AVS Forum banner

Am I crazy to get a 4k?

31K views 730 replies 114 participants last post by  mthomas47 
#1 · (Edited)
Need to pull the trigger today since the TV we are using is moving this weekend.
I am about to go nuts with research and trying to figure out what to get.

Am I crazy to get a 4K now when my closest viewing distance will be approx 10-12' and my primary viewing will be at approx 14'? (Leaning towards a 65" 4K, bigger if not 4K and looking to spend less than 3000 no matter my decision).

I am ok with having to get a new TV in 3-5 years if need be to keep up with technology (like when the OLEDs are reasonably priced)


edited 12-17-14

For what it is worth, we ended up with the Sony XBR65X850B for $2300. We had a F8500 that did its time and the last tv we were watching before setting up the Sony was a 60" Kuro (my dad's that he took when they moved out of state).
We are very happy so far with the sony and not regretting our puchase. Now maybe a side by side comparison to the plasmas we were watching would prove different, but we feel the PQ is as good as or better than the plasmas we had.(and really that is all that matters, what we feel..)
I am no expert and have yet to do any in depth calibrations. We were nervous we would not be happy with an led after plasmas, but our nerves have settled. My assumption is that screen quality and technology of this new tv have made it meet our desires. We feel that once 4k starts popping up we are going to be even happier.
I also assume that once I spend more time with settings and calibration, things hopefully will get even better.
Also pretty sure we are saving a pile of money now on electric going from the plasmas.

Again, I appreciate the advice and tips from all on this post and am thankful for a forum like this to help take some of the frustration out of home theater for novice users like myself.
 
See less See more
#2 ·
Im fighting the same thing myself. I want to get something in the 75" to 80" range and keep going back and forth. Id rather spend the extra money on screen size versus the 4K thing. Its a tough call.
 
#5 ·
Yeah, way more thinking than I was anticipating. Then to make it worse, when I go to the store to look at them, I am afraid they may not have them set right, or I can't look from the distance I will be sitting away, or the lighting in the store is interfering.....and on and on...
 
  • Like
Reactions: bzbx
#3 ·
Well, I can tell you that 4k looks MUCH better to me. I've purchased the 65" Samsung and the 70" Vizio P series. to me, the Samsung has better overall quality, BUT it is about $1000 more than the Vizio. The Vizio is a better deal overall and with some tweaking looks fantastic. For $2k, the Vizio 70" P series is a keeper ion my house. 4K streaming from netflix looks great. And it up-converts 1080P quite well. Blu-Rays from my Oppo to the Vizio look fantastic as well.

Overall, I am quite happy with the Vizio, especially that I got it for $500 off list price (On sale at Costco)
 
#163 ·
IMO, you'd have to be 1/2 blind to not notice the difference that 4K provides, at least when standing/sitting close enough, which I always do.

I'm waiting for the Vizio reference LCD with HDR Dolby Vision on it. The relatively crappy black levels of LCDs compared to plasmas sort of disappear when you add HDR into the mix.
 
#4 · (Edited)
If you sit 14 feet away get a 75" TV. I look at 4k just like I do 3D, and smart apps. It's a feature, a feature you may rarely use because there is next to nothing in terms of source material now. If you're like me and watch the news, football, cable movies, football, Blueray rentals, and football, you'll probably do as well with a 1080 set. Mine is great for sports and for VuDu streamed movies, even 3D movies streamed. I don't buy the old "it looks better because it's upscaled" schtick. I'm waiting to see how 4k shakes out, my TV is only 2 years old.
 
#129 ·
I completely agree with you. We bought a Samsung 75" H6350 for $1,999 2 weeks ago and we couldn't be more pleased with it. We sit 13ft away and it's the perfect size for us.
We don't need 3D, we don't need Smart, we just need a big screen with an excellent picture quality and this is what this Samsung offers.
We watch news, sports, concerts, movies and channels like Discovery, HGTV, History Channel, SciFi, etc..., plus bluray rentals.
We couldn't justify paying twice as much for 4K, considering the lack of material available.
 
#7 ·
I personally saw a difference in Best Buy standard feeds from Samsung HD and Vizio UHD sets. Motion artifacts and blockyness was generally lower by a good margin.

That said most sets outside of Vizio have a bit of a premium.

