When does 4k become mainstream? I'm looking for a new TV and can't decide if I need 4k. Will you hel

[theone8181]

Im looking at 1080P still when i get a new tv next year. Some may poo-poo the idea but as i mainly watch sky/consoles/bluray ive no interest in 4K. I reckon when i replace that tv in 5 years or so 4K will be a bit more mainstream. I would say there still not a massive amount of HD content on sky so how long is 4k going to take not to mention im not sure of the hdmi standard used so a new box may be needed. BTW this is for a 65 incher so not a small set.

 

[nicktay2605]

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.

If you're interested in the JU7005 (I'm presuming that's the JU7000 here in the UK) then check out this review:

http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/ue48ju7000-201509274187.htm

 

[Psycho Sonny]

A friend recently purchased a 65" 4K sony was £4K down to £2K. it's also a curved screen.

The curve is very subtle, you don't really notice it at all, most probably couldn't tell the difference i bet.

He showed us some 4K demos he had downloaded and wow they were fantastic, he then showed us 4K content on netflix and tbh it looked no better than a blu ray rip.

Basically the real 4K content you can tell the difference, it looks so real it looks fake, it's like staring out of a window into a CGI world.

The low bit rate 4k content is no better than blu ray.

Blu ray also looked really good on it. So real 1080P on a 65" screen is fine.

If it were me I'd go for the same screen in 1080P and save myself a grand or so.

The best thing about the tv was the built in speakers. I was amazed at how powerful and the clarity of them. No need for a soundbar with that tv at all.

If I buy another tv within the next 5 years it will be a 65" 1080P curved panel from sony.

 

[3t3P]

I can't find the source now but resolution is last on what makes good image quality.

Contrast, colour depth, colour accuracy and motion resolution all being ahead of pure resolution.

I'm still investing in 1080 when I move into my house, a projector in fact.

 

[md85]

My girlfriend curbed me to a 48" in the end, so I went for the Samsung JS9005 (9000 in the UK). I know it's probably a little small for a curved tv but the setup of our lounge doesn't provide much opportunity for glare.

It came in at DKK 10999, which at current rates is £1100, which seems to be much cheaper than the same tv on offer in the UK (or pretty much any other european store I looked at). It's £1465 on Amazon. It was only £200-400 down to the equivalent size non-4K so I didn't see much point in not getting the 4K for such a small difference.

 

[Nogimmix]

When the UHD Blu-ray come available, then we will see a big difference in picture quality.

I've had a 4k TV for over 5 months and you can notice the difference between streaming 4k and 1080p, even my wife has noticed too.

People said that full HD would never take off and look at it now, though some broadcasts are not 1080p.

 

[Jim99]

I think I'd go for a 4K to run a PC (and indeed games), but probably not for films right now given the lack of content.

 

[NirK]

Hopefully with the new graphics cards over the next few years, it will eventually be something like this :

midrange = 1080p 60fps

high end = 1440p 60-144fps 4k 30-60fps

"enthusiast" = 4k 60fps

nvidia and AMD already claim this, but the titan X and fury are nowhere near running every game at 4k 60fps.

 

[TheVoice]

People said that full HD would never take off and look at it now, though some broadcasts are not 1080p.

By "some" you presumably mean "almost all". People might have Full HD TVs but the majority of what they watch isn't Full HD, whether it's broadcast TV or physical media where DVD still outsells Blu-ray massively.

 

[nicktay2605]

My girlfriend curbed me to a 48" in the end, so I went for the Samsung JS9005 (9000 in the UK). I know it's probably a little small for a curved tv but the setup of our lounge doesn't provide much opportunity for glare.

It came in at DKK 10999, which at current rates is £1100, which seems to be much cheaper than the same tv on offer in the UK (or pretty much any other european store I looked at). It's £1465 on Amazon. It was only £200-400 down to the equivalent size non-4K so I didn't see much point in not getting the 4K for such a small difference.

It's a great TV, I hope you're as happy with it as I am with mine. If you haven't done so already, I'd recommend checking out avforums picture settings guide for the JS9000.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

When the UHD Blu-ray come available, then we will see a big difference in picture quality.

I've had a 4k TV for over 5 months and you can notice the difference between streaming 4k and 1080p, even my wife has noticed too.

People said that full HD would never take off and look at it now, though some broadcasts are not 1080p.

The reason why you can notice a difference between streaming 4k and 1080p is simply because 1080p streams are low bit rate.

a 4k stream = 1080p blu ray

1080p stream < 1080p mkv @ 1/4 of the original size

i doubt you or your wife could tell between a 4k stream and a blu ray of the same content.


the fact is the majority of people are watching 720p or 1080i content on their tv's or worse 480p dvd.

So having a 4K is currently pointless and will be for a long time. It's as useful as 3D is at the moment.

Obviously it's the future but it's a long time off.

