4K Televisions: Are they worth it?

[Neely2005]

RLED, of course. Don't you know your alphabet? Eventually, we'll get to ZLED, which you funny Canadians will pronounce as "zed led."

Most of the English speaking world pronounces Z as Zed.

Just like most of the world uses the Metric system.

 

[Lonewolfe2015]

Right now LED's are still beating OLED's in refresh rate, motion blur and brightness. For gaming and the price I would wait till they catch up or save money on an LED. That will change as new models come out but LED conintues to improve as well. I'm not a fan of Vizio at all.

The 3rd party stuff is interesting. My Sony has no ads, I have no idea if they are tracking stuff. It's an android TV.

I'm still running a pair of Plasma TVs, OLED would be the closest experience to Plasma in terms of picture quality. I'm not up to speed on the input lag which would be something I'd research on any new set. However refresh rate and motion blur are essentially the same thing and there isn't a distinct advantage for LCD/LED TVs versus OLED TVs in my experience.

I'm actually still trying to figure out if I'm even sensitive enough to the 120Hz of a regular LED versus the claimed 600Hz of my Plasmas. Since motion blur is generated by your brain's interpretation of the motion on the screen each person will be affected by the TV's refresh rate differently.

 

[chicagoskycam]

If you're buying a new TV right now why wouldn't you get a 4K TV?

I think the question is to upgrade for it.

I'm still running a pair of Plasma TVs, OLED would be the closest experience to Plasma in terms of picture quality. I'm not up to speed on the input lag which would be something I'd research on any new set. However refresh rate and motion blur are essentially the same thing and there isn't a distinct advantage for LCD/LED TVs versus OLED TVs in my experience.

I'm actually still trying to figure out if I'm even sensitive enough to the 120Hz of a regular LED versus the claimed 600Hz of my Plasmas. Since motion blur is generated by your brain's interpretation of the motion on the screen each person will be affected by the TV's refresh rate differently.

I see what you're saying. I have a Pioneer Elite still and the picture quality for movies is still amazing.

For gaming, LED's were beating the last batch of OLED's in brightness, motion. It's more than just how you react to it. You can actually see the pixels blur on fast moving content with on some displays. Most newer displays have game settings.

Sony seems to be backing LED's for a while longer.

 

[Bjorn Le]

The reason more manufacturers aren't making OLEDs is it's still very much a trade secret how to do it efficiently. It's why as I mentioned before Samsung hasn't been able to get OLED TVs at a cost that allows them to effectively operate in the market. The South Koreans have invested billions into OLED, so until the tech trickles down economies of scale are going to make other manufacturers getting into OLED a non-tenable move. Sony is attempting to market their improved backlit LCD LED's but they can't hope to beat OLED moving forward. By the early 2020s OLED should have replaced LED in the mainstream.

 

[kingsholygrail]

I still love my Vizio I bought back in 2010. I ride my TVs into the ground.

 

[chicagoskycam]

The reason more manufacturers aren't making OLEDs is it's still very much a trade secret how to do it efficiently. It's why as I mentioned before Samsung hasn't been able to get OLED TVs at a cost that allows them to effectively operate in the market. The South Koreans have invested billions into OLED, so until the tech trickles down economies of scale are going to make other manufacturers getting into OLED a non-tenable move. Sony is attempting to market their improved backlit LCD LED's but they can't hope to beat OLED moving forward. By the early 2020s OLED should have replaced LED in the mainstream.

True, I believe Sony stated they destroy 3 panels for every 1 that comes out correctly for OLED

 

[Lonewolfe2015]

Interesting, didn't know manufacturing OLED was still that difficult. I remember reading a lot about the curved display issues in the past, but figured by now that information would have been distributed or it would be possible to source the screens.

I'll keep watching this January during CES and hope Panasonic commits to releasing a reasonably priced one. I've never had such a great value buy as their final Plasma series, 50" Plasma for $630. That one will get relegated to the bedroom in favor of a 4K living room TV should the right one come out in the next year.

