Invest in 4k display?

[hdmi_guy]

I am currently shopping for a new tv. I have a few models in mind, but I am leaning towards a Sony 75" XBR.

My question is, with current Dish receivers (I am due to upgrade, prob hopper/hopper, or super Joey) is it worth it to spend the extra, almost double, on a 4k set at this time?

 

[harshness]

It is probably okay if you must replace the existing TV but definitely not if it is just something you're jonesing to do. What works with what is probably an unknown until next year at the earliest and there will be kinks and twists for a while.

If you can't wait, I'd suggest buying a smaller, cheaper TV now (you can get LG and Vizio 65" UHD models for under $1500) and save up for the big splash once all the standards are set and the manufacturers can say with certainty that they meet them. Costco is selling a 65" JVC UHD set for around $1100 that should nicely tide you over and I'll bet the name brand SMART UHD TVs a year or two down the road will be almost that much less expensive.

 

[KAB]

I am currently shopping for a new tv. I have a few models in mind, but I am leaning towards a Sony 75" XBR.

My question is, with current Dish receivers (I am due to upgrade, prob hopper/hopper, or super Joey) is it worth it to spend the extra, almost double, on a 4k set at this time?

Wait at least a year or two for 4K. Buy a cheap 1080 in the meantime. You won't be missing much, if anything. And you will have that "backup" TV.

 

[hdmi_guy]

Yea. That's kind of exactly where I am at... I definitely do t want to got less than 70", it's a large room and I am replacing a Misu 73".

There is a last years model Sony XBR 70" currently at BB for $2400 that is 4K. But other than that it seems entry into 4k game is $4500ish (coincidence???)

I wonder if I should be looking at mid to top tier non 4k ? It would prob still look better than my old Mitsubishi. Or sink $500ish into a new board and bulb for my Mitsu.. Currently only the component inputs work and the hdmi out on my Vip622 has never worked anyhow.

 

[ChadT41]

Go to Walmart. They had a 75" 4k(can't remember the brand) for $1600 and $2400 today. I almost went home with a new tv today, but my gf reminded me we don't need one. Glad she doesn't care about electronics, cause otherwise I might be in trouble.

 

[bamasat]

Sounds like you're straight up in love ( your post have WE all over them recently.. = walk on.

 

[bamasat]

Sounds like you're straight up in love ( your post have WE all over them recently.. = walk on).

 

[dfergie]

I bought a '15 XBR65 850 a couple months ago or so, very happy with it, especially with Blu-rays and OTA programming...

 

[patmurphey]

A 4k TV will give you a better Satellite picture upconverted from Dish's 1080i output. There is also a fair amount of streamed 4k content available from Netflix, Amazon, and YouTube, if you have 25mbps broadband. Steaming apps work beautifully on today's smart TVs, without any other input box like a Roku.

Samsung 4k TVs have available Evolution upgrades available for any future change in UHD input standards, some of which have not been completely finalized.

 

[dfergie]

I have a Sony 4K camcorder which factored into my purchase also...

 

[Jhon69]

Just don't be upset when the TV manufacturers come out with 8K SUHDTVs.

 

[hdmi_guy]

Just don't be upset when the TV manufacturers come out with 8K SUHDTVs.

Lol. It's always something right. If I buy now, OLED is right around the corner. Not to mention standards for 4k...

I think I might just buy the best 1080p Sammy and be done... U7150...

 

[Tampa8]

My opinion, I don't think it is reasonable to spend twice the amount if that is actually what the difference is. First, there just isn't enough 4K material available yet, most of it is streaming. If you do some research the truth is as more people start trying to stream 4K ISP's will not be able to sustain the speeds needed. Here is one very good article.
http://blog.streamingmedia.com/2015/01/4k-streaming-bandwidth-problem.html

Second, if you wait and I don't mean for years, that price is going to plummet. Partly because that always happens but second because the economy is still horrible, nowhere near the amount of people needed to sell these to exists. Already there is a feeling most people will not see enough of a difference to jump into buying one if the cost is higher. (And that will be true for many people, many don't actually see 1080I HD now because of size of TV and/or distance sitting to it)

Get an HD TV that you feel is good now and I'm betting you could have that TV AND get a 4K for close to the price of what the 4K is now. And that 4K will be better than what is out there now. This is different than something better always comes along. It's just too new and price is not reflective of what it will be in the not too distant future.