 

[R3X]

The reason why you can notice a difference between streaming 4k and 1080p is simply because 1080p streams are low bit rate.

a 4k stream = 1080p blu ray

1080p stream < 1080p mkv @ 1/4 of the original size

i doubt you or your wife could tell between a 4k stream and a blu ray of the same content.


the fact is the majority of people are watching 720p or 1080i content on their tv's or worse 480p dvd.

So having a 4K is currently pointless and will be for a long time. It's as useful as 3D is at the moment.

Obviously it's the future but it's a long time off.

Think that answered a question I was about to ask, I just got an 4K 40" Samsung JU6400 TV and was comparing 1080p and 4K sources from youtube and even 4K sample video files and could not actually see any visible differences in image quality.

I had a feeling 1080p vs 4K was not going to be that impressive but overall I am disappointed with the PQ in general its not really any much better then my Samsung 32" TV from 2 years ago really.

I will check more and decide if its an keeper or not but atm I have to justify if a £550 TV over a £200 TV which performs similar is worth it !

 

[kona786]

1080p is the sweet spot IMO.

Give me better quality pixels rather than more pixels.

If everything we watched was bluray THX quality, then I doubt anyone would want for better PQ.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

If you had a scale it would be like this

4K blu ray (unavailable atm) = 10/10

1080P blu ray = 9.5/10

BT Sport UHD = 9.25/10

4k stream = 9/10

1080p stream = 8/10

Sky or Virgin HD = 8/10

SD or DVD = 7/10

 

[Jim99]

Think that answered a question I was about to ask, I just got an 4K 40" Samsung JU6400 TV and was comparing 1080p and 4K sources from youtube and even 4K sample video files and could not actually see any visible differences in image quality.

I had a feeling 1080p vs 4K was not going to be that impressive but overall I am disappointed with the PQ in general its not really any much better then my Samsung 32" TV from 2 years ago really.

I will check more and decide if its an keeper or not but atm I have to justify if a £550 TV over a £200 TV which performs similar is worth it !

The 4K samples I've seen in John Lewis were absolutely incredible, and I could definitely tell the difference.

But, admittedly, that was standing 3-4 feet from a 65" screen.

6-10 feet from a 40" screen could well be a very different experience. But I wouldn't trust streams, personally.

 

[Doogles]

The 4K samples I've seen in John Lewis were absolutely incredible, and I could definitely tell the difference.

But, admittedly, that was standing 3-4 feet from a 65" screen.

6-10 feet from a 40" screen could well be a very different experience. But I wouldn't trust streams, personally.

Got a 1080 60" screen that I've had for 5 years and sitting about 7 feet away I would be able to tell the difference between UHD and 1080p in a heartbeat.

 

[spoffle]

Hopefully with the new graphics cards over the next few years, it will eventually be something like this :

midrange = 1080p 60fps

high end = 1440p 60-144fps 4k 30-60fps

"enthusiast" = 4k 60fps

nvidia and AMD already claim this, but the titan X and fury are nowhere near running every game at 4k 60fps.

I really hate the notion that you have to spend out significant money to be considered an enthusiast. A real enthusiast is someone who pushes the hardware they can afford to the max.

 

[R3X]

The 4K samples I've seen in John Lewis were absolutely incredible, and I could definitely tell the difference.

But, admittedly, that was standing 3-4 feet from a 65" screen.

6-10 feet from a 40" screen could well be a very different experience. But I wouldn't trust streams, personally.

Yeah I think its my source material of 4K youtube videos, some of the 4K files even downloaded are 300-500meg.

Guess will need to wait for 4K films to take off next summer, for now as said by another member 1080p is the sweet spot and I still find nothing much bad with it.

Reminds me of avforums netflix 4K review here:
https://www.avforums.com/article/is-4k-netflix-better-than-blu-ray.10589

Pretty much very little difference between the 4K and 1080p stream....

I think were limited in streams and file sizes for now, guess we need those bluray 4K players and 4K full on releases.... perhaps next summer !

 

[NirK]

I really hate the notion that you have to spend out significant money to be considered an enthusiast. A real enthusiast is someone who pushes the hardware they can afford to the max.

Well its just the name they gave to the most expensive parts, I agree that it is getting ridiculous these days how much you can spend on a PC.

 

[R3X]

1080p is the sweet spot IMO.

Give me better quality pixels rather than more pixels.

It is and I prefer 1080p everything seems to just work well, I am going to test more stuff out by I think moving from a 32inch screen to 40" brings out more flaws in SD content so am going to move to 720p and 1080p sources where naturally 1080p and 4K tvs shine.

I guess with a 4K panel why use SD when HD if fully available !

Got a 1080 60" screen that I've had for 5 years and sitting about 7 feet away I would be able to tell the difference between UHD and 1080p in a heartbeat.

Yup the bigger the size the bigger the difference I guess, they do often say 4K is best viewed on 60" and above or if your able to 2 meters away on smaller screens!