Topic: 4k TV Recommendations

I suggest you google this. I really don't mean to be a negative nancy..... but... HDR and input lag will matter alot more than 4k will given your screen size and viewing distance... check out this link: which actually quotes Sony and THX as corroborating the information. It also has a nice chart that specifically answers your question,

so at 7-8 feet away you'll need a 60" screen just to get the full benefit of 1080p, and a 70" screen to even start noticing 4k. HDR by all reports is a bigger deal.

@BAMozzy: Thanks alot for your detailed answer. You can`t imagine how much that helps me =) I think I will just save a little more and go for the bigger screen of the KS8000 too. Its always good to hear from people first hand, who are satisfied with a product they own, since you can go mad with all the offerings out there in the market. Your TV fits all my needs regarding online multiplayer and picture quality. Maybe we also see another price drop until or after PS4 Pro is out, that would sure be awesome ^^ I will also definately try out your tip with a 55 inch dummy screen to see if that fits my living room. Have a nice sunday

@Mega-Gazz: thanks for the chart and the link. I`ll definately reconsider =)

@MindlESsSelf: The difference between the KS7000 and KS8000 in terms of actual image and HDR quality is minimal according to the reviews. The difference in price is mostly to do with the better sound (only important if you don't use a soundbar or alternative), twin tuners (only important if you use freeview and intend to connect and external HDD to record one channel whilst watching another) and the aesthetics - the 8000 has the 'floating' stand whilst the 7000 has the wide feet which could make no difference if you wall mount anyway. The 'slight' difference in blacks, peak brightness and 'motion' are probably imperceptible unless you have equipment to actually measure these.
I don't want to encourage you to spend 'more' than you want or have to for features that you may not want/need - especially as the difference in cost between the KS7000 and KS8000 (at 55") is nearly the cost of the PS4 Pro.

The chart that @Mega-Gazz posted can be a bit misleading. There are a number of these on the internet and some can vary giving you a different result.

This for example shows a very different set of results. The chart that Mega-Gazz posted was based on the 60ppd (pixels per degree) theory but most people actually have better vision than that and can see a difference. However Japanese broadcaster NHK supposedly proves our visual acuity can be much better than 60ppd – up to 200, in fact and the chart I posted shows the distances at that level.

To get the most benefit from a 4k TV, I would base my decision on the top chart but that doesn't mean that some benefits won't be observed if you opt to buy a smaller TV or sit further away. HDR though is not dependent on size of screen. If you can't afford or fit a 65" screen but sit 10' away, 55" will still show some benefit, an extra sharpness, a bit more detail in the finer areas. At 1080p, hair (for example) can 'breakage' and lose detail in mid range but at 4k, it keeps this detail better. The mid areas retain a level of sharpness that 1080p can't and whilst it may not be obviously better, its when you see a side by side that you can tell one looks 'superior'. How many 4k screenshots do we look at on the internet and see a difference over 1080p - and that's apparent at small sizes.

The best advice I can give is to buy the biggest TV you can afford and comfortably fit in your environment. I would also suggest you visit a TV store armed with a tape measure and have a look for yourself at the distance you are most likely to be viewing from. Even if you are not intending to buy from that retailer, it will give you a much better idea of what 4k will offer in the size you are looking at. You can also get to see how HDR compares with SDR too...

60 ppd is based on 20/20 vision, and obviously that is a factor, as will be age. It's true that some people have better than 20/20 and I honestly don't know how someone with glasses factors in. Anyhow my I don't mean to start an argument .

And, in any event, HDR, frame rate, and possibly input lag will have a much bigger impact on your gaming experience. IMO until everything is running at 60fps or higher that would be my priority.

I was trying to find information on ppd for people with glasses (does it even affect it?), and ran into this on reddit which has a link to a simple test, though take it with a grain of salt. Apparently our accuracy for parallel lines is much higher than dots, for example.

https://m.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/3aug70/for_fun_calcula...

@Mega-Gazz: It wasn't meant as a start to an argument but was trying to show that graphs can be misleading and not accurate enough to base a decision on alone. According to that link, I need to sit 3.5' away to see a difference in 4k over 1080p or buy a ridiculous sized screen - yet I know from personal experience, I can clearly see a difference between 1080p and 4k on my 55" from my sofa and have tested it too.

This is why further on, I said that the best thing to do is to test it yourself - go to a retailer and stand the same distance away that you sit and see if you can see a difference yourself. Its more obvious the bigger you go but the differences can still be seen on smaller screens. The overall look is cleaner, sharper, more precise but whether its 'significant' enough to justify the cost is debatable and dependent on the individual. HDR though is obvious at any screen size.

I never took this as anything but a healthy debate which will hopefully end in some clarity (see what I did there?). I am trying to separate personal bias from actual facts, which is hard. Also, frankly, my kids are at a play gym and I've got nothing much to do while I let them play but research stuff like this online

As for graphs I'm half tempted to overlay the two graphs to show the range between 20/20 vision and best possible vision but can't do that on my phone.

