# Is this a good time to buy a 4K TV?



## Liviu Cojocaru (Sep 22, 2016)

Hi guys,

I have a 40inch  Samsung F6100 for about 2 years now and I was thinking to upgrade to a 4K 48-55inch TV.

Would now be a good time to do this or should I wait, let's say, another year or so for 4K technology to mature and get more features like HDR and OLED for a good price around 500 £ ?

P.S I forgot to mention that I have a PS4 but I don't really use it that much, the TV would be mainly for watching movies and TV series.

Thank you in advance for your opinions.


----------



## Vayra86 (Sep 22, 2016)

Not sure if OLED will be coming down in price that much in a year's time. The display technology is still not easy to produce and only LG has a solid implementation of it (as far as we can tell now, anyway).


----------



## P4-630 (Sep 22, 2016)

Vayra86 said:


> Not sure if OLED will be coming down in price that much in a year's time. The display technology is still not easy to produce and only LG has a solid implementation of it (as far as we can tell now, anyway).



And IIRC I was reading somewhere samsung stopped developing oled tv's (tweakers.net).


----------



## Bill_Bright (Sep 22, 2016)

Samsung stopped coming out with new models because the technology (RGB OLED) they use cost too much. The technology LG uses (WOLED) is cheaper but LG owns the patents (bought from Kodak) and won't license it to their arch rival, Samsung. But Samsung hasn't stopped R&D on them and according to reports, are developing something - but when it will hit the market is anyone's guess. The earliest I heard was something in 2018.

They still sell OLEDs, however. They just are not coming out with any new models.

The problem with waiting for something just around the corner is that is a never ending conundrum - there is always something better just around the corner.

For example, Samsung is working on Quantum Dot Technology (QLED) TVs that may make OLEDs obsolete. See, How QLED TV could help Samsung finally beat LG's OLEDs.

I say if (1) if you NEED a new TV now, (2) your eyes are good enough to actually see the difference, and (3) you have source content available in your area to actually take advantage of the latest technologies, then buy what your budget can afford. If any of those three prerequisites cannot be met today, then wait for what's around the corner.


----------



## Liviu Cojocaru (Oct 1, 2016)

I bought a 49inch LG 4K TV...LG 49UF770V. I am really impressed.


----------



## GamerGuy (Oct 2, 2016)

Bah, if you can wait, wait!  I think HDR alone is worth the wait, I most certainly am waiting for HDR to be widely available and more cost effectively priced (aka CHEAP!) before I'd jump on board.


----------



## WhiteNoise (Nov 1, 2016)

I was in a local store today and happened to be walking past the 4K TV's. Oh man this is the first time I have seen HDR in action and I was floored. I mean what a difference! Of all the TV's there I thought the OLED LG's in the $2000+ range had the most beautiful pictures. The next best sets I saw were the Samsung SUHD sets. Man on man I have been against buying a 4k set for my PC but I have to admit....I'm thinking about it now.


----------



## nomdeplume (Nov 1, 2016)

Same issue in both cases, lack of 2K content.  4K is years away.   8K is laughable unless your workflow is dependent on native resolution full frame photography or broadcast quality video editing.  4K gaming, not without a Displayport output on your video card.  Might as well be hooking that adapter up to VGA running onboard video. 

It will look great, iphones etc use 4K screens, but don't kid yourself 4K is what's being resolved 99% of the time.  On small screens they massively scale text and graphical interfaces to give that sharp appearance.  The resolution is better suited for +30" screens which allow full appreciation of suitably detailed subjects.


----------



## hat (Nov 1, 2016)

I still think 1080p looks great. In fact it looks so great I never use it. I am transcoding bluray rips right now and what am I doing? Chopping them down to 720p... even though I have a 1080p capable TV (admittedly, not the greatest, but it can do it). Besides that, I'm not a stickler for quality retention. I'm actually encoding for a terrible device which barely handles what h.264 can do. But even through all that, my crappy 720p rips still come out looking great. I still do a lot of DVDRips... that's 480p. But when I have the source material in my hands, I can make it whatever I want. A real, commercial DVD doesn't look that bad, and it doesn't come out looking bad when I'm done, either.

So, 4K TV? Coming from a guy who uses 720p at max... nah. It's just too much. It's too expensive, especially for what it is. Where is the content? 4k blurays are coming out, but they're still mainly 1080p. 4k content is barely on streaming services, and if it is, the bitrate is gonna be huge. Hope you don't have a data cap!

4k is still in its infancy... along with h.265, the new standard in video encoding which will ultimately be handling 4k in its maturity. The big dogs are still shuffling their feet here. If you really want 4k... wait for it, or you might be shooting yourself in the foot later once it matures and the 4k stuff you bought now is out of spec.


----------



## Liviu Cojocaru (Nov 1, 2016)

In my opinion, after seeing what 4k and UltraWide(3440x1440) can look like, the more pixels the better but again the 4k content is still very low and it will take another two or three years for this to improve so...it is not the best time to get a 4K TV but I for sure don't regret buying my TV . I will replace it in three years tops with a better one  ... yeah I love buying new stuff.


