Why 4K? - Page 2 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 10Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 54 Old 11-17-2015, 11:15 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
ray0414's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: michigan
Posts: 17,005
Mentioned: 266 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12803 Post(s)
Liked: 12144
Quote:
Originally Posted by lmacmil View Post
Given that I won't go larger than 55" and can't get closer than about 11' from the screen, this pretty much confirms that I won't see the benefit of 4k. By next spring, 1080p ought to be really cheap!

What the good 4K tv's offer though is wider color gamuts, something you CAN see from farther away. There are plenty of goodies that are now coming with 4k tv's that the manufacturers are not putting in the 1080p tvs to sort of push people into 4k.

LG has already stated they will not be offering any 1080p tvs in their 2016 lineup
chunon likes this.
ray0414 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 54 Old 11-17-2015, 12:20 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
lmacmil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 685
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by ray0414 View Post
What the good 4K tv's offer though is wider color gamuts, something you CAN see from farther away. There are plenty of goodies that are now coming with 4k tv's that the manufacturers are not putting in the 1080p tvs to sort of push people into 4k.

LG has already stated they will not be offering any 1080p tvs in their 2016 lineup
Just back from Costco and they had a couple Samsung 4k 55" sets on sale for under $1000. That pretty much makes it a no-brainer!
lmacmil is offline  
post #33 of 54 Old 11-17-2015, 01:13 PM
Member
 
djjoshuad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 133
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 85 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by lmacmil View Post
Just back from Costco and they had a couple Samsung 4k 55" sets on sale for under $1000. That pretty much makes it a no-brainer!
there are (at least) two good 55" offerings from Samsung under $1k. I have the 6400 model (paid $899), but I kind of wish i had spent the extra $100 to get the 7100. the 6400 is perfectly fine unless you want to install a lot of apps. Then the 1G internal storage becomes a limiting factor. I don't regret that enough to return it, though... it's just the master bedroom TV
djjoshuad is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #34 of 54 Old 11-17-2015, 01:22 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
dschulz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,044
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 868 Post(s)
Liked: 615
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhrir View Post
The one thing that's been ignored is that lmacmil has stated more than once the majority of viewing will be broadcast tv. It makes zero sense to buy a 4k tv for that type of viewing. 1080p will be around a for quite a while yet and as lmacmil correctly pointed out 4k broadcast tv isn't even on the horizon.
Actually 4K broadcast is on the horizon; the ATSC 3.0 specification, which includes a resultion of 3840X2160 is very far along through the approval process. There have even been test broadcasts in a couple of markets. Although for me that's an argument to wait a bit - as much of the earlier posts have suggested, 4K standards are still in flux, and if I were in the market I would wait - if not for ATSC 3.0 broadcast, at least for 4K UHD Blu Ray to appear on the market. I am happy to use my 1080p plasma (which has a better picture quality than any 4K LCD screen I've seen) for a couple of more years until the standards for 4K are well and truly nailed down.
dschulz is offline  
post #35 of 54 Old 11-17-2015, 03:00 PM
Senior Member
 
linkgx1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 227
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by lmacmil View Post
Given that I won't go larger than 55" and can't get closer than about 11' from the screen, this pretty much confirms that I won't see the benefit of 4k. By next spring, 1080p ought to be really cheap!
Yeah, as in bare bones, minimum colors cheap.
linkgx1 is offline  
post #36 of 54 Old 11-17-2015, 04:33 PM
Advanced Member
 
