Why do you want a 4k TV? - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HotUKDeals, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HotUKDeals app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit

Why do you want a 4k TV?

£0.00 @
The HD TV broadcasts in the UK are 720p/1080i, non HD are 576i. Standard Blu Ray discs and players are 1080p. All current games consoles are 1080p max. So why do you want 4k/UHD? Upscaling ("blowin… Read More
nedge2k Avatar
8m, 2d agoPosted 8 months, 2 days ago
The HD TV broadcasts in the UK are 720p/1080i, non HD are 576i. Standard Blu Ray discs and players are 1080p. All current games consoles are 1080p max.

So why do you want 4k/UHD? Upscaling ("blowing up") an image to a higher resolution makes it looks worse. If you have a 1080p TV now and watch an SD TV channel like Motors TV, think how bad that looks and then imagine it 4 TIMES WORSE.

The average human eye cannot see the extra detail a 40-50" 4k TV offers unless you are sitting 3-4' away from it. 5-6' is the minimum distance to get the full benefit of 1080p...

If most of what you watch is 4k and you're buying a massive screen and sitting fairly close to it, I can understand it but in reality, most people physically can't see a difference between 1080p and 4k anyway in their lounge.

If most of what you watch is not 4k, why watch it in lower quality?

http://i.i.cbsi.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim/2013/01/27/resolution_chart.jpg
Tags:
nedge2k Avatar
8m, 2d agoPosted 8 months, 2 days ago
Options
Best Answer
I did the test of a 1080 sony next to a 4k LG and 4k Samsung. The Sony was the clear winner on SD and HD freeview channels. The Sony was the same price as the LG and the Samsung £100.00 more. Samsung 50UJ6800 was not a very good tv compared to the other two which was a shame as that was the one I went into buy. On all 3 tv's playing their clever promotion screen on USB there wasn't anything to choose between them from 8 feet away but then that didn't surprise me as these short video loops are edited very carefully to ensure they maximise the output of the tv. Strange how the 4k videos were more like a slide show than a video. It's not just a question of the amount of pixels on a screen but how it's processed. You get what you pay for to a point with tv's and I have no doubt that a £1,000 4k tv from Sony is going to look better than one of the last W800 1080 tv's and the same will go for most brands. I bought a very expensive LG tv in 2008 and 2 years later bought another tv at nearly half the cost. The new tv had a better picture than the more expensive one from previous years but technology moves on and gets cheaper. Anyone viewing a 2016 4k tv will see an improvement over their 1080 tv from a couple of years ago purchased for a similar cost. I remember seeing some pictures by dad took on an old digital camera with a 3.2mp lens. Quality was as good if not better than the silly amount of pixels you get today and good enough to blow up to poster size. A decent lens makes an amazing difference, just the same as how your tv processes the image. What the OP is saying is that pound for pound a 1080 tv made today (if you can find one) will be better than a 4k tv for standard viewing for the same cost. As the experts say after a certain distance there is no difference that the naked eye can spot and they have also proved that 4k tv's don't upscale SD programmes as well as 1080 tv's do. Whether you can see that difference will be down to the individual. Pretty soon you won't be able to do a comparison as they will be all 4k but I remember getting my first LCD tv and compared it with my old CRT tv. The picture and sound was better on the CRT and was disappointed. Second LCD was so much better quality so hopefully technology will improve for more HD and UHD channels but for me who doesn't stream entertainment I am with the OP on this one and highly delighted with the super HD quality of my LG.

All Responses

(39) Jump to unreadPost an answer
Responses/page:
#1
to keep up with the trends
#2
My PS4 Pro can run some games in 4K. My PC can run games in 4K. The majority of Amazon Video and Netflix shows that I watch have 4K quality. And it looks incredible... why wouldn't I?

I mean, who watches regular TV anymore?
#3
It sounds like you're trying to convince yourself not to spend money on one
#4
HDR is arguably a more noticeable improvement than the resolution increase. I'm looking at a 4K HDR TV to future proof myself. If you get a TV that has a UHD Premium label you'll know it is conforming to the industry standards for HDR.
#5
Hx3KinG
It sounds like you're trying to convince yourself not to spend money on one
No i'm just genuinely curious. I don't need, nor do I want one. I watch everything on a 1080p projector and until SD TV channels are gone and the majority of content is at least 1080p, I won't even consider one.