65" at 14' I probably would tend to lean toward 1080, if closer you might see a difference in 4k.

Go to a store. Pace out your distances and get them to play the same feeds to compare. While not the best environment, at least try and compare apples to apples?
 
#9 · (Edited)
I'd say if one is too cheap to buy into 4K streaming sources then go 1080P. Netflix, Amazon, and others on the Horizon that'll be announced at CES in January. If I'm buying a Primary HT Panel there's no way I'm not going 4K because I'll pony up the difference after having been blown away by 4K sources I've witnessed.

Historically 1080P started out the same way with the identical arguments against it when it was in early adoption when only a handful of HD sports broadcasts of majors got HD treatment and now virtually everything is and Sony is in charge of most of the production/camera's used. Japan has had a UHD Channel since June.

If your primary panel is a 5 year + life cycle than the UHD lifecycle provides viewing enjoyment/growth during those years. But, if your thrifty frugal consumer counting your pennies and waiting for it to be FREE on local channels than stick with 1080P until 2160P becomes the norm perhaps in 2020. The manufacturers will see to it that it becomes the norm. If your one that won't even pay for a HD Cable Box or BD's or streaming then forget it. If your Happy with 1080P Bravo!

2160P is comparatively F-BOMB better though it's adoption needs to be sped up.It's easy to question the choice if you've not truly witnessed real UHD source otherwise it's awesome and can't arrive in volume soon enough.:)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dominus
#365 ·
Better Quality is Better Quality



I disagree. The Distance you are from your TV has more to do with what size screen you should buy than quality of screen. Better screen quality is BETTER screen quality regardless of distance.

If you were planing on moving your TV to a larger room (more distance between you and the screen), then Screen size becomes more relevant. Whatever your comfortable viewing distance is for viewing your TV, if you sit farther away from that distance, your screen will look smaller. If you sit closer than that distance your screen will appear larger. In both scenarios, if your screen quality is better, it will appear better regardless.
 
#11 ·
Price should be a big consideration here.

If you're saying I am spending $x no matter what, then it's a debate.

For me, the #1 factor is size. I'd rather have 1080p 80 inch vs. 4k 70 inch. But price is also a factor.
Sometime in the next month I am going to jump on an 80 inch deal for 1,999. The Vizio M 80 incher was that price yesterday at Costco and Sam's... but I missed it.

I'd rather spend $2k now on a 1080p, wait 2-3 years when there isn't a lot of 4k content anyway, then spend another $2k-$3k in 3 years on a new 1080p 80 incher.

The alternative is to get a 4k 70 inch now for $2,500 (see Vizio, cheapest), so spend $500 now... and have a nice tv that might last me 4-5 years before I need to upgrade anyway.

But I can see one going the other direction, ESPECIALLY if a 70 inch would work just as well as an 80 inch. Bigger is always better... but my wall could support 120+inches... it is just bathed in ambient light and not the right place for a projector set-up, so I just really need big.
 
#12 ·
I really don't understand why people are still using the distance arguments. Higher resolution is better and noticeable at all distances. If you can tell the difference between a 1080p and 2160p screen on a 6" phone, you can tell the difference at 14' on a 65" screen. It's just like back in the day when people use to claim that you couldn't see the difference between 1080p and 720p if your TV was under 40". It was totally bogus then and is totally bogus now.

Now, that's not to say that somebody absolutely must get 4k... just that the distance argument is silly.
 
#23 · (Edited)
I'm sorry, but the above simply is not true, and introducing a phone screen into the dialog doesn't make it so, either. If you want to sit 15 feet from a 50" 4K television and say the resolution alone makes it better than a 1080 set at that distance, fine, but please don't mislead others.

What is REALLY "silly" is somehow asserting that the RESOLVING POWER of the human eyes somehow isn't a factor when VIEWING THINGS. That's disturbingly "silly".

James
 
#13 ·
I bought a 55-inch Samsung 4K for $898.00 and absolutely thrilled at the clarity and quality of upscaling. Anyone who says that 4K is not of much value for 1080p sources is absolutely wrong. I watched Jimmy Fallon last week and let me tell you ... it was like being there. Remember that blue curtain behind which he walks out from? ... that curtain looked silky smooth. Science and Nature shows look spectacular. Animated shows are out of this world - all sources were 1080p.

