55" vs 60", and 1080p vs 4K

Discussion in 'Apple TV and Home Theater' started by exi, Nov 29, 2015.

  1. exi macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    #1
    Have an old 42" plasma which has served me well but is a little long in the tooth.

    Currently sitting about 7" from the TV. May be rearranging and/or moving in the near future which would lengthen the distance. Have seen the graphs showing I'm currently in the "4K is worth it" territory for a screen of 55" size at my distance.

    Am between Sony's W800C or Samsung's J6300 for a 55" 1080p, or Sony's X810C for a 4K.

    Debating whether 60" is worth it for me.

    Curious as to anyone's thoughts on size, resolution, or models.
     
  2. Aluminum213 macrumors 68040

    Aluminum213

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    #2
    If you're buying a TV just the 60" 4k because you're getting it for the long haul anyway
     
  3. exi thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    #3
    I should also mention that I'm using an AppleTV only (and an XBox) with the TV, so not sure about 4K sources. Also concerned as to upscaling. I'm particular.
     
  4. Mac... nificent macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    #4
    Have owned both. Sony is much better between the two.
     
  5. exi thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    #5
    My bias as well. Appreciate the thoughts.

    For someone who may not have any major sources for 4K content for awhile, suppose it's worth ponying up for a 4K TV and risk a little artifacting from upscaling 1080p and/or the 55" vs 60" argument?
     
  6. Cnasty macrumors 68020

    Cnasty

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    #6
    Samsung all the way. Especially for 4K but that's just my opinion and all the research I did before buying the js8500 and it's amazing.
     
  7. Ray2 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2014
    #7
    I have an old Panasonic plasma. Purchased a Samsung UHD this year for another home. The Panasonic blows it away irrespective of content. Better dynamic range, better color saturation.
     
  8. 2010mini macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    #8
    OP

    Check out OLEDs before you commit to regular HD or 4K TVs.
     
  9. Gutwrench macrumors 65816

    Gutwrench

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2011
    #9
    Or 4K OLED.

    I'm happy with the 4K I just bought. The OLED I was interested in was $2500 more.
     
  10. exi thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    #10
    I'm willing to pony up for a 55" 4K or 60" 4K over their 1080p counterparts, but my worry is that for my minimum viewing distance -- ~7 feet at the moment -- upscaling of 1080p, which is the majority of everything I watch, will be noticeable in a bad way.

    Has that been anyone's experience?
     
  11. Gutwrench macrumors 65816

    Gutwrench

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2011
    #11
    I'm not too educated on this topic because I just started watching television for the first time in about 10 years. I just bought a 60" 4K LG and was/am amazed at the picture quality. The first show I watched was Lucy and had no idea Morgan Freeman had so many facial blemishes. I sit about 10 away from the television and wouldn't want to be closer. But that's just my opinion.
     
  12. turbineseaplane macrumors 68020

    turbineseaplane

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2008
  13. 2010mini macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    #13
    This. OLED 1080p over any 4K tv all day.
     
  14. 2010mini macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    #14
    And worth every penny!
     
  15. Gutwrench macrumors 65816

    Gutwrench

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2011
    #15
    I did like the OLED picture but wasn't worth $4500 to me. In a year or so it'll be priced at half that.
     
  16. richb330 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 9, 2009
    Location:
    Gosport, England
    #16
    Having just done this i've got to say it's a mixed bag. I had a 55" Sony 1080p and upgraded to a 55" Sony 4k - x85 with Android tv. I already had a sony amp - STR-DN850. The upscaling of the xbox is superb, especially with the Vivid default picture setting. Normal tv and movies i change it to the standard picture setting after fiddling with some of the advanced settings.

    Blu Ray's through the xbox are excellent, the picture is stunning!

    The Android tv isn't great, it's ok.. Youview (in the uk) is slow and cumbersome and sometimes craps out although the picture quality on freeview is excellent.

    Netflix and amazon prime UHD quality is very good, not sure it's financially worth it as the 1080p picture quality was also very good. UHD brings another dimension to the picture but only in long shots and panoramic vista shots. Close up conversation and action sequences are no different to the 1080p picture. Also, be aware that you are restricted to using the default applications on the tv for this. When watching Bosche on Amazon Prime UHD for example it's only when the picture changes to a long shot of the city do you notice that you are watching 4k. These shots in this show and others are far and few between. Other than the Amazon Fire Tv 4k and maybe one or two others, nothing else will allow you to access 4k content.

    Text based content, youtube, the menu screens on the tv etc are all fantastic.

    If you're going 4k you need to look into HDCP. 4k content requires this and if you have a new Amazon Fire tv 4k for example, this has to plug into the tv as the HDCP does not work with the amp. The new Sony amp DN860 only has one input that supports HDCP. (I know this is supposed to be about the tv but this is my experience) i've learned a lot about HDCP and 4k in the last couple of weeks...!

    Where the 4k does fail is watching standard definition content, either normal tv or streamed content, lots of jagged edges and washed out colours. DVD's are also noticeably poorer even with the upscaling. All are watchable but you do know that you're not watching HD.