snorge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: WI
Posts: 549
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 240 Post(s)
Liked: 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by lmacmil View Post
Given that I won't go larger than 55" and can't get closer than about 11' from the screen, this pretty much confirms that I won't see the benefit of 4k. By next spring, 1080p ought to be really cheap!
They also might not be making many decent 1080P tvs at that point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhrir View Post
Here is a condensed quote by David Katzmaier from CNET which I think is very telling compared to what the 4k fanbois spout on the forums after making a "comparison" at Best Buy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by snorge View Post
I don't think the charts that claim there is little to no benefit of 4K past a certain viewing distance are accurate. Even walking around in Best Buy at a much larger than typical viewing distance I can easily see the difference. The main thing I would be concerned with is your upgrade cycle. If you don't buy new tvs very often in 2 or 3 years from now you may end up wishing you spent a little more for 4K. If you aren't a picky viewer though 1080p may suit you fine for a while.
How is this being a fanboy? I said 1080p could be fine for him. I don't even have a 4K set yet but I know I don't buy tvs very often so I might as well get one now and he may be in the same boat. As for looking at tvs in Best Buy where do you propose people check them out instead?
snorge is offline  
post #37 of 54 Old 11-17-2015, 05:03 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
gomo657's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,944
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 826 Post(s)
Liked: 821
Quote:
Originally Posted by dschulz View Post
Actually 4K broadcast is on the horizon; the ATSC 3.0 specification, which includes a resultion of 3840X2160 is very far along through the approval process. There have even been test broadcasts in a couple of markets. Although for me that's an argument to wait a bit - as much of the earlier posts have suggested, 4K standards are still in flux, and if I were in the market I would wait - if not for ATSC 3.0 broadcast, at least for 4K UHD Blu Ray to appear on the market. I am happy to use my 1080p plasma (which has a better picture quality than any 4K LCD screen I've seen) for a couple of more years until the standards for 4K are well and truly nailed down.

I may be wrong but all of these current 4K sets are not compatible with atsc 3.0 so an upgraded set will be needed unless you're just on cable/satellite.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

"well you know what doctor I'm going to go home take two aspirins and call you a b****"
gomo657 is offline  
post #38 of 54 Old 11-18-2015, 09:11 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 81
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 46 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Short of taking them home, calibrating them, and making a comparison the average buyer like myself has to rely on expert reviews that use actual qualitative data. It's impossible to make a meaningful comparison in a retail environment that has the agenda of making the TVs with the highest profit margin look the best.
mhrir is offline  
post #39 of 54 Old 11-18-2015, 10:04 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 81
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 46 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by ray0414 View Post
What the good 4K tv's offer though is wider color gamuts, something you CAN see from farther away.
The amount of content that is encoded beyond REC. 709 is essentially non-existent. Wider color gamut is of no value if the content isn't encoded for it.

It is well documented that using the wider color gamut setting that some TVs currently offer only makes colors look over-saturated and it's recommended to leave it turned off. The setting doesn't meet any standard so it's about as useful as the receivers that were "4k ready" but didn't have HDCP 2.2.

REC. 2020 is coming but from what I have read no TV manufacturer is currently planning a consumer product to meet that standard.
mhrir is offline  
post #40 of 54 Old 11-18-2015, 10:10 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
ray0414's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: michigan
Posts: 17,005
Mentioned: 266 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12803 Post(s)
Liked: 12144
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhrir View Post
The amount of content that is encoded beyond REC. 709 is essentially non-existent. Wider color gamut is of no value if the content isn't encoded for it.

It is well documented that using the wider color gamut setting that some TVs currently offer only makes colors look over-saturated and it's recommended to leave it turned off. The setting doesn't meet any standard so it's about as useful as the receivers that were "4k ready" but didn't have HDCP 2.2.

REC. 2020 is coming but from what I have read no TV manufacturer is currently planning a consumer product to meet that standard.

It is the persons option to use the expanded color gamut, some do and some dont. But a tv equipped with the tools for a much wider color gamut will have much better out of box accuracy. Alot of tv reviews over the past year has commented about much better out of box accuracy is getting, and I think it can be partially attributed to better/wider color systems.
ray0414 is online now  
post #41 of 54 Old 11-18-2015, 10:49 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
golfster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: St Louis, MO
Posts: 1,926
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 795 Post(s)
Liked: 666
Just a few things to ponder.

1080p TVs have been with us for close to 10 years now. As of 2015, US stations only broadcast in either 720p or 1080i. What makes you think there will be any 4k broadcasts in the near future? We still do not have 1080p broadcast.

In order to get 1080p, you need streaming services or a BD player. Yes, there will be some 4k streaming on Netflix at a higher cost and will require more bandwidth which some may have to upgrade to be able to use.

Upscaling is a bit of a misnomer. You are taking one pixel of information and letting the TV extrapolate how to chop that into 4 pixels to make it look smooth. You can not get 4k form a 1080 source.

At normal viewing distances, a person can not discern the difference in RESOLUTION of a 4k set vs a 1080p one. What we can see in a difference in contrast or color depth. Manufacturers put the most and best features in their high end sets and they are all 4k. That does not mean that the pictures from their low end 4k sets are any better than a 1080p set.