 

[dangue]

My opinion, I don't think it is reasonable to spend twice the amount if that is actually what the difference is. First, there just isn't enough 4K material available yet, most of it is streaming. If you do some research the truth is as more people start trying to stream 4K ISP's will not be able to sustain the speeds needed. Here is one very good article.
http://blog.streamingmedia.com/2015/01/4k-streaming-bandwidth-problem.html

Second, if you wait and I don't mean for years, that price is going to plummet. Partly because that always happens but second because the economy is still horrible, nowhere near the amount of people needed to sell these to exists. Already there is a feeling most people will not see enough of a difference to jump into buying one if the cost is higher. (And that will be true for many people, many don't actually see 1080I HD now because of size of TV and/or distance sitting to it)

Get an HD TV that you feel is good now and I'm betting you could have that TV AND get a 4K for close to the price of what the 4K is now. And that 4K will be better than what is out there now. This is different than something better always comes along. It's just too new and price is not reflective of what it will be in the not too distant future.

I generally agree with this, but have one caveat. If you are like my parents and will not consider a new TV purchase until your current one dies (likely a decade later), I would go with a 4K set so that you can enjoy 4K in the near to medium term. Barring bad luck with what you purchase, this new set could last until 8K is the thing and you'll be in the same position as now only 4K would be in the position of HD and 8K will be today's 4K.

 

[Jhon69]

I generally agree with this, but have one caveat. If you are like my parents and will not consider a new TV purchase until your current one dies (likely a decade later), I would go with a 4K set so that you can enjoy 4K in the near to medium term. Barring bad luck with what you purchase, this new set could last until 8K is the thing and you'll be in the same position as now only 4K would be in the position of HD and 8K will be today's 4K.

I agree with this suggestion and the reason is a 4K UHDTV will upconvert all the signals it receives to near a 4K resolution and you will enjoy a better picture.If you like to watch Blurays that is where the 4K upconversion really looks awesome.

 

[Tampa8]

I generally agree with this, but have one caveat. If you are like my parents and will not consider a new TV purchase until your current one dies (likely a decade later), I would go with a 4K set so that you can enjoy 4K in the near to medium term. Barring bad luck with what you purchase, this new set could last until 8K is the thing and you'll be in the same position as now only 4K would be in the position of HD and 8K will be today's 4K.

That is the theory to buy the best you can afford now, and I don't totally disagree that is a legitimate theory. If 4K sets were around longer I would agree even more. Just seems like it is a little too early to spend what very likely much more than it will be in the near future.

 

[inazsully]

I guess the real question is what is Dish's position on it's relationship with 4K? How soon will any major networks be sending out a 4K signal for prime time programming? Of course we here on the forum can't answer that question but conjecture is what we're all about isn't it? Educated guessing based on somewhat unsubstantiated sources?

 

[sam_gordon]

I guess the real question is what is Dish's position on it's relationship with 4K? How soon will any major networks be sending out a 4K signal for prime time programming? Of course we here on the forum can't answer that question but conjecture is what we're all about isn't it? Educated guessing based on somewhat unsubstantiated sources?

There has not been talk in the affiliate world yet about needing to distribute 4k. There are currently tests going on (in Cleveland) for ATSC 3.0. That will apparently allow a 4K stream, a 720p stream, and an "enhanced" 480i stream in a standard 6Mhz OTA slot. http://www.tvtechnology.com/news/00...-futurecasts-atsc-30-transmission-test/276567
http://hometheaterreview.com/atsc-30-field-tests-now-taking-place-in-cleveland/

But, since ATSC 3.0 won't even have a "candidate standard" until the end of the year, I'm assuming any TV's purchased now won't be able receive a broadcast based on that standard.

 

[springwater7]

Unless you are investing in an exceptionally large TV (60" + ) and have perfect 20/20 vision and like to sit close to the TV, I just don't think most folks will notice any difference. It's kind of like 720p and 1080p on 32" and 40" sets. Most people can't tell any difference at normal viewing distances.

 

[Keystone7]

I recently purchased a Smart Vizio M-Series 240Hz 55" for $499.97 at local Sams on clearance and love the picture. I will wait for the black Friday specials for the prices on the 4k sets. I really think this Vizio has all I need for now. They'll have to lower the prices and get more programming for me to make the leap!