[JulesandSand]

I had a demo yesterday of the Sony X9 65" 4K TV. The PQ with 4K material was breathtaking as was BluRay playback. HD was upscaled and was very good also.

I was really impressed with the sound quality from the in-built speakers too as that's always where flat screen TVs fall down.

Having said all that I'm not buying one as 95% of my viewing is Sky HD and the improvement in PQ over my current TV doesn't justify spending £6K

Still stunning though.

[call100]

Just wait patiently...The cost's will drop dramatically fairly soon as all the manufacturers push out more models...Happy days..!

[JulesandSand]

Quote:

Originally Posted by call100

Just wait patiently...The cost's will drop dramatically fairly soon as all the manufacturers push out more models...Happy days..!

It's not the cost that's holding me back - it's the lack of 4K material.

[Nigel Goodwin]

Our's came yesterday - but NOT the computer that is supplied to demo it

[JulesandSand]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

Our's came yesterday - but NOT the computer that is supplied to demo it

There's the thing - the hard drive displays 4K content on the TV in stunning definition. It's a bit like Jim Bowen on Bullseye - 'Let's see what you could have won!' Here's what your TV is capable of but you won't be seeing it any time soon.

[call100]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

Our's came yesterday - but NOT the computer that is supplied to demo it

Bummer!!....Would value your opinion when you get it up and running Nigel...

[Nigel Goodwin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by call100

Bummer!!....Would value your opinion when you get it up and running Nigel...

You wouldn't believe how little interest I have in 4K TV

How pointless can you get, no source in sight, and existing HD pictures are perfectly fine - and would be better still if they upped the bandwidth.

[Deacon1972]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

You wouldn't believe how little interest I have in 4K TV

How pointless can you get, no source in sight, and existing HD pictures are perfectly fine - and would be better still if they upped the bandwidth.

You could say all new technology is pointless then because there is rarely any decent amount of content/media to accompany it when first released - this was true for colour TV, VHS, DVD, widescreen TV, PS2/3 and no doubt PS4, DVD, Bluray and 2k HD.

What would be pointless would be having the content and media available but nothing to watch/play it on. At least you can still watch current content on it until the new format gains ground.

4k won't be any different to the 2k HD we have now, where HD TV's were out a few years before HD launched in the UK.

As for source -There's already some 4k content available, there's a dedicated UHD channel on Eutelsat. The BBC have even been recording in 4k this week at Wimbledon - With manufacturers now bringing out 4k sets it will move fairly quickly.

[Joel's dad]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

You wouldn't believe how little interest I have in 4K TV

How pointless can you get, no source in sight, and existing HD pictures are perfectly fine - and would be better still if they upped the bandwidth.

You sound like my old man did back in 2005. 'What's the point of HD when there is no source.'

Films are where it will shine and they bringing out up scaled 4k soon.

And I'm sure sky will be churning out a channel sky movies 4k with a £20 per month for 4k sub

[call100]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

You wouldn't believe how little interest I have in 4K TV

How pointless can you get, no source in sight, and existing HD pictures are perfectly fine - and would be better still if they upped the bandwidth.

How far away is retirement?......

[chrisbartley]

Pixel resolution might not be the only consideration ....

LINK

[Nigel Goodwin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joel's dad

You sound like my old man did back in 2005. 'What's the point of HD when there is no source.'

People won't sit close enough for current HD (including people on here who should know better), so they are VERY unlikely to sit a great deal closer for 4K

[call100]

You don't have to sit a 'great' deal closer, just a bit. 5 to 6 feet from 55" - 65" Tv's would be the ideal. That said it's not compulsory and you will still notice a difference at normal lounge distances.
I think that the distance argument has been done to death though. Not really worth revisiting. Those really interested in UHD will probably view it correctly.
Nigel....Will you get a demo of the new Sony Media player when it arrives?

[Nigel Goodwin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by call100

You don't have to sit a 'great' deal closer, just a bit. 5 to 6 feet from 55" - 65" Tv's would be the ideal.

I'd class that as a 'great deal' closer

5 to 6 feet would be pretty suitable for current HD, you would need to be closer still to get decent benefit from 4K.

