Major DIRECTV Rumor Alerts

[AZ.]

I don't personally see the need for 4K, 1080i/p is good enough for me. Never could understand the hype of 4K. Even looking at the 4K TVs in my local store sitting next to the 1080p TVs I still couldn't tell the difference.

Well because it was the same 1080 feed?...All it was doing was up-scaling.....Now had you seen a 4K side by side....If anything you would see the color difference....

 

[trparky]

They were also displaying some native 4K content as well but honestly I couldn't tell the difference. My eyesight is bad, I'm really nearsighted with prescription lenses that are pretty much as strong as they come. You should see my glasses, even with the small lenses that I have the sides of them are large.

 

[Troch77]

They were also displaying some native 4K content as well but honestly I couldn't tell the difference. My eyesight is bad, I'm really nearsighted with prescription lenses that are pretty much as strong as they come. You should see my glasses, even with the small lenses that I have the sides of them are large.

Even with 20/20 it's not as "WOW" as it's made out to be here by the 4K HD Guru's.
It's better sure the closer you sit, But not worth a premium in any way shape or form.

 

[trparky]

If you ask me 4K just doesn't have that "Wow Factor" that going from Standard Definition to High Definition had. When I upgraded from SD to HD there was definitely that "Wow Factor" that took your breath away just by looking at it. Going from HD to UHD/4K just doesn't have that "breath taking" experience that going from SD to HD gave you.

 

[raoul5788]

If you ask me 4K just doesn't have that "Wow Factor" that going from Standard Definition to High Definition had. When I upgraded from SD to HD there was definitely that "Wow Factor" that took your breath away just by looking at it. Going from HD to UHD/4K just doesn't have that "breath taking" experience that going from SD to HD gave you.

I don't recall anyone saying it did.

 

[tigerfan33]

If you ask me 4K just doesn't have that "Wow Factor" that going from Standard Definition to High Definition had. When I upgraded from SD to HD there was definitely that "Wow Factor" that took your breath away just by looking at it. Going from HD to UHD/4K just doesn't have that "breath taking" experience that going from SD to HD gave you.

Watch a uhd blu ray next year and see if you say the same.
Everyone are getting stuck on pixels only with 4K. Resolution will not be that important with true uhd.

 

[trparky]

My problem is that we don't even have the UHD standard ratified yet. Even the UHD HDMI standard is in flux and we don't know what it will be like in a year or two. This whole 4K thing reminds me of the old 802.11n days in which router makers were making 802.11n routers when the 802.11n standard hadn't even been ratified by the IEEE. So when the UHD and HDMI standards are finally ratified and set in stone, will the UHD TVs bought today be compatible? Software upgradable? Probably not. It would be the cost of playing on the bleeding edge of tech.

 

[Jimbo]

My problem is that we don't even have the UHD standard ratified yet. Even the UHD HDMI standard is in flux and we don't know what it will be like in a year or two. This whole 4K thing reminds me of the old 802.11n days in which router makers were making 802.11n routers when the 802.11n standard hadn't even been ratified by the IEEE. So when the UHD and HDMI standards are finally ratified and set in stone, will the UHD TVs bought today be compatible? Software upgradable? Probably not. It would be the cost of playing on the bleeding edge of tech.

My guess would be , Some will, some won't.

 

[trparky]

Yep, that's why I won't jump into 4K quite yet. The TV you buy today may very well be junk next year.

 

[tigerfan33]

My problem is that we don't even have the UHD standard ratified yet. Even the UHD HDMI standard is in flux and we don't know what it will be like in a year or two. This whole 4K thing reminds me of the old 802.11n days in which router makers were making 802.11n routers when the 802.11n standard hadn't even been ratified by the IEEE. So when the UHD and HDMI standards are finally ratified and set in stone, will the UHD TVs bought today be compatible? Software upgradable? Probably not. It would be the cost of playing on the bleeding edge of tech.

Seems all set to me.
What's to add?

http://www.whathifi.com/news/ultra-hd-blu-ray-everything-you-need-to-know

And..

http://www.uhdbdinnumbers.com

 

[Jimbo]

Yep, that's why I won't jump into 4K quite yet. The TV you buy today may very well be junk next year.

I'm not jumping because I still have a perfectly good working Pioneer Elite that looks very very good.
It's 6 years old now, a dumb TV to boot and I get people raving about the picture when they come over.

I did see a LG OLED the other day that was VERY impressive at my local A/V store.

 

[trparky]

What about High Dynamic Range? Many 4K sets sold today don't yet of that part of the TV.

4K TV and Ultra HD: Everything you need to know

 

[goaliebob99]

Yep, that's why I won't jump into 4K quite yet. The TV you buy today may very well be junk next year.

Those of us who have Samsung's don't have to worry about that. The evolution kits have been doing a good job with keeping up with the standards and adding new features. I was going to upgrade to the SEK3500U this year but have opted to wait for the SEK4500U coming out early next year. I am waiting to see what changes they make, and / or get a 3500U cheaper if the changes are not worth while between the two units.

 

[tigerfan33]

What about High Dynamic Range? Many 4K sets sold today don't yet of that part of the TV.

4K TV and Ultra HD: Everything you need to know

Most can be upgradable like the Samsungs with the one connect box.
My 2014 can be upgraded to 2.0a.
Sony upgraded several in September.

 

[goaliebob99]

Most can be upgradable like the Samsungs with the one connect box.
My 2014 can be upgraded to 2.0a.
Sony upgraded several in September.

I think TV makers finally got the hint from consumers about having to upgrade every year and not pay the cost for a whole new TV set. I would shell out a few hundred for an upgrade quicker than adapting a brand new set.

 

[navychop]

I'd like my whole TV to cost only a few hundred.

 

[Troch77]

I don't recall anyone saying it did.

Bragging to no avail, and paying $200 -300 more on it very well implies such!
Just not in this particular thread.
But there are a few threads that are ridiculous with the 4K rave.

 

[raoul5788]

Lots of people are first adopters. That doesn't mean that they think the improvements are of a particular quality. They just have to have the latest thing.

 

[Troch77]

Lots of people are first adopters. That doesn't mean that they think the improvements are of a particular quality. They just have to have the latest thing.

You seriously need to visit the DISH 4K thread.
Or the "Is 4K worth it" thread in the dish forums.
Early adoption, is thrown out the window when graphs are brought in.

 

[Jimbo]

You seriously need to visit the DISH 4K thread.
Or the "Is 4K worth it" thread in the dish forums.
Early adoption, is thrown out the window when graphs are brought in.

When you consider that the majority of TV's being sold now are also 4K, by default, thier numbers will rise.
Just because you have a 4K TV doesn't mean your getting 4K signal, I would bet that a large portion of those 4k sets are not all that great when the real 4k with a set of standards get put in place.

Being an early adaptor is a great thing IF you can afford to do it.

I was doing HD long before most in my area, yes, I bought early, but made a wise and informed choice when I made my purchase.