Also, anyone who says that a 4K set is only useful if you are sitting very close ... thats wrong too ... my wife commented that everything look very smooth ... and she was standing near the kitchen ... about 14 feet from where the 55-inch set was sitting. Its true .. Football never looked better ... the jerseys and helmets had a smooth sheen to them. Very happy. See my other threads for specs and review.
 
#15 ·
That is your personal opinion, I have read from other 4K owners the complete opposite. Cable/sat feeds was nothing special and a 1080p set displayed a better picture. Again that is their personal opinions. Everyone has opinions, the best thing to do is to judge the sets they are interested and make the judgment and final decision whatever fits their needs.
 
#14 ·
Well, two years ago I paid almost $7000 for a 70" Sharp Elite. It was the last of it's kind and all indications I had read was that full array local dimming sets were going to be a thing of the past because of the cost. But now Vizio is selling a 70" full array for under two grand. Even though they only have 72 zones, the local dimming appears to be every bit as good as my Elite.

At those prices, just having a full array back lit with local dimming set is worth it. Add in any potential 4K future use and it's a steal. I honestly do not know how Vizio was able to come in at these price points. Two years ago you would pay more than that for a regular crappy edge lit 1080P set.
 
#21 ·
Thanks for all the input. Although with all the opinions you all did not make my decision any easier.:)

I pulled the trigger on the Sony XBR65X850B. I hope to be happy with it, but if not, at least my salesman will let me return it for a different model until I am happy. Hopefully I will not have to go through the hassle.
Now I just need to research how to set it up correctly to get the most out of it. Then have to research new blu-ray player. Then have to research new receiver. Then have to research how best to set up 7.2 with the items I have. Then have to research what cables to use. Then..... Well you know what I am talking about.
 
#57 ·
Congrats, by the sounds of it you are pretty new at this. Don't make it so hard for yourself, here are some good hints.

Bluray player = I wouldn't invest so much on one at the moment, a good $150-$200 player will do for now since the new batch of 4K players are coming out by end of next year. Don't be fooled by 4K upscaling bluray players, the tv already does that.
Receiver = make sure it has HDMI 2.0 and 4K passthrough to be somewhat future proof.
Cables = Monoprice has excellent cables and prices, don't fall for expensive Monster cables.

Hope this helps.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ted99
#22 ·
Need to pull the trigger today since the TV we are using is moving this weekend.
I am about to go nuts with research and trying to figure out what to get.

Am I crazy to get a 4K now when my closest viewing distance will be approx 10-12' and my primary viewing will be at approx 14'? (Leaning towards a 65" 4K, bigger if not 4K and looking to spend less than 3000 no matter my decision).

I am ok with having to get a new TV in 3-5 years if need be to keep up with technology (like when the OLEDs are reasonably priced)
You were me- 3 weeks ago. Yes, I deemed myself crazy. I bought a 70" 1080 and enjoy it immensely. I'll prolly do so for 3 years and then buy a much more ridiculously-sized 4K television in 3-4 years for about the same price. Which could also be reasoned to be crazy.

But one was gauged to be "crazier" than the other so I went with it.

Good luck - do what YOU feel is best- none of us will be living with YOUR decision and it's always fantastically easy to spend other people's money.

Just ask my wife.

James
 
This post has been deleted
#29 ·
You should watch a 1080i sports program on a 4K display. You will be hooked. The jersey / helmet / etc. are silky smooth. Put a 1080p mp4 video on a USB. It can be something from a camcorder or a snippet you downloaded from the internet. Go to Best Buy or HHGREGG or Sears or any store ... and play the USB on a 1080p set and a 4K set. Make up your mind.
 
#32 ·
Im pullingna trigger on samsung un65hu7250 curved tv its 1,799 dollars in my locale store they also got samsung un557150 for 999 dollars whats u think is the best deal?
 
#34 ·
I guess to each their own.... After doing a lot of reading on the 4K subject, There is tech that is a year or so away, like 4K blu-ray and gaming, etc. Even Comcast and Dish network was rumored to start testing 4K content...or will be soon..


So, if like to be ahead of the game, 4k is for you. If you have the unlimited budget and love the tech, buy your 1080p now but, in 2-3 years, you might regret it when this content is available and want to replace it.


