Hardly any, there isn't going to suddenly be a massive boost in 4K content just because Amazon have released a 4K capable box.
There is some 4K content available, not enough to justify buying a 4K TV now though.
When does 4k become mainstream? I'm looking for a new TV and can't decide if I need 4k. Will you hel
- Thread starter Ricochet J
- Start date
Hardly any, there isn't going to suddenly be a massive boost in 4K content just because Amazon have released a 4K capable box.
There is some 4K content available, not enough to justify buying a 4K TV now though.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2013
- Posts
- 9,368
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,063
- Location
- In a house
Ive been looking at the SONY BRAVIA KD55X8509C, but can't find any reviews on it.
Quote:
Enjoy your favourite content in 4K Ultra HD
Enjoy hundreds of TV episodes and movies in 4K Ultra HD on your Amazon Fire TV, the largest selection of any streaming media player. Classic movies such as The Way We Were, critically acclaimed TV shows such as Orphan Black, blockbuster movies such as Captain Philips, Fury and more. Titles are being added all the time on Amazon Instant Video. Watch Amazon Originals series such as Transparent, Bosch, Tumble Leaf and more. Stream Netflix favourites including House of Cards in Ultra HD.
Indeed. Which is flipping annoying, i would much prefer the aspect ratio.
4k has a different aspect ratio? I thought it was just the same as everything else just a higher resolution.
UHD (also known as UHD 4K, the 4K put in there by some marketing "genius") is 16:9 @ 3840×2160 (4x FullHD or 1920x1080. There's nothing "4K" about it)
4K (native) is 1.90:1 @ 4096x2160. Slightly wider, for cinemas. I would prefer a wider screen and less letterboxing.
Last edited:
Well considering on freeview TV (and possibly sky I don't know), the SD channels are absolute junk and HD is not even 1080p, it is 720p or 1080i with low bitrate. I think it is unlikely 4k will be "mainstream" for about 10 years. Depends what you mean by mainstream. Meh I would even take upgrading the freeview channels from the filth quality that they are currently, to 720p or 1080i.
Is 1080p upscaled to 4k really a lot better than native 1080p? The only reason I would want a 4k TV would be a) gaming when a single card can run it properly, and b) if the upscaling from SD or 1080p looks a lot better than a 1080p TV
Is 1080p upscaled to 4k really a lot better than native 1080p? The only reason I would want a 4k TV would be a) gaming when a single card can run it properly, and b) if the upscaling from SD or 1080p looks a lot better than a 1080p TV
Last edited:
Not worth the expense, no. Kinda like trying to polish a turd.
"digital sick" is something I read once, I think it is pretty appropriate if you look closely at some freeview channels it looks like someone was sick on the screen.
Thread hijack.
Also looking at a new tv and wondering whether to take the plunge. I know nothing in depth about TV technology (other than general research and this forum), so open to persuasion either way.
Is 4K really that far off being useful right now? I don't really have a specific budget and looking at the 55" mark - it seems silly not to pick up a '4K' TV when support for it is coming (albeit it over the next year or two).
I'm in Denmark so the model numbers are a little different, but the Samsung UE55JU7005XXE (flat) is available for around £900, UE55JU7505 (curved) £1100 or I'm tempted by the SUHD UE55JS9005Q (curved) for around £1600. The only one I've seen in a store is the SUHD and the quality is great, but if everyone's saying 4K isn't 'ready' right now then is it really worth £1600?
That said I, and probably the OP, don't want to settle for a non 4K TV just because the the content isn't there right now. Even if it never hits mainstream tv, presumably newer model TVs aren't going to NOT have 4K capability, next years models will also be 4K right? So why wait? If the only reason to wait is that there is currently no content (other than upcoming 4K blu ray) then are we to keep buying non 4K TVs until there is?
Also looking at a new tv and wondering whether to take the plunge. I know nothing in depth about TV technology (other than general research and this forum), so open to persuasion either way.
Is 4K really that far off being useful right now? I don't really have a specific budget and looking at the 55" mark - it seems silly not to pick up a '4K' TV when support for it is coming (albeit it over the next year or two).
