First anniversary of 4K UHDTV

Page 7 of 8« First<45678>
Poll
No votes (0%)
No votes (0%)
1 vote (33.33%)
2 votes (66.66%)
No votes (0%)
No votes (0%)

3 members have voted

April 22nd, 2014 at 6:31:43 PM permalink
Tomspur
Member since: Apr 10, 2014
Threads: 4
Posts: 80
No it doesn't look like that, mine is completely digital with no analog buttons anywhere.

I probably spent a little more than I should but with our new home I wanted to make a centerpiece livingroom with which I could be proud. I bought a Denon 7.1 channel 4K ready receiver for $500 (black friday again). It retails for $649. I also had some ceiling recessed speakers installed (5 total). Obviously the TV and I bought a Sony Blu-Ray player. I spent, alltogether about $1,800 but due to the built in home theater system I figure I pumped up the value of my home by at least as much as I had spent. WE have DirecTV which I'm not sure I LOVE as yet. We used to have Cox Cable and obviously the signal is more reliable with a cable company however we live in the dessert. How often do we get so much rain that the dish is completely scrambled. DirecTV is also considerably cheaper than Cox but I have a feeling I may have to order the football package again which is going to cost me $240. I haven't convinced myself yet that I watch enough football to justify that price tag.

All in all I'm very happy. The pricing was brought down because of some great black friday deals. The geek squad did the installation and everything was done within 2 hours.

I know budgets are important but I feel like I got a decent enough deal for what I got in return that I'm happy with the final outcome.
April 23rd, 2014 at 1:39:16 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 1068
Posts: 12569
Quote: Tomspur
Obviously the TV and I bought a Sony Blu-Ray player.


What brand TV?

My younger brother is going to spend $2K on a TV setup this year. He has a modest home which he paid off a few months ago, and works as a preacher. But he said he loves movies and he wants a top notch place to view them.
April 23rd, 2014 at 6:32:13 AM permalink
Face
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 61
Posts: 3941
I can't imagine upgrading. Even having LCD is a relatively recent upgrade for me that I've just gotten used to in the last two years. I always played Xbox on a low-def boob tube. It made me nauseous trying it on the 40" hi-def for a long time.

Now I got the girl's 52" with the Xbox hooked up to it. My kid plays games on it, and we use it for Netflix and DVDs. No remotes, I just turn it on manually and use the Xbox controller for navigating (don't have to switch from TV to AUX to whatever). My 40" has my gaming PC hooked up to it. I use it for my games, streaming the NHL/racing from the UK, and browsing the web. Also no remote, I just turn it on manually.

If I get more TVs, it'll be cheap 40"ers so I can do a three screen setup for my gaming PC. 80", Ultra High Def, 3D, none of that stuff is interesting to me. I'm not even sure if my house will let me sit far enough away to use an 80".

And even if I could... $9k?! I could buy a hell of a boat for $9k. Or a "new to me" truck. Or 3 - 12 new guns. Or a next level race car. Or....

Yeah. I can think of a thousand things better to spend $9k on.
Be bold and risk defeat, or be cautious and encourage it.
April 23rd, 2014 at 7:36:59 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 1068
Posts: 12569
Quote: Face
If I get more TVs, it'll be cheap 40"ers so I can do a three screen setup for my gaming PC.


Best buy house brand TV products
19" TV for $100 720p
32" TV for $200 1080p
40" TV for $300 1080p
48" TV for $400 1080p

If you were going to purchase three of them, is it worth the money to go from 32" to 40"?

55" TV for $2000 Ultra High Definition 2160p
50" TV for $650 Ultra High Definition 2160p

Still, even if you opt for the 48" screens, that is 3*$400=$1200 plus console cost, while the known brand UHDTV costs $2K plus UHDTV storage device which will be far more money than a gaming console.

Which option provides the most fun for a typical family?
April 23rd, 2014 at 8:02:30 AM permalink
Face
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 61
Posts: 3941
I already have one 40", so I'd just be buying two. But regardless, "Value for size" isn't in my equation. I already have a 40" and need them all the same size, so 40's are what I'd get.

But to your question on fun - 3 x 40" TVs PLUS my gaming rig is about the cost of ONE of those fancy TVs. For me, the choice is easy. A fancy TV would be about worthless to me. I sort of need normal hi-def for gaming, since the consoles are made for hi-def and as a result, make their fonts super fine and small. On a normal boob tube, much of the text is illegible. But even so, in a pinch, I'd be fine with a 32" boob tube. I've used it for years for both gaming and TV, I still have it in the house, and just used it again 3 weeks ago. Super hi def is a gimmick of sorts. I remember when I went from boob tube to hi-def and I was like "WOW!!!". For all of a week. Then it was just "normal".

Having a 19" boob tube and an original Nintendo gives me more fun and value than UHDTV ever would. So a high powered gaming rig with 3 screens so I have "side windows" and immersion into my racing and flight combat sims would send it over the edge. It's not even close.

I think that TV caters to a "type". I know those kind of people. The ones that always need the latest and greatest, that equal possessions with self worth. Maybe if I was a skillionare, I'd buy a bunch so I could easier see incoming SAMs in my flight sims. But for me and all my lower middle class friends, it's ridiculous. Like I said, I could get 3 good pistols for $2k, and for us, that's a battle a TV can't hope to win.
Be bold and risk defeat, or be cautious and encourage it.
April 23rd, 2014 at 10:00:46 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 1068
Posts: 12569
Quote: Face
I already have one 40", so I'd just be buying two. But regardless, "Value for size" isn't in my equation. I already have a 40" and need them all the same size, so 40's are what I'd get.