I need a new TV and after doing my research, as long as it comes with HDMI 2.0 and HDCP 2.2, a 4K tv should be ok for a while and support the new tech coming down the line.


No question, I am going for 4K...(never mind my last tv I have had for 10 years and with the WAF, I don't think I will be able to replace it for a long time, so 4K is the answer here)
 
#59 ·
I need a new TV and after doing my research, as long as it comes with HDMI 2.0 and HDCP 2.2, a 4K tv should be ok for a while and support the new tech coming down the line.

Not true at all.


There are 2 flavors of HDMI 2.0 chipsets out at this time:


1) 18Gbps HDMI 2.0 / HDCP 2.0
2) 10.2Gbps HDMI 2.0 / HDCP 2.2

There is no chipset out yet that does 18Gbps AND HDCP 2.2.


HDCP 2.2 is required for all flavors of 4K


18Gbps HDMI 2.0 is required for 60fps, improved color depth, dual streams and a bunch of other stuff.


Any TV you buy today will go in the trash next year.


The Samsungs that have all the guts in an external box are supposedly going to be upgradable with a new box (for around ~$400+, but I don't believe you'll be able to upgrade most other TVs since its different hardware and not just a firmware upgrade.


People like the upgradability of the Samsung, but at $400, that upgrade doesn't make much sense $$$ wise. You can buy the 60" model for under $2k today. Slap a year of usage on it and an outdated standard and it'll be worth closer to $1000. $1000 + $400, well, you can pretty much go buy a new TV at that point.
 
#43 ·
20/15, 10' viewing distance, Sony XBR 79X900B. I see way more detail on 4K upscaled 1080i material than I ever saw on my Sony 1080P XBR 60" at 7' or 1080I Qualia 70". Sorry, but an 80" 1080P set isn't going to have that detail, just a bigger, but fuzzier picture.
 
#47 ·
Sounds decently reasonable if you really sat/sit 6-7 feet from a 60 or 70" display (can you even stretch your legs out, lmao). Most are comfortably DOUBLE that distance (or more) and consequently throws 4K right out the window. Horses for courses.

James
 
#44 ·
You may be crazy at MSRP that these 4K's started out at, not so much at current prices.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ted99 and DavidinCT
#71 · (Edited)
Can someone help me with this 8-bit, 10-bit, 12-bit color stuff?

What is required for future 4k format and what do these tvs support?[/QUOTE

I waited for someone better qualified than me to answer, but I'll give you my layman's view:
8-bit, 10-bit, 12-bit color refers to the range of color tones that can be transmitted/displayed. The human eye can see a lot more color gradations that can be transmitted/displayed on current devices. What you see on common 1080p displays is 8-bit color. The limit for current LCD displays is 10-bit color, which contains a lot more color gradations. OLED and the upcoming "quantum-dot" LCD displays can do 12-bit, which is the REC 2020 standard and pretty close to everything the human eye can see.

The next milestone for 4K is the Blu-ray 4K standard. It's not set, yet; and expectation is that it will allow, but not require, much higher color fidelity and 60 fps. This means that Blu-ray 4K may be able to provide much greater performance than current displays, but it will be backwards compatible to current displays PROVIDED they can accomodate HDCP 2.2, which will be mandatory. The current HDMI 2.0 (lite), when combined with HDCP 2.2 can only pass 10.2 Gbps, which limits it to 30 fps (plenty for all the legacy 24 fps movies) and less than the full REC 2020 color gamut. Sometime next year, chips will be available to do HDCP 2.2 and "full" HDMI 2.0 which will pass 18 Gbps, enough for 60 fps (which future digitally-mastered movies will be capable of) and the full REC 2020 color gamut.

So, if you have HDCP 2.2 with HDMI 2.0 (lite), you will still be able to use your current hardware in the future, albeit at less than the highest quality display technology that will be available. As in all things technology, it'll be better later, but you will sacrifice the present for a better future. You pays your money and you takes your choice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ldgibson76
#48 ·
Just personal opinion...

I just recently got the Vizio 70p (4k), our view distance is 9.5-10'. I was right on the bubble in those resolution x size x distance charts for 4k.

I upgraded from a 720p 58" 8 year old panny plasma.