You need to compare TV to one another with the same feed. Those demo loops are designed to make those sets look really good. Also, look at them at YOUR viewing distance, not with your nose against the screen.

The next real difference in picture quality will be in HDR, OLED or other screen technology. As of now, standards are not set for HDR so any "HDR compatible" TV you buy today may not be able to take full advantage of HDR when it becomes available. HDR will require less bandwidth than 4k so it is more likely to be available.

If you can find a good 1080p set with the features you need, it is all you need at this point. You can put the money saves toward the next great thing.
golfster is offline  
post #42 of 54 Old 11-18-2015, 10:52 AM
Member
 
zgemboandislic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 93 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhrir View Post
Here is a condensed quote by David Katzmaier from CNET which I think is very telling compared to what the 4k fanbois spout on the forums after making a "comparison" at Best Buy.

With video on a TV, the difference between 4K/UHD and 1080p/HD resolution is really hard to see. Many of the words in those reviews were written on a laptop in my lab at a theatrically close seating distance, comparing a 65-inch 1080p and a 65-inch 4K TV. Despite all the extra pixels I knew made up the 4K TV's screen, most of the time I didn't see any difference at all, especially with HD TV shows and Blu-rays. The differences in detail I did see were limited to the very best 4K demo material. Larger TVs or closer seating distances make that difference more visible, as do computer graphics, animation, and games, but even then it's not drastic.

In the meantime, a standard 1080p TV bought in the next few years will remain perfectly viable for as long as you own it. Sure, it might not be able to play the most cutting-edge 4K content at 4K resolution, but you probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference anyway.
I think it varies from person to person. I can definitely see the difference. Where I struggle to see the difference sometimes is between 1080p and 4k content on my 4K TV, because the upscaling does wonders.

Not everyone can tell the difference between a 15$ whiskey and a 60$ one...
zgemboandislic is offline  
post #43 of 54 Old 11-18-2015, 10:54 AM
Senior Member
 
linkgx1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 227
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfster View Post
Just a few things to ponder.

1080p TVs have been with us for close to 10 years now. As of 2015, US stations only broadcast in either 720p or 1080i. What makes you think there will be any 4k broadcasts in the near future? We still do not have 1080p broadcast.

In order to get 1080p, you need streaming services or a BD player. Yes, there will be some 4k streaming on Netflix at a higher cost and will require more bandwidth which some may have to upgrade to be able to use.

Upscaling is a bit of a misnomer. You are taking one pixel of information and letting the TV extrapolate how to chop that into 4 pixels to make it look smooth. You can not get 4k form a 1080 source.

At normal viewing distances, a person can not discern the difference in RESOLUTION of a 4k set vs a 1080p one. What we can see in a difference in contrast or color depth. Manufacturers put the most and best features in their high end sets and they are all 4k. That does not mean that the pictures from their low end 4k sets are any better than a 1080p set.

You need to compare TV to one another with the same feed. Those demo loops are designed to make those sets look really good. Also, look at them at YOUR viewing distance, not with your nose against the screen.

The next real difference in picture quality will be in HDR, OLED or other screen technology. As of now, standards are not set for HDR so any "HDR compatible" TV you buy today may not be able to take full advantage of HDR when it becomes available. HDR will require less bandwidth than 4k so it is more likely to be available.

If you can find a good 1080p set with the features you need, it is all you need at this point. You can put the money saves toward the next great thing.
Except that next great thing won't be standardized for several years, too.

I have Panasonic 50ST30 and a Vizio M series (2015). The Vizio is noticeably sharper, especially at close distances. (I usually sit 6' or less, more immersive). It's not as big as the jump to 1080p, but it's still a difference.
linkgx1 is offline  
post #44 of 54 Old 11-18-2015, 10:58 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
ray0414's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: michigan
Posts: 17,005
Mentioned: 266 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12803 Post(s)
Liked: 12144
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfster View Post
HDR will require less bandwidth than 4k so it is more likely to be available

this is a very misleading statement.

While technically HDR takes up less space than the rest of the file (in UHD), the HDR rides on top of the entire 4k file, so combined you do get a very large file.