Edited By: nedge2k on Nov 24, 2016 11:59
#6
ipswich78
HDR is arguably a more noticeable improvement than the resolution increase. I'm looking at a 4K HDR TV to future proof myself. If you get a TV that has a UHD Premium label you'll know it is conforming to the industry standards for HDR.

I agree, HDR is a huge benefit but until the majority of what you watch is HDR, why buy something that'll be obsolete by the time it is, when what you have now could be doing a better job for most of what you watch?

Edited By: nedge2k on Nov 24, 2016 12:29: .
#7
4K appeals more to people who want the best from their home cinema setup which a lot of people do, therefore they will also buy a 4K blu ray player to go with it, also as mentioned above gaming is moving into 4K and that will appeal to people who have a PS4 or Xbox One S for the HDR and upscaling
#8
So what TV would you get now if you were looking for a 55 inch new TV?
#9
IT IS BETTER QUALITY! 100% I have a Panasonic 40'' 4K and it is definitely better quality. I find the quality is better with something that was recorded at 4K not just upscaled. I honestly think the people who say it's not better just haven't got a 4K set. Programmes like Narcos are very noticeable as better quality

Edited By: batezy_1984 on Nov 24, 2016 12:16: Addition
#10
Htpc
4k gaming
Ultra blu ray

Japan already broadcasting in 4k
#11
nedge2k
So why do you want 4k/UHD? Upscaling ("blowing up") an image to a higher resolution makes it looks worse.

That's not true.

Look at reviews of upscaling devices and you'll find plenty of people feel it improves the image quality.

It's not even true in the technical sense if by 'worse' you mean 'contains less information'. Upscaling an image to a larger size reduces detail, but displaying an image at the same size using additional closely spaced pixels won't necessarily. In the case of Full HD where it's scaled up by an exact twice then it can be literally identical.

In the case of lower resolutions I'm not sure on the technical side but I suspect that once they've had time to tune the upscaling it may even be better because you can make a close approximation to the original with more available pixels in the same space.

Although I fully agree with you that 4K is a dud and shouldn't be of any interest in a Television unless you're buying a really massive TV or sit unusually close to the screen.

HDR on the other hand is well worth having if you're buying a high end TV. When prices come down on the technology to do it well I reckon that'll be a big thing. If TV companies haven't ruined it's reputation too badly by claiming 'HDR' on the current crop on mid-range TVs with only minimal support.
#12
batezy_1984
IT IS BETTER QUALITY! 100% I have a Panasonic 40'' 4K and it is definitely better quality. I find the quality is better with something that was recorded at 4K not just upscaled. I honestly think the people who say it's not better just haven't got a 4K set.
4k content on a 4k panel will be better quality, if you're sitting close enough to it to be able to perceive it. Upscaled will not. What you might perceive as better quality is the quality of the panel itself, not the resolution. If you went from a **** old 32" LCD to a new 55" 4k OLED, of course it will appear to look better but that doesn't mean that you're seeing more detail in a upscaled image.
#13
Usuallyalurker
So what TV would you get now if you were looking for a 55 inch new TV?

Personally, a 1080p OLED.
#14
EndlessWaves
nedge2k
So why do you want 4k/UHD? Upscaling ("blowing up") an image to a higher resolution makes it looks worse.
That's not true.
Look at reviews of upscaling devices and you'll find plenty of people feel it improves the image quality.

How can you improve something by adding detail that isn't there? It's like when one of the CSI programs "enhance" a CCTV image - it doesn't work like that. What those reviewers are probably seeing as better quality is probably just better overall panel quality and they're probable only talking about upscaling 1080p, which should be acceptable. 720p or 567i? Gonna look bad (detail-wise) compared to a native resolution panel.

Maybe standalone upscalers have better algorithms for "guessing" what should be there and that's giving the illusion of more detail?


