8K discussion thread

[gkolb]

I don’t get it. Are displays convex now, instead of concave? Weird

[LexInHD]

Originally Posted by JohnAV

I keep remembering the issues of incorrect transportation practices with large plasma TV's in trucks. The Panasonic 103" from 2 years earlier (2010) was 706 pounds. They also had a 152" 4K plasma" was 1300 pounds. I don't recall these other then CES monster sets, not shipped to consumers?

They were shipped to special buyers and also placed within prominent international airports that serve markets where Panasonic is a well-known brand. In 2010, I encountered one (103-inch, if I recall) of them in Panama, enclosed in a giant cube of glass, but the unit was turned off and seemed to be abandoned, covered in dust and looking a bit worn-out. I remember other Panasonic TVs mounted throughout the waiting areas and used by the airport to display flight information. Ironically, the big thing was located across from a Sony outlet store inside the airport.

[Lee A Stewart]

Samsung's most advanced "QLED" LCD tech is now reserved for its 8K TVs

In 2020, Samsung will start the push towards 8K TVs by removing its most advanced "QLED" LCD technology from 4K TVs.

Last year's Q90R 4K "QLED" LCD TV had approximately 500 dimming zones. The 2020 successor, Q90T, will have around 100 dimming zones. In an LCD TV, the number of dimming zones determine factors such as contrast, luminance control, accuracy, peak brightness and HDR picture quality overall.

In many ways this sums up Samsung's TV strategy for 2020. This year, Samsung 4K TVs will from a picture quality standpoint be less capable than last year's models. If you want the South Korean company's most advanced LCD technology - not just in terms of resolution - you will have to buy an 8K TV.

https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.ph...&id=1581925126

[JohnAV]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

Last year's Q90R 4K "QLED" LCD TV had approximately 500 dimming zones. The 2020 successor, Q90T, will have around 100 dimming zones. In an LCD TV, the number of dimming zones determine factors such as contrast, luminance control, accuracy, peak brightness and HDR picture quality overall

You see a lot more of this cheapening if you scan through the Forbes article.

I guess we’ll see when the sales figures come in whether the high-end market is ready to go for 8K, or whether not having a really high-end 4K option will prove a costly error.

I understand Samsung being highly motivated, but last year debacle with true 8k resolution has still to show whether they learned their lesson with this years models.

[Brian81]

Wow, that's pretty shitty on the part of Samsung. I can understand making 'new' features exclusive to the higher end sets, but removing existing standard features also? I hope that instead of opting to pay more, customers see the move and consider looking elsewhere, or buy the old models.

[JohnAV]

Originally Posted by Brian81

Wow, that's pretty shitty on the part of Samsung. I can understand making 'new' features exclusive to the higher end sets, but removing existing standard features also? I hope that instead of opting to pay more, customers see the move and consider looking elsewhere, or buy the old models.

I don't think this is new trait either. The Q80R used 96 zones , while Q70R used 48 zones. Compare the 2020 changes below. I don't think you want these sets.

8k 65-inch Q950TS gets 336 dimming zones. Assuming this proves to be correct, it’s actually down from 480 on last year’s equivalent models.

Things get a bit controversial here. The Q90T/Q95T’s apparent zone count of 120 is way down on the 480 found in last year’s equivalent 4K flagship, revealing right away that Samsung has decided not to offer a truly flagship 4K model this year to rival last year’s Q90R.

The Q80T is the lowest point in Samsung’s 2020 range where you can still get direct LED lighting with local dimming. The dimming zone count drops to 48, though.

The Q70T is the point in Samsung’s 2020 TV range where you lose direct lighting and local dimming, shifting instead to an edge LED system.

Just buy any other brand.

[LordoftheRings]

Sony and LG make 8K TVs too ... OLED.

[JohnAV]

Originally Posted by LordoftheRings

Sony and LG make 8K TVs too ... OLED.

And others. I think we all in favor of TV manufacturers not crippling the HDR performance of 4K sets that compete with their 8K models. This is suppose to be a trickle down technology benefits to promote the acceptance to higher resolution TVs. We still have people not yet migrated to 4k.

[PaulGo]

Originally Posted by JohnAV

And others. I think we all in favor of TV manufacturers not crippling the HDR performance of 4K sets that compete with their 8K models. This is suppose to be a trickle down technology benefits to promote the acceptance to higher resolution TVs. We still have people not yet migrated to 4k.

It's all marketing. The average 4K TV has become so cheap manufacturers have a difficult time selling expensive 4K TVs. The only way they can put in features and make a profit is in the 8K TVs. They just need to make certain that the 8K TVs are known as superior.

[JohnAV]

Originally Posted by PaulGo

It's all marketing. The average 4K TV has become so cheap manufacturers have a difficult time selling expensive 4K TVs. The only way they can put in features and make a profit is in the 8K TVs. They just need to make certain that the 8K TVs are known as superior.

There is a opening accessible to them all which is against less then 55" TV's. Just about any 4K TV out there is severely deficient on picture quality and HDR below 55". If the panels are so dirt cheap why is the panel technology so poor. The 48" LG CX OLED is aimed squarely at a marketplace that is dying for a solution, instead of this bigger, high resolution displays is the only direction for this technology to progress into. That is plain lazy marketing from well known TV vendors. Gamers, small residence users want expensive smaller 4K sets that work well, not junk.

Obviously this is a 2nd half of the year model. LG only has the 65" model discussed online.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by JohnAV

There is a opening accessible to them all which is against less then 55" TV's. Just about any 4K TV out there is severely deficient on picture quality and HDR below 55". If the panels are so dirt cheap why is the panel technology so poor. The 48" LG CX OLED is aimed squarely at a marketplace that is dying for a solution, instead of this bigger, high resolution displays is the only direction for this technology to progress into. That is plain lazy marketing from well known TV vendors. Gamers, small residence users want expensive smaller 4K sets that work well, not junk.

Obviously this is a 2nd half of the year model. LG only has the 65" model discussed online.

I believe the 48" OLED is more aimed at those who want a high quality TV at or below the $1000 price point. Something that none of the OLED manufacturers are willing to hit with a 55" model. All other TV OEM's eyes will be on the LG and Sony units to see how popular it will be before they too begin to offer one.

When you set aside convenience, price becomes the number one factor for consumers.

[PaulGo]

On the smaller size 4K TVS manufacturers can make more money by selling monitors to the gamers. Last year I purchased a 32" LG 2K HDR monitor.

[MechaGodzilla]

Originally Posted by JohnAV

There is a opening accessible to them all which is against less then 55" TV's. Just about any 4K TV out there is severely deficient on picture quality and HDR below 55". If the panels are so dirt cheap why is the panel technology so poor. The 48" LG CX OLED is aimed squarely at a marketplace that is dying for a solution, instead of this bigger, high resolution displays is the only direction for this technology to progress into. That is plain lazy marketing from well known TV vendors. Gamers, small residence users want expensive smaller 4K sets that work well, not junk.

Obviously this is a 2nd half of the year model. LG only has the 65" model discussed online.

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

I believe the 48" OLED is more aimed at those who want a high quality TV at or below the $1000 price point. Something that none of the OLED manufacturers are willing to hit with a 55" model. All other TV OEM's eyes will be on the LG and Sony units to see how popular it will be before they too begin to offer one.

When you set aside convenience, price becomes the number one factor for consumers.

I think you're both right. There's a lot of people who don't want TVs 55" or larger, and express their frustration that premium 4K HDR TVs in sub-55" size classes hardly exist. Reasons vary from: it can't comfortably fit in their room, they feel the TV is too big for the intended purpose (like many gamers find it uncomfortable to game on larger screens), they prioritize quality (picture, build, sound...) over size, don't have an infinite budget to work with and will go with a better, smaller set over one that's bigger but provides inferior picture quality, etc.

Between LG and Sony's 48" OLEDs, and Sony's 49" X950H and such, I think it's a wonderful thing that people who are looking for TVs in this size class have more options now, both LCD and OLED.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Robert Zohn

Great visit from video experts Florian Friedrich FF Pictures GmbH and Claudio Ciacci, Head of TV Testing at Consumer Reports at @valueelectronics!

Michael isn’t doing your guys’ 8K mission any favors –

[Robert Zohn]

@Penton-Man, thanks for reposting the photos showing one of my meetings with Florian and Claudio, two of my favorite celebrity video experts.

Well, we agree on the first item on Michael's list. 8K resolution by itself is not a significant improved visual experience in typical viewing conditions. But the visual advantages of 8K can easily be seen and enjoyed at further distances then the eye chart for 20/20 vision would lead you to believe.

Regarding the rest of Michael's comments, I would suggest he read up on Florian Friedrich's research on the value and visual benefits of 8K resolution.

Even more important is the many advantage all 8K TVs get by all of the TV manufacturers' designing and employing the very best panel display technology and the very best and most powerful "machine learned" 8K video processing.

Now for the final word on the visual advantages of 8K vs 4K, tune into our June 10 - 11, 2020 TV Shootout Evaluation event where we'll be crowning the King of 4K TV and separately on day 2 the King of 8K TV and we'll be moving the two Kings butt next to each other so our panel of expert judges and presenters along with the attendees will be easily be able to analyze the picture quality differences.

We're having professional native 8K HDR content specially created for this 8K vs. 4K comparison at the 2020 TV Shootout. The native 8K content will be saved to a USB disc and then professionally compressed to 4K HDR which will also be saved onto a USB disc and played on the best in class 4K and 8K TVs. We'll also have a few select 4K and 8K test patterns and some beautiful Blu-ray and Kaleidoscope 4K HDR content.

[PaulGo]

Manufactures can only sell 8K TVs (and make a decent profit) only if they can show their 8K TVs are superior to 4K TVs. The easiest way of doing this is by putting superior technology in 8K TVs and withholding this technology from 4K TVs.

[Robert Zohn]

Two things to consider; one is that the higher-end display panels cost more to build as does newly developed bleeding edge processors that have more memory and new Silicon chipsets. So once you add packaging, marketing and supporting another 4K model plus the distribution mark-ups on the higher principle costs you would likely get a 4K TV at near the cost of offering it in 8K.

I do also agree with what you said, it's common for all equipment manufacturers to withhold easy to implement or of minimal cost to the lower end models. It's just another way they use to differentiate the models and although no one likes it that's the way it is in business.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Michael isn’t doing your guys’ 8K mission any favors –

Heh. I think when it comes to actual 8K content *itself*, leaving aside all the display factors which the manufacturers are using to weight their 8K sets as the superior screens vs 4K, then yeah: we're heading into the realm of vastly diminishing returns when it comes to what all those extra pixels can do for anything under, say, a 75" screen viewed from more than 6 feet away. And specifically shot demo videos showing this off is one thing but 8K versions of actual real world cinematography is something else, as 4K itself has proved.

As for Robert's shootout, the problem is that it won't be like for like: we won't have 4K TVs with the latest AI processing and the latest backlights and the latest improved colour rendering because the manufacturers don't want to do those any more, so most of the improvements that I'm sure people will be seeing will be in spite of the 8K resolution, not because of it.

[Robert Zohn]

The best way I can describe the higher resolution display improves the visual image here's what I see when I compare the current best 4K and 8K TVs side-by-side with various content.

The higher resolution gives the image a more natural film look and any anomalies in the image with the tiny 8K pixel structure, which is 1/4 of the size of 4K pixels that are also more tightly packed gives the overall image a cleaner look that is definitely more pleasing to my eyes and all if not most who view our showroom display wall of the best TVs currently available.

[Scottishguy]

Originally Posted by PaulGo

Manufactures can only sell 8K TVs (and make a decent profit) only if they can show their 8K TVs are superior to 4K TVs. The easiest way of doing this is by putting superior technology in 8K TVs and withholding this technology form 4K TVs.

Or just put it in good old fashioned VIVID