Quote:

That said it's not compulsory and you will still notice a difference at normal lounge distances.
I think that the distance argument has been done to death though. Not really worth revisiting. Those really interested in UHD will probably view it correctly.
Nigel....Will you get a demo of the new Sony Media player when it arrives?

I'll certainly be down to have a look

I certainly expect it to be spectacular - as others have mentioned the set looks to have far better speakers than usual, actually at the sides of the screen making it a fair bit wider than other sets.

[call100]

The 5 to 6 feet comes from Sony's own recommendations for their UHD sets....

The media player is being shipped with films and video shorts preloaded in UHD to start you off. They are also launching a Sony 4K network video service offering access to a library of 4K movies and TV show titles.

[Deacon1972]

Quote:

Originally Posted by call100

The 5 to 6 feet comes from Sony's own recommendations for their UHD sets....

The media player is being shipped with films and video shorts preloaded in UHD to start you off. They are also launching a Sony 4K network video service offering access to a library of 4K movies and TV show titles.

I heard there's a job going at a Sony shop if interested.

Saw a 4k demo a few months ago, I presume it was via Sony's media player, wasn't a TV but their 4k PJ, nevertheless, it was exceptional.

[Nigel Goodwin]

OK, apparently the unit turned up earlier, so I've just been down and had a look - as I imagined it looks pretty spectacular, but it would be better if the dialogue wasn't in Russian and Chinese

[d'@ve]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrisbartley

Pixel resolution might not be the only consideration ....

LINK

Ah, temporal / dynamic resolution.

I've been banging on for years on DS about the rubbish HD blurryvision we have to suffer because HD fans focus on spatial resolution and most of them still don't get it. In the end, I gave up so I'm glad you've posted that link - every HD fan should read it and learn to understand it.

Until the frame rate and shutter speed problems have been fixed, HD will always be half-HD to me, as motion resolution is as cr@p as SD, indeed the blurryvision can be even more noticeable. Here's one of several posts I made in 2009, with link to a BBC quote on the issue as it relates to Super HD:

http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showt...8#post35515098

Andy Bower, the then BBC’s head of Broadcast Research & Innovation, speaking at IBC, said:

“...To date, development of Super HD has very much focused on increasing spatial resolution, interest in the use of higher frame rates to improve dynamic resolution on moving objects or for panning, is now growing. It is likely that frame rates well beyond the current 60 Hz, and of the order of 240 Hz, are needed as you quadruple linear resolution of current HD, said Bower.”

Until the temporal / dynamic resolution problem is fixed, not only will HD TV continue to be half-HD, but Super HD or whatever it's now called will be pointless and a waste of money (except on static or very slow moving scenes). The fixation with spatial resolution on static pictures just makes me mad.

[technologist]

and BT 2020 only has 120Hz (not 100) but we really need say 300Hz for UHD2 acquisition ....
plus 4:4:4 12 bit acquisition
and at least 10 bit emission .. and linear gamma !

But at least the color gamut is wide enough..
......

But as it is say 10+ years away there is time to get the technology sorted out ..
and to hear if the Audio is to be linear or object based ?!

[d'@ve]

I just want them to get rid of HD blurryvision first, and jerkyvision on imported Americal material. So yes, 300 fps accompanied by faster shutter speeds on the cameras would be a huge step forward - and they could experiment first with it on 1080p material, while continuing to develop UHDTV. I think most people would be surprised by the improvement this would bring to HD TV.

[David (2)]

IMO, 60in sets are about the break point for 4K HD. Anything smaller and I am not sure its worth it compared with current HD formats. Even at 60in, I am not 100% sure its worth it or that others will think its worth it - our friends have a 62in LCD and on SkyHD the HD channels looks fantastic - I don't really know if 4K would be much of a step up even on that size tv.

As an aside note, I know many people with more regular 32 - 42in sets who have NOT bothered getting a HD source (over air or BluRay) as they claimed the improvement wasn't worth it. I can see the same thing happening all over again on these size sets.

As for a 4K source, bandwidth is the issue. It will be a massive headache trying to fit a couple of 4K channels on Freeview, and not much better on Satellite or Cable networks. You can put in online, but how fast a connection would you need, and I don't think at the moment if thousands of people attempted to access the same 4K content at the same time, the internet wouldn't cope - this may change with time, maybe a reason some will once again having a pay for internet option - so that only the pay-for internet route would carry such content. I see that bluRays mastered from 4K are out there, but IMO I cant see this making much difference - its still a current HD picture.

