to get OLED to 4000nits, they've got some technological issues to solve on the the brightness front.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

The little scrotes! You're quite right, just hunting around and LG themselves have stated it's 8 bit panel with dithering...How they can say it's that Dolby stuff (which I thought needed a 12 bit panel) is beyond me.

Basically I don't care about HDR then, as I'm not spending 1k on a telly. The fake HDR stuff just irks me greatly.

I just want a 40-50 inch 4k TV! I don't give a rats about the other stuff now.

Samsung UE49KS7000 - £850 is your best bet for 10 bit panel

that is what you get for the extra £200 over the LG

unfortunately the only 10 bit panel that will fit my living room is curved and therefore won't fit inside my enclosure in my feature wall (it has doors which close and hide the tv. so my only choice was the LG.

 

[Kenai]

Yup. I think it's more frustration on the impact that will have on content. As somebody who enjoys HDR with a proper HDR TV, id prefer other consumers aren't mislead by it. That way content will grow instead of people developing a point of view that it's "Not that much different" - but when watched in the right way it's bloody fantastic.

Yes, can completely agree with that - much like the early days of HD with 'HD Ready' TVs giving a lacklustre improvement that probably only slowed the adoption of Full HD in the long run.

 

[stewski]

I wouldn't agree tbh, providing you get a decent LCD...

OLED has had plenty of its own problems, still does. At its current price point, it really needs to iron those out.

2 more years and I'll look at OLED... Going to be interesting to see how long it'll take them to get OLED to 4000nits, they've got some technological issues to solve on the the brightness front.

As I understand it input lag has been addressed to some degree via firmware, what other issues do you see.

From a simple laymans point of view and ignoring cost at most reasonable sizes (say 40+-75") in simple terms I'd assert
OLED > HDR 10bit > HDR 8Bit (including emulation) > 4k

 

[hughtrimble]

Samsung UE49KS7000 - £850 is your best bet for 10 bit panel

that is what you get for the extra £200 over the LG

unfortunately the only 10 bit panel that will fit my living room is curved and therefore won't fit inside my enclosure in my feature wall (it has doors which close and hide the tv. so my only choice was the LG.

And I'm just not sure I need HDR as I'm not a film buff who will be buying into the proper Bluray gear for it etc. and by the time it's widespread in things like Netflix, Amazon etc. it'll likely be OLED time anyway. Maybe!

 

[sprite-]

Yes, can completely agree with that - much like the early days of HD with 'HD Ready' TVs giving a lacklustre improvement that probably only slowed the adoption of Full HD in the long run.

Oh god yes. To be honest 4K in general has been handled poorly, the amount of 4K TV owners with HDMI 1.4 early doors... Basically a pointless buy.

I do think manufacturers have seen the error of their ways though, at CES this year HDR was pushed very hard. They realised they need to push and promote things that actually give the consumer a noticeable difference.