UHD TV shopping

[RKF]

I'm close to upgrading from my 11 y/o Samsung DLP. Most important to me is sports viewing (PGA, F1, and NFL). The DLP still looks darn good to me.
When I view the scene of a golfer putting on the Samsung 8550's, it looks as though the grass on the fringe of the green is SMUDGED.
Anyone else notice shortcomings like this? It might be the feed in the store as I saw the same on the Samsung 8000 series(non-uhd) and their top of the line Plasma.

[racer-x]

Probably the limited feed. It may be a long time coming and very expensive to supply the needed bandwith to support a high-quality UHD picture. In my opinion, we've already reached the point of diminishing returns for broadcast tv anyway.

But I may be wrong...............

[jagabo]

Be careful about HDCP 2.2: http://www.cnet.com/news/hdcp-2-2-what-you-need-to-know/

[Cornucopia]

If you are going to comparison shop and do a visual test, you need to use a known-good, extremely high quality source (both HD and UHD). Camera originals if you've got them or can get a hold of them, or a nice BD.

Otherwise, you aren't comparing apples to apples, and your findings are confounded by an interfering weak link elsewhere in the chain.

Scott

[Cornucopia]

Be careful about HDCP 2.2: http://www.cnet.com/news/hdcp-2-2-what-you-need-to-know/

Oh, damn! Another CP mechanism rears its ugly head. Thanks for the heads up, hadn't heard about this.

Scott

[jman98]

Interesting about HDCP 2.2 in a very bad way. I also had not heard that. Well, after reading that I'm not even going to bother worry about UHD for years to come as I'll be damned if I am going to replace my perfectly good receiver just to get 2.2 compatibility. I'm guessing that the locality check is an attempt to defeat external boxes that strip the copy protection away. We'll see if that actually works or not.

[usually_quiet]

I wouldn't bother with a 4K TV now either. By the time 4K video is widely available, today's expensive 4K TV will be a relic that doesn't work well with other garden-variety consumer electronics capable of supplying 4K video.

[RKF]

Thanks everyone for the responses.
Is there a member who can tell me how "real" a benefit/upgrade they see with viewing Upscaled content from STB programming on one of Samsungs UHD TVs?
What I saw at a Paul's TV store did not particularly impress me-"Upscaled"picture detail was not better to my eye when compared to LED Samsungs on the same feed, nor was it really better than what I enjoy on my old DLP.

[jagabo]

Upscaled video never adds detail. All it does is make the picture bigger, hopefully keeping edges sharp and adding as few artifacts as possible. But those two goals are antithetical to each other. No doubt the manufactures will err on the side of sharpness because people will notice that rather than the oversharpening halos when standing right in front of a Ultra HD TV on the showroom floor.

Keep in mind: At normal viewing distances you'll need a really big TV to see the difference between 1080p and 2160p. You have to be sitting closer than about 1.2x the diagonal measure of the TV to see any difference (oversharpening "enhancements" aside). Eg, for a 60" TV you need to be sitting within about 72" to see any difference.

[Cornucopia]

I've noticed at BB and Fry's that the better demo models are using USB sticks as their looped video demo source. Likely some vendor-specific true 4k/UHD image sizzlereel stuff, so no need to upscale. Of course, there's no way to compare that with a standard HD set, since the HD set couldn't read the UHD material.

Scott

[RKF]

Upscaled video never adds detail. All it does is make the picture bigger, hopefully keeping edges sharp and adding as few artifacts as possible. But those two goals are antithetical to each other. No doubt the manufactures will err on the side of sharpness because people will notice that rather than the oversharpening halos when standing right in front of a Ultra HD TV on the showroom floor.

Keep in mind: At normal viewing distances you'll need a really big TV to see the difference between 1080p and 2160p. You have to be sitting closer than about 1.2x the diagonal measure of the TV to see any difference (oversharpening "enhancements" aside). Eg, for a 60" TV you need to be sitting within about 72" to see any difference.

To me adding detail is part sharpening edges, part contrast-producing ability and part true-color reproduction. All of these are things I absolutely seen in the showrooms on Samsungs uhd sets when viewing the canned, but true uhd signals.

What I'm wondering is if the Upscaling these sets are capable of produces any of the same effects ?
I was hoping that someone could say yes or no about whether Upscaled images look any better (in detail or otherwise) than those on Samsungs higher end non-uhd LEDs??

[fritzi93]

There are some lengthy threads at the avs forum on this subject. Some of the discussion is highly technical. Like this one, for instance:

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/286-latest-industry-news/1611434-uhd-4k-quandary-buy-not-buy.html

Personally, I'm glad I don't have to upgrade anything for a couple years. That is, assuming my fairly new 65" and 70" 1080p TVs don't up and die.

