Costco: Hisense 55" Class 4K Smart LED Ultra HDTV 55T880UW $1499.00

is there even anything to watch in 4k yet? have i missed something? I guess sports would be nice if they even had that
 
primetime said:
is there even anything to watch in 4k yet? have i missed something? I guess sports would be nice if they even had that
Click to expand...

there's remastered in 4k stuff but it isn't true 4k. only a few movies were/are shot in 4k iirc. the hobbit was shot in 4k iirc. also, for true 4k i believe the movie needs to be shot in 4k
 
primetime said:
is there even anything to watch in 4k yet? have i missed something? I guess sports would be nice if they even had that
Click to expand...

Just the cycle of planned obsolence at work. 1080p isn't even fully realized yet and now 4k is being pushed and the sheep shall be sheared. ;)
 
primetime said:
is there even anything to watch in 4k yet? have i missed something? I guess sports would be nice if they even had that
Click to expand...

If people can't consume the content nobody will make it, if nobody makes it people cant consume it. Its the whole "you need credit to get credit" cycle. You have to start somewhere.
 
primetime said:
is there even anything to watch in 4k yet? have i missed something? I guess sports would be nice if they even had that
Click to expand...

AIUI a large number of films are shot in 4K these days and the downgraded BD disks retain sufficient information for 4K players to decently upscale them.
 
I think the beauty of 4K right now is to be able to watch 3D movies with passive glasses in 1080p. Just my opinion. After that 50th anniversary Doctor Who episode I really started getting into 3D. It seems like it's becoming less about the "gimmick" of things coming out the screen a you and more about a depth of field. Like you are looking through a window instead of watching a TV.

I know a lot of people are firmly against wearing glasses whether they are active or passive and I get that. If God wanted me to sit in my living room wearing glasses he would have made me a loser with bad vision. All bigotry aside it's not that big a deal. People wear glasses all the time.
 
Have yet to meet a single person IRL that cares at all about 4K. Personally I agree with the above poster about "forced obsolescence... shearing sheep".
 
requiem99 said:
Have yet to meet a single person IRL that cares at all about 4K. Personally I agree with the above poster about "forced obsolescence... shearing sheep".
Click to expand...

This.

100% of the TV I watch is still in SD, not even 720p and tbh I don't care at all.
 
How in the hell can people watch SD tv. It looks horrible, especially sports.
 
mobusta1 said:
there's remastered in 4k stuff but it isn't true 4k. only a few movies were/are shot in 4k iirc. the hobbit was shot in 4k iirc. also, for true 4k i believe the movie needs to be shot in 4k
Click to expand...

Most movies are shot at more than 4k, in fact on film you can get 8k+ easily. As far as content, 1080p bluray can often be scaled well due to the high bit rates. Gaming or pc use works wonders with it too.

To the guys saying 1080p or sd isn't realized yet.... That's downright ridiculous. I've run around 1080p for my monitor since 2004, and 2560 resolutions since 2008. It's been a big upgrade each time. On my 84" 1080p projector setup I would be able to easily tell the difference to 4k, heck 720p vs 1080 is readily visible and 4k is a bigger jump. Sdtv has looked horrible since I first got a 720p lcd many many years ago. Once I saw hd, I couldn't stand sd. Night and day, plus a huge aspect ratio difference.
 
GoldenTiger said:
To the guys saying 1080p or sd isn't realized yet.... That's downright ridiculous. I've run around 1080p for my monitor since 2004, and 2560 resolutions since 2008. It's been a big upgrade each time. On my 84" 1080p projector setup I would be able to easily tell the difference to 4k, heck 720p vs 1080 is readily visible and 4k is a bigger jump. Sdtv has looked horrible since I first got a 720p lcd many many years ago. Once I saw hd, I couldn't stand sd. Night and day, plus a huge aspect ratio difference.
Click to expand...

You're the exception, not the rule. Most of the general public doesn't even have 1080p yet.
 
Rizen said:
This is HardForum not Walmart, I'd hope most people here can tell a difference.
Click to expand...

Being that more of the general public shops at Walmart than browses on HardForum, his statement is acurate.Again, an overwhelming majority of households get their programming via Cable/Sat etc. Very little if ANY content via those avenues is sending 1080p signals. So anyone hooking up a cable box to a 4k set is pretty much wasting time and money. Hook a BluRay player up to it and it looks like the 1080p set you can by without the 4k premium. The very few who could push these sets are just that..VERY FEW. One of the FEW uses would be PC gaming @ 4k res..Again, the console set(the majority) is just now scratching the surface of 1080p and will probably never fully utilize 4k. Ill maybe take the plunge when 4k players and content are much more abundant.
 
Starrbuck said:
You're the exception, not the rule. Most of the general public doesn't even have 1080p yet.
Click to expand...

The Blu Ray vs HD DVD was settled a while back. The disks are readily available at discount merchants. The players cost less than 70 for base models. 24" sets can be purchased for under 180 USD. Are you quite certain that 1080p has yet to arrive to the general public?


The shearing of sheep is a pretty silly comment as well. It is for the higher end market, as the prices indicate. Similar rhetoric was said around 2005 when 1080 first started showing up in force.

I would suggest waiting however, for HDMI 2.0 on these sets. Otherwise, the buyer would be stuck with a 30 fps 4K tv.
 
Noetic said:
The Blu Ray vs HD DVD was settled a while back. The disks are readily available at discount merchants. The players cost less than 70 for base models. 24" sets can be purchased for under 180 USD. Are you quite certain that 1080p has yet to arrive to the general public?


The shearing of sheep is a pretty silly comment as well. It is for the higher end market, as the prices indicate. Similar rhetoric was said around 2005 when 1080 first started showing up in force.

I would suggest waiting however, for HDMI 2.0 on these sets. Otherwise, the buyer would be stuck with a 30 fps 4K tv.
Click to expand...

Quoted for truth. Bluray players can be had for $50-80 every day, discs cost $3-10 depending on newness of movie and whether it's used or not... dirt cheap, and most cable providers offer 1080i/720p programming as do satellite ones as part of their general packages, and have for quite a long while now. Sets as you said aren't very pricey at all, I've seen 46" sets regularly for $300-400 and 32" for $250/less commonly on sales, and of course you can always buy regular-priced smaller sets for less (which many people do). I love how people always slam early adopters nowadays....
 
I dont watch blu ray and the streamed movies I see and nearly all "hd" content on cable/satellite is 720 or 1080i at best so no point in 4k tv any time soon.

I am looking forward to 4k monitors though.
 
cannondale06 said:
I dont watch blu ray and the streamed movies I see and nearly all "hd" content on cable/satellite is 720 or 1080i at best so no point in 4k tv any time soon.

I am looking forward to 4k monitors though.
Click to expand...

+1 Gets no simpler than that. I do watch mostly Bluray so 1080p is fine for now.:cool:
 
robothunter said:
I think the beauty of 4K right now is to be able to watch 3D movies with passive glasses in 1080p. Just my opinion. After that 50th anniversary Doctor Who episode I really started getting into 3D. It seems like it's becoming less about the "gimmick" of things coming out the screen a you and more about a depth of field. Like you are looking through a window instead of watching a TV.

I know a lot of people are firmly against wearing glasses whether they are active or passive and I get that. If God wanted me to sit in my living room wearing glasses he would have made me a loser with bad vision. All bigotry aside it's not that big a deal. People wear glasses all the time.
Click to expand...

heheheheheh funny post i agree.. ;) i wouldnt mind having it for 1080p / pc monitor.. most people have their tv hooked up to so many sources isnt one them a pc.. if it was 1000 id bite for sure.
 
Rizen said:
This is HardForum not Walmart, I'd hope most people here can tell a difference.
Click to expand...

exactly. I must be the exception too, because i am excited about 4k tvs. If you cant get 4k content then your just being lazy. If i buy a 4k tv I WILL get 4k content for it...
 
I am just now convincing the wife to get a 1080p TV over my 32 Vizio 720, its gonna be a long time till I ever think about how I am going to convince her to get a 4k.
 
1080p not realized yet - LOL. Gimme a break. I had a 55" 1080i set back in 2000. Us with big screens (70" and larger) have been waiting a LONG time for 4K. I'm ready. Been ready.

It's a repeat of 1080p. "We don't need 1080p - you can't tell a difference..."

BS to the stagnant Neanderthal thinkers in here.

You'll see.
 
Dude..... you can 100% immediately, instantly, completely, and totally tell the absolute and undeniable difference between 4k and 1080p looking at each screen for only seconds. Anyone who says otherwise is a complete idiot.
 
To anyone who says you can't tell the difference...

(2) LCDs (1600x1200 + 1920x1200) display 43 rows and 46 columns of default size in MS Excel 2010

Any 3840x2160 TV at native resolution will show 92 rows and 55 columns while using less power and with no bezels interrupting your viewing.

Yeah...there's no difference at all, is there?
 
If I can tell the difference between 720p and 1080p (and this is with 20/40 vision).. then you better believe there will be a noticeable difference between 2k and 4k
 
jlbenedict said:
If I can tell the difference between 720p and 1080p (and this is with 20/40 vision).. then you better believe there will be a noticeable difference between 2k and 4k
Click to expand...

As an Achitect visualizer, I can tell, but that's only because I'm staring at pixels every damn day :(. On the plus side for me though, it makes for great renderings...
 
Count me as one of the sheep that looks forward to 4k! Anything over 40" and you can really start to see the flaws in 1080p.
 
Would be great if this TV had support for HDMI 2.0 or DP 1.2, because being stuck on 30hz is terrible, unless if your watching movies.
 
ChronoDetector said:
Would be great if this TV had support for HDMI 2.0 or DP 1.2, because being stuck on 30hz is terrible, unless if your watching movies.
Click to expand...

Would it be great if it had them? Yes.

Is being stuck on 30Hz terrible? No. Not in the least.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top