Originally Posted by luckydriver
in the research ive been reading that expensive tvs handle it better but id be happy if that wasnt true and i could get away with a 700 dollar unit. ive read sony is best and others here say no difference from LG.
all my OTA from philly are very good PQ so im fortunate there. if they are compressed then i love compressed
I think if you dig in to the subject deeper, you'll find the primary concerns are with more subtle issues - in fact the same issues we had to deal with the moment we moved away from CRT's.
Namely that our new displays are no longer interlaced and converting an interlaced image to a progressive image is tricky to this day because the networks will mix up the signals they broadcast and the flags they provide. Some providers are even down-rezzing to save bits. And because our displays are higher resolution than the source and bigger than our old TVs, they're really good at showing flaws in the source material. These flaws can be smoothed out by adding processing and it's that sort of thing you get by buying a more expensive processor (like in the Sonys or the newer LG models).
But if you have a quality 720p or 1080i signal, about the only thing you have to worry about when getting that upscaled to 4K in my opinion is reverse telecine or the ability of the TV to extract 1080p24 from the 1080i signal - and a lot of people don't even care for that - and some even prefer to add some motion smoothing over the inherent stutter in 24p video.
When it comes to handling motion in a more plamsa-like way, newer TVs have a "black frame insertion" option that tries to mimic how plamsa pixels charge and discharge. This helps fool our eyes in to accepting that the animation we're watching is actual motion. Unfortunately this feature also adds flicker and a lot of people don't even bother with it.
Otoh, some people like motion smoothing. If you walk in to a store and you like what you see, then maybe you'll like it too as it's become the standard way to deal with motion. Many of us dislike the so called "soap opera" effect that makes film look like video, and will just turn off the motion processing or reduce it drastically.
So, that's why I think if cost is a factor, you might try out an LCD and see if you like it; and then if not - move on to an OLED which most former plasma owners find to be an acceptable upgrade.
In the end, you're going to have to judge for yourself what's acceptable - just keep in mind that TVs in stores are not usually representative and unless they let you sit down in a light controlled room with a cable feed and a remote with a prepared clue what you're tweaking you're probably not going to truly see what that TV could be like in your home.