I'm in Denmark so the model numbers are a little different, but the Samsung UE55JU7005XXE (flat) is available for around £900, UE55JU7505 (curved) £1100 or I'm tempted by the SUHD UE55JS9005Q (curved) for around £1600. The only one I've seen in a store is the SUHD and the quality is great, but if everyone's saying 4K isn't 'ready' right now then is it really worth £1600?
That said I, and probably the OP, don't want to settle for a non 4K TV just because the the content isn't there right now. Even if it never hits mainstream tv, presumably newer model TVs aren't going to NOT have 4K capability, next years models will also be 4K right? So why wait? If the only reason to wait is that there is currently no content (other than upcoming 4K blu ray) then are we to keep buying non 4K TVs until there is?
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 3,875
I'll give you my feedback seeing as I have one of the TVs you've been looking at. I bought a Panasonic CX700B 4k TV but returned it due to some uniformity and backlight issues and replaced it with a Samsung JS9000. There are valid arguments for and against 4k.
The biggest argument against 4k at this moment in time is that there isn't a great amount of content, and while that is true it somewhat depends on whether you've seen the TV series that Netflix and Amazon have in 4k. For example, Netflix have Daredevil, Narcos, Breaking Bad, Better Call Saul, and House of Cards all in 4k. If you've seen all of them already then you're not going to have much available to watch. Otherwise, that's quite a few hours of TV you've got there. Movie availability at 4k is currently pretty poor, with only a few films on Amazon Prime and slightly more on Ultraflix.
Secondly, you have to have a good internet connection if you want to stream 4k content - Netflix recommends about 25Mbps minimum.
Thirdly, cost is still somewhat an issue. Sure, you can get a 4k set for £600 or less, but it probably won't upscale HD content all that well, and that's the majority of what you'll be watching at the moment.
Right those are the main arguments against, now for the arguments for 4k. Firstly, cost. If you're thinking of spending anything over £700 then imo you'd be mad to go for a 1080p TV. You can get a really nice 4k set for anything around or over that price, and why would anyone spend good money on a 1080p set that will be outdated in a year or two?
Secondly, upscaling. A lot of this years 4k TVs upscale HD content really well. Even 720p content looks pretty great on my JS9000, and it's really only SD content that looks a bit naff (though still watchable).
Thirdly, content. Although there isn't a lot right now, Panasonic and Samsung have both announced UHD blu-ray players and they should be available by early next year (Panasonic are releasing theirs in Japan next month). Also, Netflix and Amazon are working hard to improve the content that is available and both of them have more 4k shows and films due later this year.
If you have a reasonable TV now then I would advise that you wait. 4k TV prices will continue to fall and by mid to late 2016 we should have much more content available. By then there will be physical 4k UHD content available, which should look superb, plus all the streaming services will have bolstered their content. On top of that, HDR should be more established and common by then, and that is certainly something to be excited about.
I upgraded now because I had a 7 year old 720p TV and didn't see the point in spending £500-600 on a 1080p TV. The JS9000 that I've bought has HDR support and a certain amount of future proofing, plus it upscales HD content extremely well, Xbox One games look amazing and the TV looks absolutely stunning even when it's switched off - it really is a beautiful TV in every way. Sorry for the wall of text, I hope that helps.
The biggest argument against 4k at this moment in time is that there isn't a great amount of content, and while that is true it somewhat depends on whether you've seen the TV series that Netflix and Amazon have in 4k. For example, Netflix have Daredevil, Narcos, Breaking Bad, Better Call Saul, and House of Cards all in 4k. If you've seen all of them already then you're not going to have much available to watch. Otherwise, that's quite a few hours of TV you've got there. Movie availability at 4k is currently pretty poor, with only a few films on Amazon Prime and slightly more on Ultraflix.
Secondly, you have to have a good internet connection if you want to stream 4k content - Netflix recommends about 25Mbps minimum.
Thirdly, cost is still somewhat an issue. Sure, you can get a 4k set for £600 or less, but it probably won't upscale HD content all that well, and that's the majority of what you'll be watching at the moment.