    I have a lot of ripped DVD's that i access through Plex (there's a Plex client downloadable from the Google store). Picture quality on these are noticeably poorer than on the 1080p screen.

    But, there's something great about having the latest stuff. The tv with Blu Rays and UHD content is a head turner. the quality is superb, but then so is blu ray and HD through a decent 1080p tv.
     
  17. mattopotamus macrumors G4

    mattopotamus

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    #17
    What is your price range? 4K is a waste unless you are getting a 4k set that supports HDR and a wider color gamut (the samsung SUHD series and a few Sony TVs). Anything else that is "UHD" is just a resolution bump and not future proof at all.

    OLED will not doubt have the best picture, but there are still problems with motion resolution (panning shots make my eyes bleed). I currently own the LG EA9800 55" OLED and the Samsung JS8500 65" SUHD. The OLED hands down looks like the better picture b.c the contrast, but the samsung is the better overall set b.c the uniformity is insane (no banding, clouding, flashlighting, etc). OLEDs struggle with grey scale uniformity causing some scenes to look down right bad, but they are amazing to watch is a pitch black room.

    Tell us a budget and we can give you a few options.

    Any new TV is going to upscale 1080P just fine. It will look just as good as a 1080P set. If you watch SD content that is where the issue with come into play. I would consider this a non-issue since most people watch at least HD content.
     
  18. exi thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    #18
    Appreciate the help. Was thinking $1,000 or under. Don't use it THAT much but enough so, and I'm enough of a stickler, that I still want something quality.

    Still between 55" versus 60". Still unsure that 4K would be worth it for me at the moment. OLEDs are nice but also not worth the money for my use.
     
  19. zhenya macrumors 603

    zhenya

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2005
    #19
    Unless you are going OLED I wouldn't bother updating right now as your plasma set is much better than the sub $1000 LED options. If OLED is too expensive, it should come down quickly in the next year or so.
     
  20. exi thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    #20
    More that it doesn't seem worth the money for me right this moment. One of the things that bothers me is the "fizz" from the set -- seems that I sit close enough to just hear it. And I suppose 42" is a little small these days.
     
  21. mattopotamus macrumors G4

    mattopotamus

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    #21
    I cannot really get behind this. LEDs have come a long, long way. OLEDs are not without issue, and you cannot get a good one for under $2000 at 55". The cheapest one (EC9300) is exactly that. Also the difference between 42" and 55" is massive. While I love my OLED and the cont

    If you are willing to spend $1499, this is a very future proof set. If you are firm on the $1000 price vizio is by far the best bang for your buck. The "M" series it not that future proof in terms of 4K specs, but it is 60" and does not carry a 4k premium price.
    http://www.bestbuy.com/site/samsung...lver/3813039.p?id=1219607579551&skuId=3813039

    http://www.bestbuy.com/site/vizio-m...gray/2833053.p?id=1219561396855&skuId=2833053
     
  22. thisismyusername macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2015
    #22
    I agree. The Vizio M series are great sets for the money and have a picture quality that's almost as good as the Samsungs/Sonys that are nearly twice the price and are in some ways better (e.g. black levels).

    IMO, OLEDs are still too expensive to bother with. They need to drop by about 50% for me to consider them. If I had to buy a new TV today, I'd get a Vizio M series. Then, if OLEDs come down enough in price in a few years, I'd upgrade to one of those and move the Vizio to a bedroom or office.
     
  23. phrehdd macrumors 68040

    phrehdd

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2008
    #23
    I might suggest you take a visit to the AVS Forum site. They too have some debates but also some reviews of TVs.

    Things I might consider -
    1) quality of upconversion to 4k from 1080p (or should that be left to another device like a player, streamer etc.)
    2) actual image quality (contrast range, quality of blacks, etc.)
    3) type of hardware - LED, OLED, etc.
    4) cost vs longevity (might settle for a better 1080p and get a 4k TV when quality improves and more content later)

    I admit I am in the plasma camp and love my plasma 1080p. However, 4K is becoming more widely available yet the
    quality is still not quite there for all around use. I would consider investigating LG and Visio (yes, might sound funny
    but they are leading on many front of 4k technology).
     
  24. Snoopy4 macrumors 6502a

    Snoopy4

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2014
    #24
    4K is the new default standard for home entertainment technology. If you're making your decision based on the limitation of an Apple product, then you're letting Apple dictate your choice. Why would you let a company whose core business is computing dictate your home entertainment options? Especially when their products are really designed for mobility?
     
  25. phrehdd macrumors 68040

    phrehdd

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2008
    #25
    Snoopy4, I'll just say I very much appreciate your comment on mentioning a single device dictating the direction of an entire system experience being a really bad way to go. The ATV sits in the least expensive part of the entertainment chain and thus, it should add to the system not dictate the system. For most people it is TV first, then other devices like players (DVD or Blue Ray), DVRs (provider or TiVo etc.), AVRs (receivers) and Speakers, and the smallest item in terms of cost - streamers like the ATV.

    You made my day.
     

Share This Page