As of right now there are zero plans for 1080P HDR to be available, everything appears to be 4k HDR. so a 4k HDR file is roughly 25% bigger than a regular 4k file.
King Richard likes this.

82Q90R*75Q9FN(RIP)*55C8OLED*Galaxy Note10+*Ub820 fed into Oppo 203*XB1X*4k DenonX4200

MASTER LIST OF HDR CONTENT THREAD HERE, UPDATED OFTEN
ray0414 is online now  
post #45 of 54 Old 11-18-2015, 12:17 PM
Senior Member
 
linkgx1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 227
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by ray0414 View Post
this is a very misleading statement.

While technically HDR takes up less space than the rest of the file (in UHD), the HDR rides on top of the entire 4k file, so combined you do get a very large file.

As of right now there are zero plans for 1080P HDR to be available, everything appears to be 4k HDR. so a 4k HDR file is roughly 25% bigger than a regular 4k file.
Exactly

I'm really not sure why people keep thinking 1080p will be around and will be improved.

Newsflash, it is not. 4K is the new flagship. Every new tech will be with 4k, regardless of what you feel about 4k. The industry will canabalize 1080p TVs, just like how 1080i, 720p and 480p got canaballized. 1080p TVs will now be the absoulte s$$%est TV quality you will be able to find....at 60hz and no local dimming. What 720p TVs are flagship these days?

4k is going to force itself on every consumer device (hell, Macs are 5ks these days) .

Your current 1080p TVs are fine, but I still remember when most people were saying 1080p doesn't make any sense. It's technology. Once the price on 4k blu rays go down, they will force them to be bundled with 1080p versions of the film.
linkgx1 is offline  
post #46 of 54 Old 11-18-2015, 12:21 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
ray0414's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: michigan
Posts: 17,005
Mentioned: 266 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12803 Post(s)
Liked: 12144
Quote:
Originally Posted by linkgx1 View Post
Exactly

I'm really not sure why people keep thinking 1080p will be around and will be improved.

Newsflash, it is not. 4K is the new flagship. Every new tech will be with 4k, regardless of what you feel about 4k. The industry will canabalize 1080p TVs, just like how 1080i, 720p and 480p got canaballized. 1080p TVs will now be the absoulte s$$%est TV quality you will be able to find....at 60hz and no local dimming. What 720p TVs are flagship these days?

4k is going to force itself on every consumer device (hell, Macs are 5ks these days) .

Your current 1080p TVs are fine, but I still remember when most people were saying 1080p doesn't make any sense. It's technology. Once the price on 4k blu rays go down, they will force them to be bundled with 1080p versions of the film.
It is my understanding from what i have read, that there will be 2 versions you can buy.

1. A 4k version bundled with a regular 1080P blu ray version

2. A 1080P version bundled with a DVD version (how it currently is)

82Q90R*75Q9FN(RIP)*55C8OLED*Galaxy Note10+*Ub820 fed into Oppo 203*XB1X*4k DenonX4200

MASTER LIST OF HDR CONTENT THREAD HERE, UPDATED OFTEN
ray0414 is online now  
post #47 of 54 Old 11-18-2015, 12:26 PM
Senior Member
 
linkgx1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 227
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by ray0414 View Post
It is my understanding from what i have read, that there will be 2 versions you can buy.

1. A 4k version bundled with a regular 1080P blu ray version

2. A 1080P version bundled with a DVD version (how it currently is)
Interesting. Seems like a supply chain disaster waiting to happen.
linkgx1 is offline  
post #48 of 54 Old 11-18-2015, 03:23 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
golfster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: St Louis, MO
Posts: 1,926
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 795 Post(s)
Liked: 666
Quote:
Originally Posted by ray0414 View Post
this is a very misleading statement.

While technically HDR takes up less space than the rest of the file (in UHD), the HDR rides on top of the entire 4k file, so combined you do get a very large file.

