4K worth the $$ above 1080p?

[Indydriver]

I bought a 65" Samsung 8000 back in Sept and love it. In addition to 4K, it was important to me to also get HDR and 240 MHz. You will also need a matching 4K Blu-Ray player. This TV has already dropped $300 since I bought it and is about $1500 now.

In addition to 4K movies you can buy, this TV also accesses the internet where there is significant content on YouTube, Netflix, etc. but even more important for me was the upgrade to the standard cable HD feed. It says it is showing at 1920 x 1080, Huge improvement.

Because this is a ten year or longer investment for me, I want all the tech I can afford when I upgrade.

 

[alarmguy]

Me personally I would not be buying a TV because it was a "Smart TV" in fact i would avoid it if I could as I would be paying for something I would not be interested in using .. TVs last far longer then the technology of "Smart"

First thing with your new TV would be to buy a Roku player and then you have your latest updated Smart TV as soon as you plug it in.
Options with Roku are endless, including Sling and hundreds of streaming channels and subscriptions.
Oh and yes, we run all 4 of our Roku players exclusively on 5GHZ and our smart phones, laptops, desktops, Ipads etc on 2.5 which reduces channel clutter in our own home!

One thing to be leary about with some lower end Vizio TVs is some are no longer being shipped with built in TV tuners, dont discount over the air TV with an antenna. The HD picture on major networks using an antenna are far superior then pay TV.

We have a about 6 year old Panasonic 58 inch 1080p Plasma TV, with the newest Roku player its just as smart as the latest all in one Smart TV and the picture of Plasma is now only being matched by the very expensive LG OLED TVs .. I do want one day to upgrade to a 65 or 70 inch but will wait and see for a few years of the OLEDs ever get down to a better price point.

As far as Vizio, it was an American company but understand, they never manufactured a TV, not one. They designed and then contracted for it to be built by Chinese companies. Vizio has now, as of last year been bought by a Chinese company. Not saying that is bad, I bought my son a 55 inch Vizio 2 Christmas's ago.

 

[BigD1]

I thought about buying a 4K and HDR capable TV, but I am happy with 1080 for now. Main reason I am not going to do it is because all this streaming stuff is x264 I think, and if they ever standardize to x265 the bandwidth will be cut in half. Some of the streaming boxes already support x265, but what good is it when streaming services are still pumping x264.

 

[BigD1]

Originally Posted By: alarmguy
One thing to be leary about with some lower end Vizio TVs is some are no longer being shipped with built in TV tuners, dont discount over the air TV with an antenna. The HD picture on major networks using an antenna are far superior then pay TV.


I hope they are putting that in big bold letters that this TV does not have a tuner. I guess when the cable goes out for days people can stare at blank screens.

I agree with over the air antennas having a better picture than pay TV. Even the 720 channels look very good.

 

[Ramblejam]

Originally Posted By: BigD1
I agree with over the air antennas having a better picture than pay TV.


Theoretically, sure. In practice, many stations are getting carried away with the subchannels; there are a couple here with six on the same signal (65.1, 65.2, 65.3, etc.). With that much going on, compression is utilized.

 

[BigD1]

None of my subchannels are broadcasting in 1080. I think most of them are SD while the main channels 3.1 for example is either 720 or 1080. I don't have cable, but I do have PlayStaion Vue, and used Sling before that. I get a couple live stream locals on Vue, and I can switch the ball game over to antenna, and it looks a good bit better. Can't compare it to cable because it has gotten ridiculous around here with Charter the only game in town. Not paying for Spanish and shopping channels galore, so I can watch a good college football game. A la carte and I will gladly pay for what I want.

 

[alarmguy]

If this helps, tonight I noticed the Vizio boxes in Sams Club with big writing, "Built in TV tuner"
If this is a trend by them, when the public expects a TV tuner but Vizio thinks you shouldnt expect one unless its stamped on the box, well, I would think that is a new low for any manufacturer, more so when the public is starting to realize you do not have to pay for TV and can get your local channels with a better HD picture then pay TV provides.

Sub channels are not HDTV, main major network channels are.

 

[sleddriver]

Originally Posted By: alarmguy
One thing to be leary about with some lower end Vizio TVs is some are no longer being shipped with built in TV tuners, dont discount over the air TV with an antenna. The HD picture on major networks using an antenna are far superior then pay TV.

Wow...that's just nuts!
An ATSC tuner these days is an ASIC....for pennys.
If they're willing to leave that out, I wonder what else is being skimped on? Shielding??

Just nuts.......

 

[bmwjohn]

CNET, a daily tech oriented newsletter, has a Cheapskate and deals section (right top)and just had a low end deal suggestion: an INSIGNIA (Best Buy house brand) 55" very plain TV, good reviews, $279 (slightly cheaper if you use VISA check out first time, free shipping, suggest buy w/good credit card to double the 1 year warranty, add ROKU or similar to offset lack of features, coming up around $300 total, good deal to run until better stuff gets even cheaper. Just a thought!