Without 4K material I don't see much, if any reason to pay for one of the new 4K sets. Also, with a 4K set wont upscaled SD look worse than it does now on current HD sets?

And from what I have seen, 8K is already in the pipeline - so unless you have to be on the leading edge of new tech (with very deep pockets) wait the extra year for 4/8K sets to appear.

IMO, OLED screens might be more important than a move to 4K, certainly at the more normal size (and small) screens, where the OLED can remove the current disadvantages of regular LCD (or back lit LED) - eg, improvements other than resolution.

[Deacon1972]

Quote:

Originally Posted by David (2)

IMO, 60in sets are about the break point for 4K HD. Anything smaller and I am not sure its worth it compared with current HD formats. Even at 60in, I am not 100% sure its worth it or that others will think its worth it - our friends have a 62in LCD and on SkyHD the HD channels looks fantastic - I don't really know if 4K would be much of a step up even on that size tv.

As an aside note, I know many people with more regular 32 - 42in sets who have NOT bothered getting a HD source (over air or BluRay) as they claimed the improvement wasn't worth it. I can see the same thing happening all over again on these size sets.

As for a 4K source, bandwidth is the issue. It will be a massive headache trying to fit a couple of 4K channels on Freeview, and not much better on Satellite or Cable networks. You can put in online, but how fast a connection would you need, and I don't think at the moment if thousands of people attempted to access the same 4K content at the same time, the internet wouldn't cope - this may change with time, maybe a reason some will once again having a pay for internet option - so that only the pay-for internet route would carry such content. I see that bluRays mastered from 4K are out there, but IMO I cant see this making much difference - its still a current HD picture.

Without 4K material I don't see much, if any reason to pay for one of the new 4K sets. Also, with a 4K set wont upscaled SD look worse than it does now on current HD sets?

And from what I have seen, 8K is already in the pipeline - so unless you have to be on the leading edge of new tech (with very deep pockets) wait the extra year for 4/8K sets to appear.

IMO, OLED screens might be more important than a move to 4K, certainly at the more normal size (and small) screens, where the OLED can remove the current disadvantages of regular LCD (or back lit LED) - eg, improvements other than resolution.

HEVC aka H.265 will more than likely be the video coding standard for 4k - it's 50% more efficient than H.264, the video coding system we have now for 2k HD. I don't really see bandwidth being an issue.

[Nigel Goodwin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by David (2)

IMO, 60in sets are about the break point for 4K HD. Anything smaller and I am not sure its worth it compared with current HD formats.

To be honest I didn't think the current Sony one looked very big

And that was from pretty close up.

[call100]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deacon1972

I heard there's a job going at a Sony shop if interested.

Saw a 4k demo a few months ago, I presume it was via Sony's media player, wasn't a TV but their 4k PJ, nevertheless, it was exceptional.

I only mentioned the Sony ones for Nigel.. I think they are the first to be offering dedicated content along with the products, so far...

Quote:

Originally Posted by David (2)

Without 4K material I don't see much, if any reason to pay for one of the new 4K sets. Also, with a 4K set wont upscaled SD look worse than it does now on current HD sets?

And from what I have seen, 8K is already in the pipeline - so unless you have to be on the leading edge of new tech (with very deep pockets) wait the extra year for 4/8K sets to appear.

IMO, OLED screens might be more important than a move to 4K, certainly at the more normal size (and small) screens, where the OLED can remove the current disadvantages of regular LCD (or back lit LED) - eg, improvements other than resolution.

I agree about the OLED screens, I love the look of the new Samsung OLED curved screen.

Re the 8K, I think the Samsung 4K sets come with the evolution kit so upgrading should be easy...

Although looking forward to sampling both in the wild, purchase will depend on buying a new house or extending the current one. As said a lounge sized TV isn't going to really cut the mustard. Hopefully everything will fall into place at the same time.

[Nigel Goodwin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by call100

Re the 8K, I think the Samsung 4K sets come with the evolution kit so upgrading should be easy...

Am I missing something here? - how does the evolution kit upgrade the screen resolution?.