As of right now there are zero plans for 1080P HDR to be available, everything appears to be 4k HDR. so a 4k HDR file is roughly 25% bigger than a regular 4k file.
While it is true that all HDR TVs are 4k, the source material will not necessarily be 4k just as no broadcast TV is 1080p even though virtually all TVs are at least that resolution. HDR streaming uses far less bandwidth than 4K streaming (around 2.5Mb/s as opposed to 12Mb/s) so it is very likely that services like Netflix will more readily stream HDR than 4k especially since it will make a more dramatic impact on the viewed image. There is no reason why there will not be a 1080p HDR stream even if all TVs are 4k. Whatever the case, it will certainly be a premium priced service as only people with capable TVs will want to pay for it.
golfster is offline  
post #49 of 54 Old 11-20-2015, 10:35 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 81
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 46 Post(s)
Liked: 26
I agree there is a difference when wide color gamut is turned on. Since I've tried it on my TV I am going to side with the professional reviewers that the colors are oversaturated. Current content does not use a color gamut beyond REC. 709 which makes the wide color gamut setting pointless. It's like saying a TV that can produce 10 colors looks better even though the content only has 5 colors. There is no color upscaling algorithm that tries to guess where the other 5 colors are.

If a viewer prefers a vivid (oversaturated) look then great but wider color gamut doesn't have anything to do with 4k looking better right now. The same effect can more or less be achieved by turning up the color on any TV be it 1080p or 4k.

When 4k, HDR, and REC. 2020 all come together along with enough content to watch, it will be a thing to behold.
mithras1 likes this.
mhrir is offline  
post #50 of 54 Old 11-20-2015, 10:45 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 81
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 46 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by linkgx1 View Post
Exactly

I'm really not sure why people keep thinking 1080p will be around and will be improved.

Newsflash, it is not. 4K is the new flagship. Every new tech will be with 4k, regardless of what you feel about 4k. The industry will canabalize 1080p TVs, just like how 1080i, 720p and 480p got canaballized. 1080p TVs will now be the absoulte s$$%est TV quality you will be able to find....at 60hz and no local dimming. What 720p TVs are flagship these days?

4k is going to force itself on every consumer device (hell, Macs are 5ks these days) .

Your current 1080p TVs are fine, but I still remember when most people were saying 1080p doesn't make any sense. It's technology. Once the price on 4k blu rays go down, they will force them to be bundled with 1080p versions of the film.
I agree 100%. The 1080p TV is dead man walking. I just wish the industry as a whole would put the horse (4k HDR REC. 2020 content) in front of the wagon (4k TVs that meet the finalized standard).
mhrir is offline  
post #51 of 54 Old 11-20-2015, 11:31 AM
Advanced Member
 
Lozin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 692
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 337 Post(s)
Liked: 163
I myself purchased a new tv back in Aug of 2014 and at that time I opted by choice to go high end 1080P as I was still Leary of 4K TVs back then. I did however purchase a new avr this past spring as I wanted Atmos and went to a 5.2.4 system. My avr is 2.0/2.2 compliant and if I was buying today there'd be no reason not to buy 4K, but that's me and everyone's situation is different of course.
Lozin is offline  
post #52 of 54 Old 11-20-2015, 11:47 AM
Senior Member
 
tucker3434's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 213
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Liked: 63
I've been doing a good bit of reading on this. At the screen size and distance I'll be watching, I doubt I'll be able to tell much of a difference. The only reason I've decided to go 4K is because it's pretty much the default on all the good TV's now. I'd have to actually try to find a TV that I like that isn't 4K. The lone exception is the LG OLED but I can't justify that cost.
tucker3434 is offline  
post #53 of 54 Old 11-20-2015, 04:57 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
CSonntag's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Back in the SF Bay Area
Posts: 1,049
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 230 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhrir View Post
Short of taking them home, calibrating them, and making a comparison the average buyer like myself has to rely on expert reviews that use actual qualitative data.
Wouldn't that be QUANTITATIVE data? Sorry for being nitpicky, but it just struck me as a funny oxymoron.

Take responsibility for your own actions...society is not here to look after you...
In other words, if you order coffee, expect it to be hot for christsake!
CSonntag is offline  
post #54 of 54 Old 11-20-2015, 05:05 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Danielson99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 2,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked: 73
Enjoy 4k while it lasts, Japan has already started using 8k. They actually filmed the London Olympics in 8k and figure the expected 2020 date of mainstream release will be much much sooner than expected. I'm just going to keep using my plasma for 4 more years lol! Well, unless I find something on black friday to keep my happy for a few years anyway.
Danielson99 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply LCD Flat Panel Displays

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off