Right those are the main arguments against, now for the arguments for 4k. Firstly, cost. If you're thinking of spending anything over £700 then imo you'd be mad to go for a 1080p TV. You can get a really nice 4k set for anything around or over that price, and why would anyone spend good money on a 1080p set that will be outdated in a year or two?
Secondly, upscaling. A lot of this years 4k TVs upscale HD content really well. Even 720p content looks pretty great on my JS9000, and it's really only SD content that looks a bit naff (though still watchable).
Thirdly, content. Although there isn't a lot right now, Panasonic and Samsung have both announced UHD blu-ray players and they should be available by early next year (Panasonic are releasing theirs in Japan next month). Also, Netflix and Amazon are working hard to improve the content that is available and both of them have more 4k shows and films due later this year.
If you have a reasonable TV now then I would advise that you wait. 4k TV prices will continue to fall and by mid to late 2016 we should have much more content available. By then there will be physical 4k UHD content available, which should look superb, plus all the streaming services will have bolstered their content. On top of that, HDR should be more established and common by then, and that is certainly something to be excited about.
I upgraded now because I had a 7 year old 720p TV and didn't see the point in spending £500-600 on a 1080p TV. The JS9000 that I've bought has HDR support and a certain amount of future proofing, plus it upscales HD content extremely well, Xbox One games look amazing and the TV looks absolutely stunning even when it's switched off - it really is a beautiful TV in every way. Sorry for the wall of text, I hope that helps.
Last edited:
Wall of text welcome, covered off most of my questions nicely!
I actually have no TV right now, I moved to Denmark 7 months ago and TV was low on the list for 'things needed in a new apartment', but winter is on the way and some distraction for the cold evenings is required. I don't speak Danish (yet), so it's pretty much exclusively for movies, tv shows and perhaps xbox if I get round to buying one of those.
I'd like to wait, the inevitable price drops next year would be nice. I originally planned to wait until January and see what the sales are like here, but 4-6 months when it's 0-5c from 6pm onwards isn't going to work with a 13" mbp as my only screen for entertainment.
My main issue is that, as you say, why spend so much on a TV now and settle for non-4K just because the content is lacking at the moment. £100-200 isn't really that much when you're talking about £500-1500 overall cost, in my opinion.
As an alternative to going full whack on a JS9000/JS8500 (DKK 16000 here, which is about £1600), there's the Samsung 55" JU7005XXE for £900 from my previous post or I found the Samsung 50" JU6875 (I think it's JU6800 in the UK) for £700. Guess I need to figure out what my cost/nice tv threshold is.
I actually have no TV right now, I moved to Denmark 7 months ago and TV was low on the list for 'things needed in a new apartment', but winter is on the way and some distraction for the cold evenings is required. I don't speak Danish (yet), so it's pretty much exclusively for movies, tv shows and perhaps xbox if I get round to buying one of those.
I'd like to wait, the inevitable price drops next year would be nice. I originally planned to wait until January and see what the sales are like here, but 4-6 months when it's 0-5c from 6pm onwards isn't going to work with a 13" mbp as my only screen for entertainment.
My main issue is that, as you say, why spend so much on a TV now and settle for non-4K just because the content is lacking at the moment. £100-200 isn't really that much when you're talking about £500-1500 overall cost, in my opinion.
As an alternative to going full whack on a JS9000/JS8500 (DKK 16000 here, which is about £1600), there's the Samsung 55" JU7005XXE for £900 from my previous post or I found the Samsung 50" JU6875 (I think it's JU6800 in the UK) for £700. Guess I need to figure out what my cost/nice tv threshold is.
So many debates with 4K I personally just scrapped the idea of 4K and went with a tv with the highest picture quality I could see and afford, just so happens it does support 4K but I don't expect to view 4K on it asap or even bother with 4K netflix just yet.
We have already had reviews of netflix 4K shows in particular house of cards and for majority of the time you won't notice any difference between the 4K version or the 1080p version anyhow.
4K and HDR are great future proof tech but imo a long way to go and even then if people will really commit to using it is another thing.
We have already had reviews of netflix 4K shows in particular house of cards and for majority of the time you won't notice any difference between the 4K version or the 1080p version anyhow.
4K and HDR are great future proof tech but imo a long way to go and even then if people will really commit to using it is another thing.