I agree that doing a test yourself is the best answer, but I don't trust showrooms . Doing a real double blind experiment that controls all other factors is difficult... but maybe now I'm being a nerd .

Me reading this thread.

@BAMozzy: Cheeres for the interesting reading.

Ordinarily I try to future proof for as long as possible so I was thinking 4k etc but as I am limited on screen size (I have a unit and in built shelving that cost a fair packet and my wife will not let me change), the largest I can go is approx 42 inches pending stand size. My wife wants it to have Netflix and Amazon app functions and wanting 3d and having a budget limits my choices to pretty much 1 Panasonic TV and reviews emphasise the budget nature. So I think it will just be a Full HD tv with passive 3d. It's a shame as I was half persuading myself that I should invest in a pro at the same time (I know it it is still better on an HD TV but I liked the idea of 4k streaming etc.).

@Rudy_Manchego: 4k in itself isn't really the future of TV's. I know a lot of people who bought a 4k TV before 2016 and are now regretting that decision because the TV can't do HDR - especially now that console gaming is moving towards HDR even though they can't yet do a full native 4k in (most) games. I wouldn't be surprised if in the next year or 2, the major TV manufacturers only make 4k HDR'10' TV's. As the graphs above show, that under a certain distance, the difference between 4k and 1080p ceases to have much impact.

Its similar in essence to the diminishing returns of 'polygons' in video games.

As the image above shows, when you reach a certain point, the number of polygons make very little difference - unless of course you increase the size and then would see more difference. A very small circle, made up of 30 straight lines, would look at lot rounder than a very large circle made of 30 lines. Its similar with pixels too.

I am sure the PS4 Pro will still give a lot of benefits to 1080p owners. Whether its 'enough' for you and worth the cost, only you can answer. A game like Tomb Raider will look much better with higher visual settings or higher frame rates than it will on the PS4. Horizon ZD will use the highest resolution version and scale that down to 1080p - think of it like a photo. A larger photo resized down looks sharper and better than the same picture at that size. Also games like Battlefield and Titanfall will look better as these will be native 1080p instead of 900p. Games that have unlocked frame rates will be running at higher and more consistent frame rates too.

I don't want to say 'you 'must' buy a 4k TV, and then you find little/no benefit and could have saved money and waited until a 4k HDR TV comes out at a size that suits you. Like I suggested above, I suggest taking a measurement of how far you will be sitting and go and have a look at 40" 4k TV's to see if you can detect enough of a 'noticeable' difference to make it a worthwhile purchase.

You could pick up a relatively cheap 3D 1080p smart TV and in a couple of years, look again as I fully expect 4k HDR to drop in price and become much more widespread. Whether or not you can still get 3D then, who knows - maybe it won't be so important to you by then of course...

@BAMozzy: Thanks for clarification. Really appreciate it. Learned so much from this thread in just 2 days =)

@BAMozzy - Well, I caved and just bought the TV you recommend. I read and watched many reviews on it and pretty much all were positive. It's a little more money than I wanted to spend but I think/hope it will be worth it.

The suggested retail price was around $1500 and I got it for $1150 so I think I got a good deal. Now I just have to wait impatiently for it to arrive. I'm all in on this whole 4K/Pro thing.

@Splat: Congratulations - hope it lives up to your expectations.

Judging from the price, I assume you went for the KS8000 (US model number) - the equivalent to the KS7000 in the UK? From what I here they are great and RTINGs reviews it very well. I will be interested to hear what you think. It has the same input lag and panel as mine (the KS8000 (UK - or KS9000 in the US) so should deliver similar results - especially with gaming!

Based on my country's Samsung site - they don't have the KS8000 series but they do have the KS7000 series.

@Splat: Sweet, enjoy it when it comes.

Yeah, I got the KS8000 model. I'm looking forward to getting my hands on it.

@BAMozzy: Thanks mate - really fascinating. I'll try and take a look at some tv's this weekend on show at that size. The kicker is the 3d. A bit like my Vita, I bought my current tv 2 and a half years ago knowing 3d was a doomed technology but expecting to get 4-5 years out of my tv before I'd need to replace and then I would see if 3d was still available or not. It is not the be all and end all, I don't have THAT much 3d content but I do enjoy what I have at the moment.

Man I wish I had a spare £1500, seems there are a lot more choices in that price bracket.

You guys should take a look at What Hi-Fi as their reviews are usually spot on. I have bought quite a few products based on their reviews (and of course my own listening/watching experiences) and not been pointed in the wrong direction. Their website has a 4K best of article (http://www.whathifi.com/best-buys/best-4k-tvs) and I thought it would benefit those looking for a new set. Just to point out that this is a UK publication so I don't know if the models mentioned are available outside of the UK or how good they are with gaming as they are only looking at them from a movies/TV perspective.