Really on the fence ATM with this set. Real Bluray content is really good, no complaints. Good quality 720 is decent too. The issue is lesser content. 1080i and the stuff Dish is putting out on hopper is pretty bad most of the time. Or I should say issues are more apparent with the larger screen. Would a 1080p set of the same size show the same issues? Not sure. Would a 58" 4k look better without the same issues, again not sure can't compare.

At this time though, I am seriously thinking about returning the set either a smaller set or 1080 set because the content my provider provides is not up to snuff with the size, distance and resolution of my set. I literally have gone back to usenet to get 1080 versions of shows instead of using my hopper :(.
 
#49 ·
You are me, lol.

I looked at the IDENTICAL Vizio 4K P series and 1080 M Series and went with the "M". Simply could not discern the difference at 10-11 feet. Pocketed $700 and have no regrets.

Good luck with the content issues. I have pretty much given up on expecting much of anything to look terribly good with cable/satellite transmission.

James
 
#50 ·
I agree. I think 1080 contents looks great if the set is calibrated. I don't have a 4k set but my bent is to wait until there's a lot to watch. If my TV were a beater I'd probably get a 4k though. Worst case it looks the same. But the settings are the key to the deal IMO. DTV content gets a lot of complaints, more than cable, on these boards.
 
#51 ·
I've got 2 cents...

I have recently purchased a 4k tv and I sit at what the charts say is just inside the range of discernible for 4k while viewing with 20/20 vision and find it a mixed bag. Actual 4k content can be a jaw dropper but there is very little of it. I cant claim to be able to tell the difference with 1080P material that is upscaled, doesn't look worse or better than the native 1080P on the plasma that it replaced. It may be that if I could see those two side by side I would say one looks better than the other but I have no means of doing an A/B on it. Most will note that the plasma and the LCD set that replaced it both have different attributes that would also affect picture quality outside of resolution so take it for what its worth. The downside is 1080i which can be exceedingly low quality from my local cable monopoly and if anything the sharper upscaled picture seems to magnify the bad rather than look better. One last thing, 3D is clearly superior.

A summation might be 4k is pretty nifty if you sit close enough to see it and 3D is better, 1080P is a push, I hate my cable company and wish we could hang all the corporate officers. When I consider this I still feel ok about buying the 4k set. I've got both 2.0 and 2.2 and also an upgrade path to some future spec thanks to the port Sammy added for that purpose so I have some hope the TV wont be relegated to the back room a year from now. I do see some future for 4k which does look very good and since I have a set which will hopefully have some legs I'm ready to welcome more content when it arrives. The 3D is a bonus which while not often used is still appreciated. Meanwhile I didn't have to pay much more than I already would have paid for a good set. Lastly I needed a TV, it was not an upgrade. That to me is a defining point, knowing what I know now I would not buy 4k as an upgrade because the lack of content makes it a hard sell. On the other hand if you need a TV and plan on buying a decent set the jump to 4k doesn't have to be a big chunk of change anymore and it becomes a lot more viable, particularly if you pay attention and get a set that can have a future.
 
#52 ·
Also depends on how well the TV upscales to 4K. I've read over and over again that there's not enough 4K content to justify getting a 4K. I've also read claims that if a 4k and 1080P TV were put side by side and fed the same 1080p or even 1080i signal, the 1080p TV would look better.

I can tell you this holds true for the current Seiki 4K models, but not for the Panasonic 65ax800. Upscaled 1080p PQ on the ax800 doesn't look 4k, but make no mistake, it clearly looks better than a pn60f5500 1080p plasma right beside it.

As for SD content, will still look crappy regardless of 1080p or 4k upscaling.

Keep in mind that I got it primarily for 4K gaming, but the great upscaling for use as my main TV was just a bonus.

So I would suggest using 2 key criteria before making the leap to 4K.

1) Make sure the TV has gotten positive reviews in terms of how well it upscales 1080p/i. This alone can justify getting a 4K set and will let you enjoy it immediately.


2) Price -

I made sure the TV I got was just slightly more than premium 1080P units of the same size. I paid $2979 CAD (just over $2600 USD) for my 65AX800. This just a few hundred bucks more than the 65" Sony KDL65W950 or 60" Sharp LC60UQ17U, both 1080P.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top