Edited By: nedge2k on Nov 24, 2016 12:38
#15
nedge2k
EndlessWaves
nedge2k
So why do you want 4k/UHD? Upscaling ("blowing up") an image to a higher resolution makes it looks worse.
That's not true.
Look at reviews of upscaling devices and you'll find plenty of people feel it improves the image quality.

How can you improve something by adding detail that isn't there? It's like when one of the CSI programs "enhance" a CCTV image - it doesn't work like that. What those reviewers are probably seeing as better quality is probably just better overall panel quality and they're probable only talking about upscaling 1080p, which should be acceptable. 720p or 567i? Gonna look bad (detail-wise) compared to a native resolution panel.

Maybe standalone upscalers have better algorithms for "guessing" what should be there and that's giving the illusion of more detail?



It's just the world we live in now a days, a large percentage of people are quite happy to go along with all the hype and cow excrement that the advertising people would have you believe.
A lot of people just purchase them because the salesman in Curry's told them it was better and that they could buy it on 12 months interest free credit, and then tell all their friends and work colleagues that they have the latest/best TV going without actually realising they have bought a load of old dung that will be out dated in three months time! :(
#16
nedge2k
EndlessWaves
nedge2k
So why do you want 4k/UHD? Upscaling ("blowing up") an image to a higher resolution makes it looks worse.
That's not true.
Look at reviews of upscaling devices and you'll find plenty of people feel it improves the image quality.
How can you improve something by adding detail that isn't there?

Quite easily.

Imagine it's a human artist and there's a half shadowed sign that's just too small to be readable. They can't know with certainty what the text on it says, but they can certainly create something plausible.

Real time image processing isn't yet up to that level of sophistication but it can certainly smooth out the colour gradiant on the sign as it goes from the light into the shadow. Instead of the original source that only changes colour every three or four pixels it can easily create intermediate shades for every pixel so it's a smooth graduation.

You could absolutely get CSI-like levels of imaging, the technology is perfectly plausible. What's absurd is that the details in the final image would be fabricated based on what is likely, rather than the actual reality. And thus utterly useless to a police department.

Go and have a look at Photoshop's Content-Aware fill for an example of what's possible with more time and processing power.
#17
Dyslexic_Dog
nedge2k
EndlessWaves
nedge2k
So why do you want 4k/UHD? Upscaling ("blowing up") an image to a higher resolution makes it looks worse.
That's not true.
Look at reviews of upscaling devices and you'll find plenty of people feel it improves the image quality.
How can you improve something by adding detail that isn't there? It's like when one of the CSI programs "enhance" a CCTV image - it doesn't work like that. What those reviewers are probably seeing as better quality is probably just better overall panel quality and they're probable only talking about upscaling 1080p, which should be acceptable. 720p or 567i? Gonna look bad (detail-wise) compared to a native resolution panel.
Maybe standalone upscalers have better algorithms for "guessing" what should be there and that's giving the illusion of more detail?
It's just the world we live in now a days, a large percentage of people are quite happy to go along with all the hype and cow excrement that the advertising people would have you believe.
A lot of people just purchase them because the salesman in Curry's told them it was better and that they could buy it on 12 months interest free credit, and then tell all their friends and work colleagues that they have the latest/best TV going without actually realising they have bought a load of old dung that will be out dated in three months time! :(
I think a couple of tv tech review shows (including The Gadget Show) have confirmed what you say and the reality of the benefit (or not) of having a 4k tv
It goes along the lines of something like you need to be about 4ft away from a 48" 4k tv to see the benefit and nobody sits that close to watch a movie - a gain for gamers but for general tv usage it's all hype and a case of "I want better than the Jones's next door" or designer branded gear is only acceptable brigade

Edited By: philphil61 on Nov 24, 2016 13:52
#18
Ok. I know the science says you have to be a certain distance from the screen but to me peeps all that is rubbish. I have a 4K TV and it is clearly clearer than 1080 HD no matter what distance you are, Granted it may not be in full 4K at a further distance, but it is better and anyone that says different is trying to convince themselves why they shouldn't spend x amount on a new TV when you can get the same in 1080 for much cheaper.