----------



## 64K (Nov 1, 2016)

That is what has kept me from buying a 4K TV. Lack of content. Where I live I pay extra for HD TV on my cable. Almost all of the channels come in as 720p or 1080i. A very few come in as 1080p but considering that a 4K TV would require 4 times the bandwidth as 1080p then I doubt there will be many 4K channels. I need to check with Comcast though. Things may have improved in the last few years.


----------



## WhiteNoise (Nov 1, 2016)

I agree with you guys completely but after seeing some of these 4k TV's in action I couldn't stop myself and I picked up a new 4k TV last night. It took a little while to figure out how to get text to look normal but once I did I have never seen a nicer desktop and reading / surfing the web is great. I've only tested one game so far BF1 and it looks great. I ran it at 4k @ 60 Hz @ 4:4:4 and it was pretty damn amazing looking. I also tested it at 1080p @ 60Hz @ 4:4:4 and the game didn't look as good but damn it still looks much better than 1920x1080 on my 1080p Sony. I think the difference here is it just looks cleaner, btween this new 4K TV at 1080p compared to my Sony 1080P set. What stands out the most to me is just how clean and clear everything is on this 4K set. My 1080P set looked great but damn it looks nowhere near as nice as the 4k set. HUGE difference.

Now the drawback is on my 1080p set I can play any game completely maxed out which I will not be able to do with the 4k TV. It will take me some time to figure out the sweet spot on the new 4k TV to make demanding games playable. I may have to just buy a second GTX 1080 

My Sony was a 48" model which was perfect for my desk. The new 4k unit is 55" and I have to admit I may return it for the 49" model. The 55" is beautiful but I think it might be too big for me. I'm going to give it a few days and see if I can adjust to the size. Playing BF1 was amazing but damn...


----------



## Dethroy (Nov 1, 2016)

Just curious... What TV make/model did you end up buying @WhiteNoise ?


----------



## Octavean (Nov 1, 2016)

I have an LG UB8500 55" 4K UHD Smart TV that I bought on sale in late 2014.  I bought it because my old Samsung 1080 HDTV was starting to fail.  I came across the the LG 65UH5500 65" on sale and started to consider buying it at ~$850 (supports HDR but is IPS).  Although there may be some black friday deals that are even better.

Having said that, watching DareDevil, Jessica Jones, Luke Cage, Marco Polo and more on Netflix does indeed look better to my eyes then the 1080 version (Netflix supports HDR BTW).  I've watched a few shows in 4K off of Amazon Prime as well.  There is also the option of creating your own 4K media with with your own 4K camera. If you have the GPU power to play games at 4K then again its to your benefit.  I have a couple of 4K PC monitors but IMO its a much better experience at 32" or larger for desktop use. For a 4K UHD TV though you'll typically only have the option of HDMI 2.0 (HDCP 2.2) for PC connections at 60Hz.


----------



## WhiteNoise (Nov 1, 2016)

Dethroy said:


> Just curious... What TV make/model did you end up buying @WhiteNoise ?



Samsung UN55KS8000
http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/samsung/ks8000


----------



## Liviu Cojocaru (Nov 1, 2016)

Congrats for the new TV mate, it's a great one.
 Sorry but I could not resist to this
 "is beautiful but I think it might be too big for me."That's what she said!!!


----------



## WhiteNoise (Nov 1, 2016)

Liviu Cojocaru said:


> Sorry but I could not resist to this
> "is beautiful but I think it might be too big for me."That's what she said!!!



lol


----------



## nomdeplume (Nov 1, 2016)

Paused for a second expecting you to say it was going back in favor of two larger ones.  The advances in screen manufacturing alone would make HD look better.  To push 4K stably a lot more improvements are going on inside.  Congrats.


----------



## Aquinus (Nov 2, 2016)

Bill_Bright said:


> Samsung stopped coming out with new models because the technology (RGB OLED) they use cost too much. The technology LG uses (WOLED) is cheaper but LG owns the patents (bought from Kodak) and won't license it to their arch rival, Samsung. But Samsung hasn't stopped R&D on them and according to reports, are developing something - but when it will hit the market is anyone's guess. The earliest I heard was something in 2018.
> 
> They still sell OLEDs, however. They just are not coming out with any new models.
> 
> ...


Well put. The only reason I'm considering 4k is because my plasma kicked the bucket.


----------



## WhiteNoise (Nov 2, 2016)

I packed up the Samsung. Returning it tonight for the curved version. Since I sit at a desk with this thing the curved model will look cool. I'm partially sold on keeping the 55" size though. It's just so nice.


----------



## Octavean (Nov 2, 2016)

I've been wanting a 65" or 70" 4K UHD TV for a while.  I'll have to think about it for a few more days.


----------



## Dethroy (Nov 2, 2016)

Octavean said:


> I've been wanting a 65" or 70" 4K UHD TV for a while.  I'll have to think about it for a few more days.


I'd suggest the LG OLED65B6P (cheaper alternative, same picture quality) or the LG OLED65E6P. Can't get any better than this atm.