[jagabo]

Oops, wrong thread.

[RKF]

There are some lengthy threads at the avs forum on this subject. Some of the discussion is highly technical. Like this one, for instance:

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/286-latest-industry-news/1611434-uhd-4k-quandary-buy-not-buy.html

Personally, I'm glad I don't have to upgrade anything for a couple years. That is, assuming my fairly new 65" and 70" 1080p TVs don't up and die.

Thanks for that. I read about 150 of the posts.
I also spent 1.5 hrs in Local Paul's TV last night watching ONLY Golf Channel & NFL network. Here are my conclusions & subjective opinions:

-Native uhd/4k on the Samsung 60" 8550 is the best picture period. Ends the debate forever about max. viewing distance, etc. for me.
-Non 4k LED sets like Samsungs curved 65" and flat 60" are inferior to their 8550uhd/4k-which Upscales the content. It is a relatively small difference compared to my next point...
-These high-ed uhd & Non-uhd Samsungs are INFERIOR to my 11 yr old Samsung DLP for what I like to watch-PGA and NFL. Grass gets smudged and smeared when watching golf, and football just just not look quite right. Inherent Fast motion deficiencies I suspect.
-The Sharp UQ series Upscales reg HD to 4k and performs better than the Samsung uhds ONLY with reg HD Golf & Football. Their refresh rate it quadrupled through some magic processing and this virtually eliminates the smudging.
-My DLP is still damn good for what I like to watch
-Samsungs pn60F8000 plasma is better than their 8550uhd for watching golf.

My debate now is narrowed: Samsung 60" plasma F8000 vs. Sharp 60" UQ
Cost difference is obviously in favor of Sharp, but I do feel the plasma is better for what I watch 75% of the time. Actually the Sharps picture and performance on standard HD sports broadcast remind me a lot of how my old DLP looks. Shame I have to replace it really.

[fritzi93]

You mean the Samsung F8500 plasma. Better get one soon, as Samsung is ending production in November at latest. Panasonic is already out, which leaves LG, which by all accounts is not as good as the other two.

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/286-latest-industry-news/1587034-samsung-pulls-plug-plas...roduction.html

[pandy]

"Too early Sir, too early..." there is no hardware encoder for 4k content (h.265 as 4k in h.264 will be slightly insane) so broadcasters are not able even to start regular live transmissions - i would suggest to wait at least one year.

[Cornucopia]

You mean the Samsung F8500 plasma. Better get one soon, as Samsung is ending production in November at latest. Panasonic is already out, which leaves LG, which by all accounts is not as good as the other two.

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/286-latest-industry-news/1587034-samsung-pulls-plug-plas...roduction.html

To clarify: both are ending production of PLASMA tv, not TV in general.

Because of 4k, Plasma has become both economically & legally (power consumption) problematic for all manufacturers.

Scott

[RKF]

You mean the Samsung F8500 plasma. Better get one soon, as Samsung is ending production in November at latest. Panasonic is already out, which leaves LG, which by all accounts is not as good as the other two.

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/286-latest-industry-news/1587034-samsung-pulls-plug-plas...roduction.html

To clarify: both are ending production of PLASMA tv, not TV in general.

Because of 4k, Plasma has become both economically & legally (power consumption) problematic for all manufacturers.

Scott

I got one. It's awesome-PQ is outstanding as you would expect. Watching F1 is a huge step up from my DLP. Golf & NFL better too, though the DLP still def. worked.
I sure appreciate the look that 4k gives you, I just don't think they do sports well currently. Can't help but wonder if it's the much lower refresh rates of LEDs that makes me think of them as inferior to Plasma/DLP.

[Cornucopia]

I had a Plasma that I loved (until the PSU died and would cost more to replace/repair than the TV itself).
I like (good) LED-LCDs just as much, if in different ways.

I believe you are confounding certain features: LEDs in and of themselves are capable of VERY HIGH refresh rates (witness a commercial full-color, full-motion, LED billboard in use that runs at 6000Hz! - yes, that's 6k). Any percieved "slowness" of refresh has to do with either lower quality/tolerance design/parts or with the simple fact that those LEDs you see commonly are actually LED-LCDs and it is the LCD part that is the slow (weak) link in the chain. But even that isn't all that slow, when LCDs can now run at 240 & 480Hz. What's that you say? "Those are just BS #s that are cheating via backlight flicker & MEMC"? Well, a real indication of an LCD's capability is Response time.
The change in (standard) video is 1 Frame = 1/60th second = 16.6667msec. If an LCD can reliably/continually/consistently achieve equal or quicker than 16msec 0-to-partial-to-Full change (or back) response, there will be no "motion blur" due to low refresh capability. Well, LCDs have been able to achieve 5-8msec for almost a decade now, and some higher-end LCDs can achieve 1-2 msec. It's all down to economics: low price = low quality.

So I don't consider LED-LCDs to be really any inferior OVERALL to Plasmas: they each have their pros & cons (Angle of View, Response/Refresh, Black level, Brightness, Contrast, Color Purity, Glare, Price, Energy Use, Weight, Thickness, Direct-Addressability). As do all the other display technologies: CRT, DLP, CCFL-LCD, OLED. None of them are clear winners in all categories. Me, I'm waiting for the holy grail: 4k/8k, Super-Widescreen, HFR, HDR, Automultiscopic (via Plenoptic/Integral/Compressed LightField tech) Laser TVs. but those will be $$$ for another decade or so. In the meantime, I'll be ok with what the current market can give me. Unfortunately, that market isn't going to give me Plasma for much longer (see: http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/4k-plasma-201311133417.htm).

Scott

[jagabo]

a real indication of an LCD's capability is Response time... LCDs have been able to achieve 5-8msec for almost a decade now, and some higher-end LCDs can achieve 1-2 msec.

Those numbers from manufactures mean very little. They are measured differently with different models -- whichever measurement gives the best number. When measured by independent reviewers the response time is much larger. For example:

http://www.displaymate.com/LG_OLED_TV_ShootOut_1.htm

See the sample response time images near the bottom of the page.

On the LCD TV screen shot it is possible to make out latent images from more than 5 prior refresh cycles.

That was a 120 Hz LED backlit LCD. It isn't made clear if the motion interpolation was on. But if those were 120 Hz frames with motion interpolation 5 frames corresponds to ~40 milliseconds. If they are 60 fps frames in the source (each being displayed twice by the TV) that corresponds to ~80 milliseconds!

[RKF]

Just to be clear, I am only a mildly educated AV technocrat. However, I love researching and buying stuff that I see or hear as being better. I wish I was fluent in all the AV techno jargon, but for now I just shop in spurts and enjoy my high-quality stuff. Admittedly there are massive holes in my knowledge, but I am a discerning hobbyist.
My DLP was "it" for the $ when I bought it, and I still see it as superior for sports vs high-end LCD/LED. The plasma I bought is the right choice for me given what I watch.

[jagabo]

Oh, here's the story just about LCD response time, with more examples:

http://www.displaymate.com/LCD_Response_Time_ShootOut.htm

And if you want to learn more details about all the display technologies start here:

http://www.displaymate.com/shootout.html

[fritzi93]

Just to be clear, I am only a mildly educated AV technocrat. However, I love researching and buying stuff that I see or hear as being better. I wish I was fluent in all the AV techno jargon, but for now I just shop in spurts and enjoy my high-quality stuff. Admittedly there are massive holes in my knowledge, but I am a discerning hobbyist.
My DLP was "it" for the $ when I bought it, and I still see it as superior for sports vs high-end LCD/LED. The plasma I bought is the right choice for me given what I watch.

You got a very well-regarded TV, the last so-called "reference" plasma. IIRC, it won the VE (Value Electronics) shootout last year (Panasonic's ZT60 won the year before). The VE shootout is a big deal for the aficionados at AVS.

Congratulations.

[lingyi]

Just to be clear, I am only a mildly educated AV technocrat. However, I love researching and buying stuff that I see or hear as being better. I wish I was fluent in all the AV techno jargon, but for now I just shop in spurts and enjoy my high-quality stuff. Admittedly there are massive holes in my knowledge, but I am a discerning hobbyist.
My DLP was "it" for the $ when I bought it, and I still see it as superior for sports vs high-end LCD/LED. The plasma I bought is the right choice for me given what I watch.

You got a very well-regarded TV, the last so-called "reference" plasma. IIRC, it won the VE (Value Electronics) shootout last year (Panasonic's ZT60 won the year before). The VE shootout is a big deal for the aficionados at AVS.

Congratulations.

The Panasonic VT50 was the 2012 Value Electronics showdown top rated HDTV. Last year the ZT60 won the Expert's vote and the F8500 won the Audience vote.

This year's showdown is scheduled for next week 8/15 - 8/16/14 and only the F8500 will return to defend its title.

[fritzi93]

Thanks for the clarification. My memory was at fault.

I considered getting an F8500 last year, but got a 70" Sharp instead (floor model, reduced price). The Samsung was a little too spendy, and I use the Sharp extensively as a monitor anyway. Didn't want to worry about image retention.

Still, in some areas, particularly movies in a darkened HT, a top plasma is hard to beat. Unless one can spring for a (too small) 55" curved OLED.