That's the hard truth from my personal experience, also with HDR and the other technologies like "Crystal clear" or "upscaling" that Samsung offer for example, it's a better clearer picture regardless.
#19
Just go into an electrical store, stay at the same distance and look at 4K screen and a 1080P screen and then you will know for yourself but also depending on what you watch, it's clearer. Watching football in 4K on BT sport is a miles ahead of any HD football I have seen.
#20
They make HD footballs now?
That's just taking it to the extreme, although I'm sure if crapple made an iBall plenty of people would buy them! :D
#21
Dyslexic_Dog
They make HD footballs now?
That's just taking it to the extreme, although I'm sure if crapple made an iBall plenty of people would buy them! :D

and of course, they will have invented it and every new ball will look exaclty like the last until a better ball that didn't get as much marketing **** becomes more popular then their ball and they change their ball to match, calling it a revolution X)
#22
Unless you have a massive budget for audio/visual equipment I would usualy recommend spending more on a decent 1080 tv rather than a budget 4K .
I can't believe that Netflix/amazon look that amazing at 4K as when streaming 1080 it dosnt usualy look as good as normal 1080 bluray
#23
I did the test of a 1080 sony next to a 4k LG and 4k Samsung. The Sony was the clear winner on SD and HD freeview channels. The Sony was the same price as the LG and the Samsung £100.00 more. Samsung 50UJ6800 was not a very good tv compared to the other two which was a shame as that was the one I went into buy. On all 3 tv's playing their clever promotion screen on USB there wasn't anything to choose between them from 8 feet away but then that didn't surprise me as these short video loops are edited very carefully to ensure they maximise the output of the tv. Strange how the 4k videos were more like a slide show than a video. It's not just a question of the amount of pixels on a screen but how it's processed. You get what you pay for to a point with tv's and I have no doubt that a £1,000 4k tv from Sony is going to look better than one of the last W800 1080 tv's and the same will go for most brands. I bought a very expensive LG tv in 2008 and 2 years later bought another tv at nearly half the cost. The new tv had a better picture than the more expensive one from previous years but technology moves on and gets cheaper. Anyone viewing a 2016 4k tv will see an improvement over their 1080 tv from a couple of years ago purchased for a similar cost. I remember seeing some pictures by dad took on an old digital camera with a 3.2mp lens. Quality was as good if not better than the silly amount of pixels you get today and good enough to blow up to poster size. A decent lens makes an amazing difference, just the same as how your tv processes the image. What the OP is saying is that pound for pound a 1080 tv made today (if you can find one) will be better than a 4k tv for standard viewing for the same cost. As the experts say after a certain distance there is no difference that the naked eye can spot and they have also proved that 4k tv's don't upscale SD programmes as well as 1080 tv's do. Whether you can see that difference will be down to the individual. Pretty soon you won't be able to do a comparison as they will be all 4k but I remember getting my first LCD tv and compared it with my old CRT tv. The picture and sound was better on the CRT and was disappointed. Second LCD was so much better quality so hopefully technology will improve for more HD and UHD channels but for me who doesn't stream entertainment I am with the OP on this one and highly delighted with the super HD quality of my LG.
#24
Smartguy1
I did the test of a 1080 sony next to a 4k LG and 4k Samsung. The Sony was the clear winner on SD and HD freeview channels. The Sony was the same price as the LG and the Samsung £100.00 more. Samsung 50UJ6800 was not a very good tv compared to the other two which was a shame as that was the one I went into buy. On all 3 tv's playing their clever promotion screen on USB there wasn't anything to choose between them from 8 feet away but then that didn't surprise me as these short video loops are edited very carefully to ensure they maximise the output of the tv. Strange how the 4k videos were more like a slide show than a video. It's not just a question of the amount of pixels on a screen but how it's processed. You get what you pay for to a point with tv's and I have no doubt that a £1,000 4k tv from Sony is going to look better than one of the last W800 1080 tv's and the same will go for most brands. I bought a very expensive LG tv in 2008 and 2 years later bought another tv at nearly half the cost. The new tv had a better picture than the more expensive one from previous years but technology moves on and gets cheaper. Anyone viewing a 2016 4k tv will see an improvement over their 1080 tv from a couple of years ago purchased for a similar cost. I remember seeing some pictures by dad took on an old digital camera with a 3.2mp lens. Quality was as good if not better than the silly amount of pixels you get today and good enough to blow up to poster size. A decent lens makes an amazing difference, just the same as how your tv processes the image. What the OP is saying is that pound for pound a 1080 tv made today (if you can find one) will be better than a 4k tv for standard viewing for the same cost. As the experts say after a certain distance there is no difference that the naked eye can spot and they have also proved that 4k tv's don't upscale SD programmes as well as 1080 tv's do. Whether you can see that difference will be down to the individual. Pretty soon you won't be able to do a comparison as they will be all 4k but I remember getting my first LCD tv and compared it with my old CRT tv. The picture and sound was better on the CRT and was disappointed. Second LCD was so much better quality so hopefully technology will improve for more HD and UHD channels but for me who doesn't stream entertainment I am with the OP on this one and highly delighted with the super HD quality of my LG.