----------



## bug (Nov 2, 2016)

Let me put this another way: the moment to buy a 4k TV is not necessarily when prices come down enough. It's when a significant portion of what you watch is actually delivered in 4k. And I assure you, by the time we get any significant amount of wide gamut, HDR content, next year's TV will be obsolete.
There are, of course, early adopters, but judging by the title of the thread, the OP is not one of them.


----------



## Octavean (Nov 2, 2016)

Dethroy said:


> I'd suggest the LG OLED65B6P (cheaper alternative, same picture quality) or the LG OLED65E6P. Can't get any better than this atm.



Thanks, for the suggestion.  I'm not married to OLED though. I could buy into a 65" OLED at ~$3000 USD but I would rather keep it at half that or a third of that.  I see the advantages of OLED but I don't quite get why people would only consider OLED as a viable option.


----------



## WhiteNoise (Nov 2, 2016)

The LG OLED screens I saw were beautiful. I mean something very special but according to RTing claim:

"Displaying static images results in temporary image retention"

That alone makes me want to avoid OLED as a PC monitor. Maybe it is nothing to worry about but I'd rather not take the chance. Samsung's SUHD screens are mighty beautiful too!


I have to say, my 4K TV is fantastic for gaming. Games at 4k 60Hz look damn amazing. Games at 1080p 60Hz do not look as good but much better than playing on a 1080p set. It is a huge difference and I can now say worth it.

BF1 is playable at 4K 60 Hz with AA off and all visual settings to HIGH but I think I'd have to run a mix of medium/high/ultra to get an acceptable frame rate. I have a feeling I will be running some games at 4k and others at 1080p.

I tested Fallout 4 last night, 4K 60 Hz 444 with all settings set to ultra or whatever it has. Ran beautifully.

I think if you are looking for a new TV for say your living room then stick with a good 1080p set unless you are buying a 65"+ TV.

But if you are looking to go 4K for gaming and have a PC that can handle it then YES get a 4k now. It's a HUGE difference to my eyes.

This site restricts pictures but here is a shot of my desktop on the Sammy 4K:

Samsung UN55KS8500 Curved:







Samsung UN55K8800 Flat:


----------



## nomdeplume (Nov 2, 2016)

Curved seems to be the right decision for you.  Did you look at any professional level monitors on the used market.  Universities and large corporations are notoriously wasteful in spending on the latest toys.  With a little digging its amazing what you can find quietly offered following on a two year or less upgrade cycle.  Not ultra high end stuff but considerably better than widely available consumer models.  Just have to watch out for something with 1.98 years worth of backlight hours with a manufacturing date 2.5 years ago.


----------



## Octavean (Nov 2, 2016)

WhiteNoise said:


> I think if you are looking for a new TV for say your living room then stick with a good 1080p set unless you are buying a 65"+ TV.
> 
> But if you are looking to go 4K for gaming and have a PC that can handle it then YES get a 4k now. It's a HUGE difference to my eyes.



There are also some OLED 4K UHD TVs that can do HDR well but have questionable response time when the HDR feature is enabled,....assuming they had decent response time at any setting.

Still 4K can definitely look great for a number of different use cases including gaming.  There are a lot of features I would like to have and a number of must have features, however, OLED isn't necessarily one of them.  

I liken modern 4K displays / UHD TVs to modern VR headsets.  It's something you have to experience in order to have a reasonable frame of reference.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Nov 2, 2016)

This newsletter I just got seems timely.


----------



## WhiteNoise (Nov 2, 2016)

@nomdeplume

I didn't really toss that idea around. I work for a company that sells commercial grade screens and I have a few older models that we are no longer selling in the 46" range by NEC. These tend to be larger in the body, thicker units designed to run 27/7 and last. Honestly for my desk at home I wanted something sleek. Plus I wanted 4K 60 Hz and HDR which i wouldn't get in the commercial units we sell but did get in my Samsung SUHD TV.

@Octavean

Yeah you are right. Input lag on OLED TV's from LG are not that great especially with HDR content. I would not want one for competitive gaming at all. My SUHD Samsung has acceptable input lag with HDR content.


----------



## WhiteNoise (Nov 2, 2016)

Bill_Bright said:


> This newsletter I just got seems timely.



Yeah best buy has already been selling the LG OLED models at a discount. $1999 to buy the 55" version. Trust me when i say i was tempted. Those screens are beautiful but input lag is not the best and image retention turns me off. Also the HDR input lag is kinda all over the place which is odd.

The LG C6 for $1999

1080p @ 60Hz:* 34.2 ms*

1080p With Interpolation: *118.6 ms*

1080p @ 60Hz Outside Game Mode:* 51.0 ms*

1080p @ 60Hz @ 4:4:4: *34.0 ms*

4k @ 60Hz: *34.0 ms*

4k @ 60Hz @ 4:4:4: *34.0 ms*

4k @ 60Hz + HDR: *67.5 ms*

4k @ 60Hz @ 4:4:4 + HDR: *67.5 ms*


----------

