AVS Forum banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I am debating between purchasing the Sony A9F in either a 65 inch or 55 inch. My viewing distance is approximately 7.25 feet to 8.5 feet (from where the TV will mount to my seat). I am curious peoples view on which size TV is the right size given 75% of what will be viewed will be regular 1080i from cable. It appears that sometimes when watching 1080i that the 65 inch picture is not as crisp as the 55 inch, and wasn't sure if the limited distance from the television is likely to create that issue. Many thanks to all in advance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
512 Posts
Do the 65.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: npsacobra

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,389 Posts
You'll be fine with either one but if you can afford the 65", why not, go for it. You won't regret it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,101 Posts
To quote the g/f when looking at both side by side last year... "get the 65."


No regrets here.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,063 Posts
Lower size desn't expose as much compression and noise in lower resolution content, i mean perceptually. if most of what you watch 1080i, a 55 might present a perceptually more tolerable picture with low res content 1080i and below.
While most people on this board and women will always tell you bigger is better, you need to consider.

I'll give you an example, i have a projector in the same room as oled, it casts onto a 110" screen, if i play a youtube video that is maximum quality 480p, it looks horrific on the 110" screen, it's because the larger screen just amplifies the noise.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,063 Posts
Something to add,
Based on the science of human vision, there is a distance threshold upto which your eye can resolve all pixel detail on screen.

For 1080i content, the distance of 8.5 ft. is fine for a 55" screen, you will not lose detail.
For native 4k content, you will lose some pixel detail at that distance on a 55" screen.

This is the formula I use : (Snellenian constraint)

VD = DS
_____________________________
√[(NHR/NVR)²+ 1].CVR.tan 1/60

Where:
VD: Viewing distance
DS: Display's diagonal size
NHR: Display's native horizontal resolution (in pixels)
NVR: Display's native vertical resolution (in pixels)
CVR: Vertical resolution of the video being displayed (in pixels)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,101 Posts
Lower size desn't expose as much compression and noise in lower resolution content, i mean perceptually. if most of what you watch 1080i, a 55 might present a perceptually more tolerable picture with low res content 1080i and below.
Of course it will... for the same reasons a DVD will look better on a 42" screen vs a 65" screen. Comcrap programming is by far the worst looking content on my 65" OLED... and it shouldn't be a surprise considering half of it is still 720p. Still, when I say "by far the worst looking content" I'm comparing it to reference quality 4K material. It is still tolerable but I wouldn't buy an OLED for it.

If most of what I watched was 1080 content I probably would have went LCD.

I went OLED for 4K... and when it comes to 4K reference content 55 vs 65 the 65 wins for me hands down... there's no comparison really. Bigger is better. That's what she said, and that's what I say.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
  • 55" for cable tv watching at 7.25 feet to 8.5 feet
  • 65" for 1080p bluray or UHD sources watching at 7.25 feet to 8.5 feet


You'll have to decide if you want to have a large OLED tv for viewing cable tv at a close distance. If you are a bachelor I would save money and get the 55" model and then use a comfortable computer chair with a footstool to sit really close during the times you do critical viewing.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top