bs
#25
smg1984

bs

amazingly detailed, thorough and well thought out response there..
#26
Must be related to Kimi Raikkonen. Why use many words when one or two will do I think was his statement on top gear.
#27
i watch all my tv on demand,not seen an sd channel in years.so netflix,amazon xbox one s and ps4 pro all look fantastic
come from a 50 inch lg (50v580) to a 55 inch samsung suhd(55js8500),we sit around 10/12 ft from our screen,and it is most definitely better than my previous tv from same distance,tbh tv i have was a massive bargain and selling my old one covered most of the cost.
uncharted 4 on ps4 pro looks so much better than it did on standard machine,everything seems very crisp seems to be texture on surfaces now rather than attempted texture genuinely impressed.
swapping something bif/expensive in our household i generally feel"oh we dont need this,what we had was fine,"or some degree of buyers remorse,not a jot with this tv "certainly not needed,but a definite improvement ...
#28
nedge2k
smg1984

bs

amazingly detailed, thorough and well thought out response there..


Anyone who thinks Sony tv's are better than a equivalent Samsung is talking bs
#29
smg1984
nedge2k
smg1984

bs
amazingly detailed, thorough and well thought out response there..
Anyone who thinks Sony tv's are better than a equivalent Samsung is talking bs

Based on what, exactly? I'm gonna go out on a limb here and assume you're not a tech journalist who's reviewed all the latest Samsung and Sony TVs?
#30
nedge2k
smg1984
nedge2k
smg1984

bs
amazingly detailed, thorough and well thought out response there..
Anyone who thinks Sony tv's are better than a equivalent Samsung is talking bs

Based on what, exactly? I'm gonna go out on a limb here and assume you're not a tech journalist who's reviewed all the latest Samsung and Sony TVs?


What does having to be a tech journalist have to do with anything, based on good eyesight and reading reviews...
#31
smg1984
nedge2k
smg1984
nedge2k
smg1984

bs
amazingly detailed, thorough and well thought out response there..
Anyone who thinks Sony tv's are better than a equivalent Samsung is talking bs
Based on what, exactly? I'm gonna go out on a limb here and assume you're not a tech journalist who's reviewed all the latest Samsung and Sony TVs?
What does having to be a tech journalist have to do with anything, based on good eyesight and reading reviews...
Well you'll forgive me if I don't rush out and buy a Samsung TV based on your glowing recommendations and clearly superior product knowledge.
#32
nedge2k
smg1984
nedge2k
smg1984
nedge2k
smg1984

bs
amazingly detailed, thorough and well thought out response there..
Anyone who thinks Sony tv's are better than a equivalent Samsung is talking bs
Based on what, exactly? I'm gonna go out on a limb here and assume you're not a tech journalist who's reviewed all the latest Samsung and Sony TVs?
What does having to be a tech journalist have to do with anything, based on good eyesight and reading reviews...
Well you'll forgive me if I don't rush out and buy a Samsung TV based on your glowing recommendations and clearly superior product knowledge.