 

[aleshemsky83]

By the way somebody mentioned LG 4k OLEDs being lower quality relative to Samsungs (which you can't buy I guess)

How do they compare to regular 4k tvs?

 

[Bjorn Le]

By the way somebody mentioned LG bringing 4k OLEDs being lower quality relative to Samsungs (which you can't buy I guess)

How do they compare to regular 4k tvs?

OLED is night and day different. It's the biggest jump since SD to HD.

 

[chicagoskycam]

OLED is night and day different. It's the biggest jump since SD to HD.

No, they're not yet. Sony has already produced LED's on the same level as OLED and has been stated in this thread, OLED's have been rated lower than some current LED's in brightness and motion distortion. Sony probably won't be able to keep it up much longer.

 

[Bjorn Le]

No, they're not yet. Sony has already produced LED's on the same level as OLED and has been stated in this thread, OLED's have been rated lower than some current LED's in brightness and motion distortion. Sony probably won't be able to keep it up much longer.

Just because Sony says they're on the same level doesn't mean they are. What Sony says is marketing, and attempted justification for their shareholders for why they're not producing OLED's commercially (because that's a lot more optimistic than the, ****, our production techniques just aren't good enough to make these at a profit yet). You place an OLED beside even these enhanced LEDs and it's a massive difference. This is where the eye test really matters, comparing technical specifications doesn't do it justice. You have to see one, preferably side-by-side. I'd buy an OLED TV today if I didn't think the price was going to come down significantly in the next 2-3 years. It's literally moving from technology that has more or less stayed the same for a couple decades.

OLED is the next big step in display quality. The gap is only going to get bigger as more manufacturers abandon obsolete LED and start investing in improving OLED.

 

[aleshemsky83]

So for example what is the gap in quality between q $3000 Sony 4k LED and q $3000 LG 4k OLED, both of which are on the market

http://www.thebrick.com/search?keyword=lg oled tv&gclid=CMumztv8qNACFYY1aQodcHoA2w

https://www.amazon.ca/gp/aw/d/B01CD...a+hd+4k+tv&dpPl=1&dpID=51ZYEFUOj6L&ref=plSrch


http://m.bestbuy.ca/defaultpage.asp...etails.aspx?ajax=true&sku=10414557&lang=en-CA

Edit: well I guess it's a 65 inch versus 55 inch where the prices are similar but still is the quality difference still big

 

[Osprey]

LED may have a higher maximum brightness, but OLED has a much lower minimum brightness (zero). I, personally, would trade some brightness and vividness for having blacks that are truly black and all other dark colors that are rich and not washed out. I tend to watch TV at night in rooms that are not terribly bright or even have the lights turned out, so I don't need brightness, but I am acutely aware when blacks aren't black, especially when there are "bars" on the sides (ex. 4:3 or 2.35:1 content).

 

[Bjorn Le]

So for example what is the gap in quality between q $3000 Sony 4k LED and q $3000 LG 4k OLED, both of which are on the market

http://www.thebrick.com/search?keyword=lg oled tv&gclid=CMumztv8qNACFYY1aQodcHoA2w

https://www.amazon.ca/gp/aw/d/B01CD...a+hd+4k+tv&dpPl=1&dpID=51ZYEFUOj6L&ref=plSrch


http://m.bestbuy.ca/defaultpage.asp...etails.aspx?ajax=true&sku=10414557&lang=en-CA

Edit: well I guess it's a 65 inch versus 55 inch where the prices are similar but still is the quality difference still big

In my opinion yes, but it's something you have to see for yourself to really understand.

 

[chicagoskycam]

LED may have a higher maximum brightness, but OLED has a much lower minimum brightness (zero). I, personally, would trade some brightness and vividness for having blacks that are truly black and all other dark colors that are rich and not washed out. I tend to watch TV at night in rooms that are not terribly bright or even have the lights turned out, so I don't need brightness, but I am acutely aware when blacks aren't black, especially when there are "bars" on the sides (ex. 4:3 or 2.35:1 content).

I agree, black levels are the most important. My Pioneer Elite plasma still does a better job with black levels than most LED's.