That $300 for a new 40" 1080p television is probably not going to beat by a significant amount for years. Insignia has a 39" TV for $270 but it's 720p. If you are going this way, there is very little advantage in waiting for a few years.

Except for very small TV's (max 32"), it is probably a false economy to get 720p. The TV may last for a decade, and many blue-ray DVD's, gaming, and future applications use 1080p. While present day broadcast is only in 720p, it's worth a few extra bucks to keep it viable in five years.



I see people paying more than $500 for 23" monitors, so I assume good backlighting is a nice feature for gaming. I don't play games, so I am not sure what features people look for.


People have always paid more than is reasonable for latest technology. As we said, color TV's cost $500 from late 50's until mid 60's, at a time when only NBC had color broadcasts.



Taking the argument further, to these $9K curved 55" TV's, you could build out a whole game room with side by side racing car simulations.
April 23rd, 2014 at 1:05:07 PM permalink
Face
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 61
Posts: 3941
Quote: Pacomartin

I see people paying more than $500 for 23" monitors, so I assume good backlighting is a nice feature for gaming. I don't play games, so I am not sure what features people look for.


I don't know nothin' about that. I seen one of those "ambient light" TVs on display once. Again, it seemed like a gimmick. It wasn't worse than a regular TV, but anything it added to the experience wasn't worth the money to power it.

For gaming, there's certain requirements. Granted, I follow almost none of them as I'm not very fussy. But there's really only three important things.

One is definition. It almost has to be HD now because of the tiny font they use for text. Since all consoles and modern PC rigs are geared toward the higher end, and standard def TV makes everything look fuzzy.

Second is refresh rate. Again, everything is geared for higher Frames Per Second to make the animations smooth. At least 60Hz is minimum, although it is more important to set your FPS to work with whatever Hz your TV is. For example, a 120Hz TV is "better" than a 60Hz, but set your FPS to 120 with a 120Hz TV, and you're going to have a lot of stuttering issues.

And last is distance. Especially when playing single screen in any sort of sim, you have to have the right field of view setting and it has to work with your sitting position. Any serious sim has sections in the forums where it's all worked out. For example, if you have a 40" TV and your eyes are 24" from the screen, then your field of view should be set at "X". If you get too big a TV, you'll have to sit far enough away that you can't keep your wheel or HOTAS on the computer desk, and then need to buy and create a sort of "vidding pod" in the middle of your living room. That can get either disastrously expensive...


...or disastrously uncouth




Quote: PacoMartin
Taking the argument further, to these $9K curved 55" TV's, you could build out a whole game room with side by side racing car simulations.


Again, hard to see the value. For regular TV, I can't see the point at all. For gaming, it needs to be a ton longer. If that standard dimension TV was to incorporate "side view", what would be out your left window in game would still be positioned in front of you on the TV. Imagine a SAM fired from your 4 o'clock, but on the TV it looks like 1 o'clock. How do you properly evade it?

A proper three screen needs to come well along your sides...



...or you'd need one hell of a long ass curved TV.

Be bold and risk defeat, or be cautious and encourage it.
April 23rd, 2014 at 6:50:38 PM permalink
Tomspur
Member since: Apr 10, 2014
Threads: 4
Posts: 80
Quote: Pacomartin
What brand TV?

My younger brother is going to spend $2K on a TV setup this year. He has a modest home which he paid off a few months ago, and works as a preacher. But he said he loves movies and he wants a top notch place to view them.


Samsung, 1080p 240hz 65"
April 23rd, 2014 at 11:21:16 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 1068
Posts: 12569
Quote: Tomspur
Samsung, 1080p 240hz 65"


Samsung is more expensive, but better quality. The UN65EH6000F is the lowest price at $1,399.99
My brother wanted the 8000 SERIES which is currently $3K for the 65", but his wife won't let him spend that kind of money.

The Best Buy store brand, Insignia, has discontinued all their models larger than 48" and higher than $450 ($400 on sale) (nothing above 60 Hz). I think the manufacturers didn't want to be undercut by cheaper store brand models.
April 23rd, 2014 at 11:47:24 PM permalink
Tomspur
Member since: Apr 10, 2014
Threads: 4
Posts: 80
Quote: Pacomartin
Samsung is more expensive, but better quality. The UN65EH6000F is the lowest price at $1,399.99
My brother wanted the 8000 SERIES which is currently $3K for the 65", but his wife won't let him spend that kind of money.

The Best Buy store brand, Insignia, has discontinued all their models larger than 48" and higher than $450 ($400 on sale) (nothing above 60 Hz). I think the manufacturers didn't want to be undercut by cheaper store brand models.


I have to revise what I had said earlier, we actually paid $900 for the TV which is still a heck of a price for a 65" TV. You don't actualy realize how big the TV is not until you take it out of the box and try and see where it will fit. We had a perfect space above our fireplace for the TV and it fits just perfectly.

There are other off brands out there such as Westinghouse which is also a good TV, we have a 46" in our bedroom and this Westinghouse has lasted us for 6 years now, still not a day of trouble.

Is he in a rush to get it done now? Can he shop black friday or is this in Mexico?

Anyway, Cyber Monday actually has better deals. A Korean friend of mine bought a 55" TV on Cyber Monday and used a shipping company to ship the TV to Korea. It still worked out much cheaper than actually buying a Samsing IN KOREA.....crazy right? :)
Page 7 of 8« First<45678>