[j_blow]

With plenty of discussion already going on the greatness, or lack of, on 4k, I'm not looking to turn this into more of that. I do think one point often lost sight of is the source of content. By that I mean, different sources utilize different technologies to different degrees.

For the sake of this discussion/question, I want to focus on DirecTv as the source. Probably 90% of my viewing is HD sports while the remainder is streaming other sources. I'm really struggling between deciphering what the best purchase would be for this circumstance. I hear everything from upconverting on a 4k tv being great to horrible. Again, I'm betting the source has a lot to do with that.

So, for those that have experience with a 4k set and DirecTv, what are your opinions? I'm not looking at the future, I'm talking now. Would you be just as happy or even more happy with a 1080? I'm just trying to get a better idea exactly what a 4K set gets you out of just a standard Directv picture. Seems I've read greatly conflicting information on this - which probably isn't unusual in anything opinion based and especially with variables.

Thanks!

 

[Salacak]

With plenty of discussion already going on the greatness, or lack of, on 4k, I'm not looking to turn this into more of that. I do think one point often lost sight of is :/ the source of content. By that I mean, different sources utilize different technologies to different degrees.

For the sake of this discussion/question, I wasn't to focus on DirecTv as the source. Probably 90% of my viewing is HD sports while the remainder is streaming other sources. I'm really struggling between deciphering what the best purchase would be for this circumstance. I hear everything from upconverting on a 4k tv being great to horrible. Again, I'm betting the source has a lot to do with that.

So, for those that have experience with a 4k set and DirecTv, what are your opinions. I'm not looking at the future, I'm talking now. Would you be just as happy or even more happy with a 1080? I'm just trying to get a better idea exactly what a 4K set gets you out of just a standard Directv picture. Seems I've read greatly conflicting information on this - which probably isn't unusual in anything opinion based and especially with variables.

Thanks!

I'm a big sports fan also and 70-90% i watch sports (hockey, soccer, football etc.) and also Directv customer, i used other providers in the past and found out that directv far superior with PQ, sound and the receivers they provide you, so your best source is directv (at least that is the way i'm seeing). I tried many 4K sets and also i still do have plasma 1080p sets. Plasmas still great with almost anything, colors, viewing angles, screen uniformity especially motion handling etc. i still enjoy watching plasma but what 4K sets give you is that pop that you are missing on plasmas is that extra resolution crispness, you can really notice after 4K sets, plasmas seems like kind of blurry and are not crisp as 4K' sets.
Also one other big plus is that watching 4K content, whatever out there you can find is just breathtaking visual experience that you can really appreciate what you seeing.

 

[HockeyoAJB]

Even if all your 4K set does is copy the adjacent pixel as a means of "upscaling", the resulting picture will still look at least as good as it would on an otherwise equivalent 1080p set. Unless the 1080p set is superior in some other category (e.g. Black level, contrast ratio, motion resolution, color accuracy) or has better video processing then it won't look better than the 4K set (assuming both displays are the same size). Naturally, if the source is poor and the 4K set is significantly larger than the 1080p one then you might be able to see artifacts more easily on the bigger screen. But this would also be true if you were comparing a large 1080p display to a smaller one.

 

[j_blow]

Even if all your 4K set does is copy the adjacent pixel as a means of "upscaling", the resulting picture will still look at least as good as it would on an otherwise equivalent 1080p set. Unless the 1080p set is superior in some other category (e.g. Black level, contrast ratio, motion resolution, color accuracy) or has better video processing then it won't look better than the 4K set (assuming both displays are the same size). Naturally, if the source is poor and the 4K set is significantly larger than the 1080p one then you might be able to see artifacts more easily on the bigger screen. But this would also be true if you were comparing a large 1080p display to a smaller one.

See, that's the confusing part...It seems logical and the right answer yet I get all this conflicting evidence stating that it actually looks worse on a 4k set. Not sure I quite understand that unless the set itself is inferior.

 

[GregLee]

For the sake of this discussion/question, I want to focus on DirecTv as the source.

I watch mostly DirecTV on sets in two rooms, one has a 60" plasma and the other a 50" 4K LED (which replaces a 6 year old 720p plasma). I can't make a real good comparison, because the sets are different sizes, but I'd rather watch DirecTV on the plasma. The smaller LED Samsung HU8550 set looks very crisp and punchy, though, and my wife (who mostly watches it) seems pleased with it. (Crisp and punchy is not exactly my cup of tea.) The 4K LED set is certainly an improvement on the old 720p plasma it replaces, but a recent model 1080p plasma might have looked even better.

I'm replacing the 60" plasma next week with a 4k HDR LED, so I'll get a better idea how good its upscaling works for DirecTV 1080i material.

 

[andy sullivan]

I've had the 2k Sony70w850b and the 4k Sony 70x850b. The 4k is noticeably better with Dish Network. Similar differences should be available with "D".