 

[chicagoskycam]

Just because Sony says they're on the same level doesn't mean they are. What Sony says is marketing, and attempted justification for their shareholders for why they're not producing OLED's commercially (because that's a lot more optimistic than the, ****, our production techniques just aren't good enough to make these at a profit yet). You place an OLED beside even these enhanced LEDs and it's a massive difference. This is where the eye test really matters, comparing technical specifications doesn't do it justice. You have to see one, preferably side-by-side. I'd buy an OLED TV today if I didn't think the price was going to come down significantly in the next 2-3 years. It's literally moving from technology that has more or less stayed the same for a couple decades.

OLED is the next big step in display quality. The gap is only going to get bigger as more manufacturers abandon obsolete LED and start investing in improving OLED.

We are basically saying the same thing. I don't think the price difference is worth it yet. There is not a large enough variance in display for all uses IMO to account for the cost difference. I think OLED will be short lived for QLED's and then we will be approaching 8K's.

https://www.cnet.com/news/how-qled-tv-could-help-samsung-finally-beat-lgs-oleds/

I did a ton of research when I purchased my 4K last spring, I didn't feel OLED's were there quite yet and was concerned about brightness, motion blur and input lag. The one's I compared, the OLED's were losing out in several categories and more $$$. The picture quality in terms of the numbers is better. It's hard to tell visually cause the retailers typically run native 4k HDR content. Keep in mind this is very little of what you will be using it for initially if at all. The display's upscale tech is very important. Also, at the time my only option was LG for OLED. You might get Samsung and LG with two different techs.

I personally wouldn't buy a top of the line LCD right now either, go mid range if you're looking.

Calibration also makes a huge difference with whatever you purchase. I'm just saying if someone wants a new display now they don't have to go OLED.

 

[chicagoskycam]

So for example what is the gap in quality between q $3000 Sony 4k LED and q $3000 LG 4k OLED, both of which are on the market

http://www.thebrick.com/search?keyword=lg oled tv&gclid=CMumztv8qNACFYY1aQodcHoA2w

https://www.amazon.ca/gp/aw/d/B01CD...a+hd+4k+tv&dpPl=1&dpID=51ZYEFUOj6L&ref=plSrch


http://m.bestbuy.ca/defaultpage.asp...etails.aspx?ajax=true&sku=10414557&lang=en-CA

Edit: well I guess it's a 65 inch versus 55 inch where the prices are similar but still is the quality difference still big

What do you care about most? What are you going to be doing on it? Gaming? Do you have good control of sunlight in the room where it will be? What type of display are you replacing, how old?

 

[Lonewolfe2015]

Bit silly to get worked up over present versus future tech and when to buy. TV tech runs notoriously slow, OLED will likely be the premium display tech for at least 5 years and 4K for probably 10 years. It doesn't matter what resolutions we reach above 4K when we can't compress, store and stream the files over current internet capabilities easily.

 

[chicagoskycam]

Bit silly to get worked up over present versus future tech and when to buy. TV tech runs notoriously slow, OLED will likely be the premium display tech for at least 5 years and 4K for probably 10 years. It doesn't matter what resolutions we reach above 4K when we can't compress, store and stream the files over current internet capabilities easily.

Next Olympics in Japan are slotted to be filmed in native 8k so 2020. Displays are supposed to be available by then but without a major shift not cheap.

http://www.theverge.com/2016/8/26/12656286/8k-tv-broadcasts-2020-olympics-sony-panasonic

 

[McDavidCrushedLarkin]

I have had 4k for over a year and wouldn't trade it for anything. Netflix in 4k is also nice and always adding new things.

 

[TheCanasianfrasian]

imo 4k TV is not worth it....are any tv providers sending out a 4k feed? Even if they are, are any TV shows being shot in 4k?

I think for now 4k is only good for gaming, so if you want to use the mostly mostly for gaming, sure, i think it may be worth it

 

[chicagoskycam]

imo 4k TV is not worth it....are any tv providers sending out a 4k feed? Even if they are, are any TV shows being shot in 4k?

