Fiasco wrote:I'm in the market for an upgrade to my tv. Anyone have any experience with the 4K tvs out there? Is it worth the upgrade? The one I currently am interested in is the Vizio 4K Ultra HD Smart Tv M-series.
Buc2 wrote:Fiasco wrote:I'm in the market for an upgrade to my tv. Anyone have any experience with the 4K tvs out there? Is it worth the upgrade? The one I currently am interested in is the Vizio 4K Ultra HD Smart Tv M-series.
From reviews I've read, the only thing they recommend is a 50" or larger set, otherwise it's just a waste because the HD is no more noticeable than any other type on the market.
Fiasco wrote:Buc2 wrote:
From reviews I've read, the only thing they recommend is a 50" or larger set, otherwise it's just a waste because the HD is no more noticeable than any other type on the market.
The one I want to get is 55"
The other big question is, of course, whether there’s anything worth watching in 4K. At IFA, TV vendors touted some new moves to help expand UHD and HDR content. Samsung announced that it’s working with the European pay-TV services Canal+ and Astra to launch sports UHD channels, while Sony said it’s doing the same with Amazon to bring HDR TV shows and movies to its streaming viewers.
As we saw with HDTV, we’ll know that UHD has really gotten rolling when it hits mainstream sports programming. At a press dinner here Wednesday, Panasonic government-affairs vice president Peter Fannon called the 2016 Olympics “a key goal” for UHD.
If you’ve been iffy about buying a 4K set, the addition of HDR may make this option look more interesting. But at the same time, you might want to wait until the feature becomes part of a manufacturer’s entire lineup instead of being confined to high-end models.
The prospect of UHD coming to over-the-air broadcasts — a test in Cleveland of a system that puts HD and UHD video in one signal showed promising results, including stronger indoor reception — might provide an additional reason to hold off on that TV purchase until 4K content is more readily available.
The Outsider wrote:4k is a waste in a TV at the moment. If we were talking desktop monitors I'd tell you to go all in.
But if you're going to buy one anyway, spend some extra money and get a decent brand. Every Vizio I've ever had was an utter piece of ****.
The Outsider wrote:4k is a waste in a TV at the moment. If we were talking desktop monitors I'd tell you to go all in.
But if you're going to buy one anyway, spend some extra money and get a decent brand. Every Vizio I've ever had was an utter piece of ****.
Fiasco wrote:The Outsider wrote:4k is a waste in a TV at the moment. If we were talking desktop monitors I'd tell you to go all in.
But if you're going to buy one anyway, spend some extra money and get a decent brand. Every Vizio I've ever had was an utter piece of ****.
Can you elaborate on that? The reason I was gonna go with a Vizio is because I can use an extra 10% off the price with a best buy coupon they sent me. That's around $70 off. Plus my girlfriend has a Vizio and hasn't had any problem with it so far. It's been about a year now that she's had it
Buc2 wrote:Fiasco wrote:I'm in the market for an upgrade to my tv. Anyone have any experience with the 4K tvs out there? Is it worth the upgrade? The one I currently am interested in is the Vizio 4K Ultra HD Smart Tv M-series.
From reviews I've read, the only thing they recommend is a 50" or larger set, otherwise it's just a waste because the HD is no more noticeable than any other type on the market.
The Outsider wrote:Fiasco wrote:Can you elaborate on that? The reason I was gonna go with a Vizio is because I can use an extra 10% off the price with a best buy coupon they sent me. That's around $70 off. Plus my girlfriend has a Vizio and hasn't had any problem with it so far. It's been about a year now that she's had it
Every Vizio I've had, I bought 4 of them for my hunting camp because they were relatively cheap, had some sort of major component go bad. In contrast I own a couple Sony LED tvs and a JVC and have not had a single problem with any of them.
uscbucsfan wrote:IMO Samsung and LG are the two best TVs now for the money. There are pros and cons to all of them. I did a lot of research on TVs before I invested in mine.
PM me if you want further details.
I've had a Vizio and it's true they do not last as long and the picture quality doesn't stack up. Not all HD or even 4K TVs are created equal.
Fiasco wrote:Ended up getting a LG 55" smart tv, 2015 version for $680. Everything has been really good so far, just wish the remote had the keypad in the back like vizio did. Oh well
Phantom Phenom wrote:Fiasco wrote:Ended up getting a LG 55" smart tv, 2015 version for $680. Everything has been really good so far, just wish the remote had the keypad in the back like vizio did. Oh well
4K?
mdb1958 wrote:I got Samsung LCD and LED, now I wonder if I should do 4K next. Looks like an awesome picture, is this the way everything takes off and how long?
bucfanclw wrote:I can tell you that even if I had the budget to retrofit my networks into 4k, the actual vendors don't have end to end products that would allow me to. Nielsen hasn't certified anything above 1080i for watermarking. Nobody has made a compression system that would allow me to get more than 2-3 channels on a satellite transponder for distribution, which isn't nearly enough. Encapsulated video technologies will certainly help, but it's a bit in it's infancy in the broadcast world.
So the best 4K viewing you'll have is hooking up your computer to your tv and watching the small library of 4K video after you fill your hard drive at a whopping 318 GB/hr storage size.
Buc2 wrote:Non-nerd version...
bucfanclw wrote:Buc2 wrote:Non-nerd version...
Did you step into the wrong forum?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest