46-50 inch TV recommendation?

[quiktake]

My panasonic plasma just died after three years (RIP), and the repair is expected to cost $275, so I prefer a new TV.

Requirements:

-46 to 50 inch

-Anti reflective screen

-good color accuracy (natural skin tones, etc.)

-Good off axis viewing including when lying on the floor off center

-Prefer 4k as it doesn't seem like much of a price jump but I am concerned about HDMI 2.0 and 4:4:4 chroma.

Looking to keep the price around a $1000 as this seems the sweet spot. Main uses are TV (through antenna), HTPC TV recordings and daily kids movie. Not used for gaming very much at all. Good blacks are nice, but was never impressed with the plasma for that. So, I guess contrast isn't a huge priority. My wife and I prefer a Japanese company, but lately they Japanese TV's don't seem so competitive.

At this point I am looking at the VIZIO P502ui-B1, Sony XBR49X850B and LG Electronics 49UB8500.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00JQAFSBQ/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00II6VY2G/ref=ox_sc_act_title_2?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00MK39H68..._t=101&pf_rd_p=2019258862&pf_rd_i=10195182011


Any thoughts or recommendations? It seems like a bad time to buy with the 4k/HDMI 2.0/OLED transition underway and no new 2015 models in the stores. But life must go on. If I can get the Visio at Costco for good price they have the best return policy.

 

[ChronoDetector]

Not sure about the Vizio TV, but I would avoid buying the Sony set because it only supports 4:2:0 at 4K and it will look terrible and personally I cannot recommend using 4:2:0 for regular usage. The LG 49UB500 will support 4:4:4 at 4K 60Hz as long if you have a NVIDIA GTX 9xx card.

 

[mystieus]

Not sure about the Vizio TV, but I would avoid buying the Sony set because it only supports 4:2:0 at 4K and it will look terrible and personally I cannot recommend using 4:2:0 for regular usage. The LG 49UB500 will support 4:4:4 at 4K 60Hz as long if you have a NVIDIA GTX 9xx card.

49UB8500?

 

[quiktake]

Do ATI cards not support 4:4:4 chroma? I thought they have better support than nvidia.

 

[Pechendko]

The only advice I can give you: don't buy 42" sony tv's. The panels they have are the lowest quality VA garbage with severe black crush, bluish blacks when viewed even at a slight angle and horrible gamma shift.

It actually seems like a panel lottery, because the ones I've seen in stores were fine.

 

[Richard Jones]

My 42W65 (2013) doesn't show the horror you describe, neither do the 2014 version(s) by the reviews (42W70).
I though all of their VA panels were AMVA manufactured by AUO ? (w/ exception of the current lower grade W6 and the higher grade W85 featuring Samsung S-PVA)
I doubt there's a lottery, but from my experience depending on the settings the Sony W's can look night and day.

The 42W800B/805B though has been reported to show the passive 3D polarizing 'grid', unlike the 50" active models that don't show any issues.

From what I gathered all the following feature AUO AMVA5 with simple and 3D variants that should be all fine;
32W70, 42W70, 50W70, 50W79
50W80, 55W80 (+ 815, 829 declinations), W85
I may have missed some size variants and haven't checked the 2015 changes, but aside from the OS change I haven't heard of anything fundamental in their VA HD range.

PS: anyway OP is clearly looking for an IPS.

 

[ChronoDetector]

Do ATI cards not support 4:4:4 chroma? I thought they have better support than nvidia.

I'm pretty sure they can do 4:4:4 only at 30Hz, and AMD hasn't modified their drivers to allow 60Hz as far as I know, since AMD cards are limited to 30Hz due to HDMI 1.4a and HDMI 2.0 wasn't available at the time when the 200 series were being manufactured.

49UB8500?

My bad, it was late when I replied to this thread and didn't notice that error.

 

[Pechendko]

I have 42" w817b and I really regret getting it. The blacks just turn blue and washed out even when viewed head on but not far away enough. And on top of that there's black crush when lowering gamma which seems really inconsistent and something more like 2.0 in lighter shades.

I couldn't even calibrate it with cltest, it just didn't work with it because of how bad the gamma shift is.

 

[mystieus]

I have 42" w817b and I really regret getting it. The blacks just turn blue and washed out even when viewed head on but not far away enough. And on top of that there's black crush when lowering gamma which seems really inconsistent and something more like 2.0 in lighter shades.

I couldn't even calibrate it with cltest, it just didn't work with it because of how bad the gamma shift is.

Sounds like a VA or TN panel..

 

[defaultluser]

Yeah, if you want good viewing angles, it has to be IPS. Most of the high-end LG TVs use IPS, so that would be my recommendation. In my experience, they have good build quality as well - my 4-year old LG IPS 47" 1080p LED looks and operates just as good as it did when I bought it.

LG used to be a panel lottery for most TVs, but they have now committed to IPS in just about everything except entry-level. One of the benefits of making your own panels

On the Amazon link under Additional Features, they list the panel as IPS for all the 4k TVs, so I say GO FOR IT!

As already mentioned, you will have to buy a GTX 960 or higher to power this TV at 4k 60Hz 4:4:4, as this requires HDMI 2.0 (currently a Maxwell 2.0 exclusive). The next unofficial release from AMD with HDMI 2.0 is going to be Carrizo (which may not make it to the desktop, so you'd have to buy a notebook). No idea when AMD will get out a discrete part with HDMI 2.0. Intel is skipping HDMI 2.0 until Skylake, which is fine because Broadwell is taking it's sweet time getting to the desktop.

 

[quiktake]

Yeah, I think IPS is as good as it gets compared to plasma for off axis viewing.

I found the LG 55 4k (8500series) open box box for about $1200 at microcenter. I may go for that.

I just have to talk the wife into it...

 

[tordogs]

I own the XBR49X850B and have been well pleased with it. Got it a couple months back during a price match with Crutchfield and Bestbuy. The cost was $1,200 which was decent as MSRP was about $1,999. It is a bit glossier than I would like but really nothing anymore in the better TVs has anything like a matte finish. It isn't as bad as some I looked at but not nearly as nice as the old Sony XBR4 matte screen that it replaced. Finally gave up on ever seeing matte TV screens again.

It came with a ton of perks and benefits for Amazon Prime stuff and and other 4K content. Sony is pretty well connected with the entertainment business so they are able to offer several benefits. Honestly had I not decided that 49-50" was my absolute limit on size I would likely have stepped up to the 900 series or even 950 but I think the smallest screen was 55" which was more than I need in an apartment and way more than I wanted to be troubled with moving and carrying upstairs. My whole idea about flat screens is the
ease of moving and these newer panels are gaining weight all the time--one of my neighbors still has my last Sony Trinitron CRT and I swear this new one weighs almost as much although it is a bit easier to move due to the shape and size.

This model was just a nice fit and since I've used Sony TV exclusively for decades it was really my only option--I was pretty underwhelmed with side-by-side viewing of other brands. This has the typical Sony build--really tight, clean and classy. Opted for the
4K (UHD) as opposed to the OLED screens I saw. I have a 4K monitor and between it and the 4K TV it just made my old 1080p stuff look blurry. The 3D is a novelty but not much use for it. Play with it from time to time just for kicks. Once you've decided on your options the only real way to find out what works for you is a side-by-side comparison.