I think for now 4k is only good for gaming, so if you want to use the mostly mostly for gaming, sure, i think it may be worth it

Almost all Netflix original programming is in 4K plus other stuff in their library. Amazon is filming the Grand Tour in 4K and has content. I have Direct TV that has content. There are apa on my tv such as ultra hd which are all 4K movies.

It's there. The important thing to remember is any decent 4K tv will upscale 1080P.

 

[Kestrel]

Almost all Netflix original programming is in 4K plus other stuff in their library. Amazon is filming the Grand Tour in 4K and has content. I have Direct TV that has content. There are apa on my tv such as ultra hd which are all 4K movies.

It's there. The important thing to remember is any decent 4K tv will upscale 1080P.

This. Even my DVD's that I've never really watched with upscaling before... obviously there's a limit to what can be done with a DVD, but they are looking quite fantastic compared to what they used to... 1080p and 4k both look amazing on my TV. Between that, and having a decent pair of tower speakers, I enjoy watching movies on my system more than I enjoy the original theater experience. Next step is to make room for surround sound - but I don't even feel I really need that.

 

[Bjorn Le]

We are basically saying the same thing. I don't think the price difference is worth it yet. There is not a large enough variance in display for all uses IMO to account for the cost difference. I think OLED will be short lived for QLED's and then we will be approaching 8K's.

https://www.cnet.com/news/how-qled-tv-could-help-samsung-finally-beat-lgs-oleds/

I did a ton of research when I purchased my 4K last spring, I didn't feel OLED's were there quite yet and was concerned about brightness, motion blur and input lag. The one's I compared, the OLED's were losing out in several categories and more $$$. The picture quality in terms of the numbers is better. It's hard to tell visually cause the retailers typically run native 4k HDR content. Keep in mind this is very little of what you will be using it for initially if at all. The display's upscale tech is very important. Also, at the time my only option was LG for OLED. You might get Samsung and LG with two different techs.

I personally wouldn't buy a top of the line LCD right now either, go mid range if you're looking.

Calibration also makes a huge difference with whatever you purchase. I'm just saying if someone wants a new display now they don't have to go OLED.

Well it's what we discussed earlier. I really disagree that QLED is coming anytime soon. If manufacturers can't even figure out how to make OLED's at a profit, they're not going to be able to manufacture QLED's at a profit, especially when that technology is very much still in the womb. OLED is still in it's infancy, QLED isn't even there yet. I think it would be conservative to expect QLED's that aren't extremely expensive sell-at-a-loss products before the 2030s; OLED's aren't going to be widespread till the 2020s. My OLED X1 Yoga's screen probably won't be common until the 2020s.

I think you can do as much research as you want on OLED's, but it's seeing them in person that actually makes the difference. I read about motion blur, brightness, and lag before I bought my OLED X1, but none of that really mattered when I actually saw one. I can't distinguish those issues from a normal screen, but I definitely do notice the richness in colours, the true, actual blacks, and more. For me, TV's were essentially the same experience, but I can't justify the price now.

 

[Osprey]

Well it's what we discussed earlier. I really disagree that QLED is coming anytime soon. If manufacturers can't even figure out how to make OLED's at a profit, they're not going to be able to manufacture QLED's at a profit, especially when that technology is very much still in the womb. OLED is still in it's infancy, QLED isn't even there yet. I think it would be conservative to expect QLED's that aren't extremely expensive sell-at-a-loss products before the 2030s; OLED's aren't going to be widespread till the 2020s. My OLED X1 Yoga's screen probably won't be common until the 2020s.

The thing is, though, that QLED is much cheaper to manufacture than OLED. If they can't figure out how to make OLED at a profit, then that's just more incentive to transition to QLED. It's still quite a ways away--I got the impression that they haven't actually built any TV-sized QLED displays yet--but the significantly cheaper cost is the main reason why it's such a promising technology. The others are that it's twice as cost efficient and can be used in flexible displays, but those are going to have more relevance to small displays (smartphones, tablets, watch, etc.) than to TVs.