awww poor little sony fanboy
#33
smg1984
nedge2k
smg1984
nedge2k
smg1984
nedge2k
smg1984

bs
amazingly detailed, thorough and well thought out response there..
Anyone who thinks Sony tv's are better than a equivalent Samsung is talking bs
Based on what, exactly? I'm gonna go out on a limb here and assume you're not a tech journalist who's reviewed all the latest Samsung and Sony TVs?
What does having to be a tech journalist have to do with anything, based on good eyesight and reading reviews...
Well you'll forgive me if I don't rush out and buy a Samsung TV based on your glowing recommendations and clearly superior product knowledge.
awww poor little sony fanboy
hah, that's rich. guess what, i could care less about either brand.
#34
nedge2k
smg1984
nedge2k
smg1984
nedge2k
smg1984
nedge2k
smg1984

bs
amazingly detailed, thorough and well thought out response there..
Anyone who thinks Sony tv's are better than a equivalent Samsung is talking bs
Based on what, exactly? I'm gonna go out on a limb here and assume you're not a tech journalist who's reviewed all the latest Samsung and Sony TVs?
What does having to be a tech journalist have to do with anything, based on good eyesight and reading reviews...
Well you'll forgive me if I don't rush out and buy a Samsung TV based on your glowing recommendations and clearly superior product knowledge.
awww poor little sony fanboy
hah, that's rich. guess what, i could care less about either brand.


Keep telling yourself that
#35
smg1984

Keep telling yourself that

No you hang up first
#36
nedge2k
smg1984

Keep telling yourself that

No you hang up first


after you muppet
#37
violentj
i watch all my tv on demand,not seen an sd channel in years.so netflix,amazon xbox one s and ps4 pro all look fantastic
come from a 50 inch lg (50v580) to a 55 inch samsung suhd(55js8500),we sit around 10/12 ft from our screen,and it is most definitely better than my previous tv from same distance,tbh tv i have was a massive bargain and selling my old one covered most of the cost.
uncharted 4 on ps4 pro looks so much better than it did on standard machine,everything seems very crisp seems to be texture on surfaces now rather than attempted texture genuinely impressed.
swapping something bif/expensive in our household i generally feel"oh we dont need this,what we had was fine,"or some degree of buyers remorse,not a jot with this tv "certainly not needed,but a definite improvement ...

You have a good point in your preference. We are all different and see things differently. My wife struggles to distinguish between SD and HD. We also have our own opinions and preferences. Another thing to remember is you have a curved screen Samsung if I am correct. Curved screen Samsung's have their own panel and not a third party one so your tv is already heading in the right direction for picture perfect viewing. Samsung use up to four different manufacturers of panels in their tv's and the model I mentioned in my comparison is definitely at the bottom of the list whilst Samsung's own panels are at the top.

In addition you are comparing a flagship high end tv which was probably twice the cost or more of the low end LG. I have the 42LB580 which was £329.00 about a year ago. Take away the 4k side of things these tv's are just not in the same league and never could be.
#38
smg1984
nedge2k
smg1984

bs
amazingly detailed, thorough and well thought out response there..

Anyone who thinks Sony tv's are better than a equivalent Samsung is talking bs

I never said that Sony was better than Samsung. I quoted three tv's in my test and the Sony was the clear winner in that test of those tv's. Nobody could say that Sony are better than Samsung, LG or whoever. No brand is better than others because in all brands there will be good and better individual models. I have never bought a Sony tv, only Samsung and LG. I went into the shop that day to buy the Samsung to replace my LG. On viewing the tv I didn't like it. The LG UF770v was a better tv as was the Sony W809c. The Samsung was slow to turn between channels, had a terrible picture on SD channels and it only looked good when it was playing it's usb video in 4k. The UE50JU6800 has a Che Mei (innolux) panel in it. If you do some research you will find that this brand of panel is not favoured by consumers, some describing as losing the lottery in the lottery of panels in Samsung tv's. Samsung does not have the capacity to produce enough panels for their own tv's and uses other manufacturers including Sharp. The 55" model of this Samsung has a panel made by BOE. A samsung tv with a genuine samsung panel is going to be hard to beat for screen quality but it's still a lottery as to what you get with most models.
#39
My tv has a native Netflix app which streams in 4K. Huge difference

Post an Answer

You don't need an account to leave a response. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!