Best 4K Blu-ray Deals

Best Blu-ray Movie Deals, See All the Deals »
Top deals | New deals  
 All countries United States United Kingdom Canada Germany France Spain Italy Australia Japan
Dark Phoenix 4K (Blu-ray)
$29.99
 
Godzilla: King of the Monsters 4K (Blu-ray)
$29.99
 
Ghostbusters and Ghostbusters II 4K (Blu-ray)
$39.59
 
Hellboy 4K (Blu-ray)
$24.99
 
Batman vs. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 4K (Blu-ray)
$19.99
15 hrs ago
Alita: Battle Angel 4K + 3D (Blu-ray)
$29.96
 
Terminator 2: Judgment Day 4K (Blu-ray)
$7.50
 
Gremlins 4K (Blu-ray)
$25.99
 
The Shining 4K (Blu-ray)
$24.99
 
Hereditary 4K (Blu-ray)
$17.00
 
Pan's Labyrinth 4K (Blu-ray)
$24.99
 
Us 4K (Blu-ray)
$27.96
 
What's your next favorite movie?
Join our movie community to find out


Image from: Life of Pi (2012)

Go Back   Blu-ray Forum > Ultra HD Blu-ray and 4K > Ultra HD Blu-ray and 4K Hardware and Technology


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-30-2019, 08:25 PM   #21
IntelliVolume IntelliVolume is online now
Blu-ray Samurai
 
IntelliVolume's Avatar
 
May 2016
Default

I don't get why so many here are calling 12 feet seating distance "crazy far" -- I sit 12 feet from a 65 inch myself. "Crazy" to ME would be these reports of sitting like 5.5 feet from a 100-inch screen; 12 feet is a typical average living room distance to a display device kind of, isn't it? At least in American homes?

On the other hand, I did recently compare the regular Blu-ray version of Equalizer 2 with the UHD 4K version and didn't see much difference in terms of raw picture quality save for perhaps some enhanced detail on character closeups -- the HDR 4K version did seem brighter in certain places though, which makes sense (so the benefit could be assumed with HDR at least).

The comments someone shared regarding needing like an 80-inch-plus television display system at a distance of 12 feet or so may be absolutely IDEAL, but there's NO WAY I was affording a display that large nor would I be able to get one that big into our room based on the fact that it had to go into an entertainment unit on a wall that only had so much room to house large left/right speakers, a subwoofer and media center for our disc collection...

Sometimes compromises have to be made.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2019, 08:30 PM   #22
IntelliVolume IntelliVolume is online now
Blu-ray Samurai
 
IntelliVolume's Avatar
 
May 2016
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 78deluxe View Post
Not at 12 feet on a 55 inch, buy a different room.

You will see a difference in the way the picture is displayed but honestly save your money and wait until you can convince your wife to buy a bigger tv (or put it in a room that has a closer viewing distance. 12ft is way too far for a 55 inch tv.

You are correct that no-one actually watches a 55 from 4 feet away, 6-8 feet though is very reasonable. I'm 8 from a 65.
To put this into perspective, we were previously watching a 50 inch rear projection set (1080p) from 12 feet and had no perceivable issues in terms of thinking it was "WAY too small"...it DEFINITELY could have been upsized, yes, but to be honest poor-looking DVD material (of which we unfortunately still own a lot of) fared better at such a distance on such a screen, as much of the compression noise and artifacting was hidden better, if that makes any sense...
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2019, 08:32 PM   #23
Lee A Stewart Lee A Stewart is offline
Member
 
Jan 2019
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IntelliVolume View Post
I don't get why so many here are calling 12 feet seating distance "crazy far" -- I sit 12 feet from a 65 inch myself. "Crazy" to ME would be these reports of sitting like 5.5 feet from a 100-inch screen; 12 feet is a typical average living room distance to a display device kind of, isn't it? At least in American homes?

On the other hand, I did recently compare the regular Blu-ray version of Equalizer 2 with the UHD 4K version and didn't see much difference in terms of raw picture quality save for perhaps some enhanced detail on character closeups -- the HDR 4K version did seem brighter in certain places though, which makes sense (so the benefit could be assumed with HDR at least).

The comments someone shared regarding needing like an 80-inch-plus television display system at a distance of 12 feet or so may be absolutely IDEAL, but there's NO WAY I was affording a display that large nor would I be able to get one that big into our room based on the fact that it had to go into an entertainment unit on a wall that only had so much room to house large left/right speakers, a subwoofer and media center for our disc collection...

Sometimes compromises have to be made.
Actually it's about 9 feet. It's called the Lechner distance, named after Bernard J. Lechner an electronics engineer and formerly vice president, RCA Laboratories. He measured a vast number of living rooms and found 9 feet was the average distance from the back of a couch/chair to the TV screen.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2019, 08:32 PM   #24
Geoff D Geoff D is online now
Blu-ray King
 
Geoff D's Avatar
 
Feb 2009
Swanage, Engerland
417
1616
5
12
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IntelliVolume View Post
I don't get why so many here are calling 12 feet seating distance "crazy far" -- I sit 12 feet from a 65 inch myself. "Crazy" to ME would be these reports of sitting like 5.5 feet from a 100-inch screen; 12 feet is a typical average living room distance to a display device kind of, isn't it? At least in American homes?

On the other hand, I did recently compare the regular Blu-ray version of Equalizer 2 with the UHD 4K version and didn't see much difference in terms of raw picture quality save for perhaps some enhanced detail on character closeups -- the HDR 4K version did seem brighter in certain places though, which makes sense (so the benefit could be assumed with HDR at least).

The comments someone shared regarding needing like an 80-inch-plus television display system at a distance of 12 feet or so may be absolutely IDEAL, but there's NO WAY I was affording a display that large nor would I be able to get one that big into our room based on the fact that it had to go into an entertainment unit on a wall that only had so much room to house large left/right speakers, a subwoofer and media center for our disc collection...

Sometimes compromises have to be made.
They do indeed, but the point is that 4K detail is so fine that viewing distance relative to size is crucial in properly appreciating it. There's no beating about that particular bush, which is what makes all this "fake 4K" whining that people do so utterly comical to me; I'd wager that most such complainers are watching on a 43" TV from the other side of the room, thus negating the very thing that people think they're being gypped out of with 2K upscales.
  Reply With Quote
Thanks given by:
IntelliVolume (01-30-2019)
Old 01-30-2019, 08:39 PM   #25
IntelliVolume IntelliVolume is online now
Blu-ray Samurai
 
IntelliVolume's Avatar
 
May 2016
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart View Post
Actually it's about 9 feet. It's called the Lechner distance, named after Bernard J. Lechner an electronics engineer and formerly vice president, RCA Laboratories. He measured a vast number of living rooms and found 9 feet was the average distance from the back of a couch/chair to the TV screen.
Well, I've read a lot of online articles that argue 12 feet is a decent "average" spot from where folks view their displays; of course, this is probably reflective of everyday cable TV viewing and such, and not hardcore film watching in dark environments (as we fanatics on this site engage in, LOL) but still...

At any rate, if I'm three feet beyond what the average distance should be from my display, so be it; I can't re-arrange this room nor can I fit/afford a screen as big as in excess of 80 inches. I still have a problem with people saying 12 feet is "crazy far" when they're watching a 110 inch screen from like five something feet...
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2019, 08:40 PM   #26
IntelliVolume IntelliVolume is online now
Blu-ray Samurai
 
IntelliVolume's Avatar
 
May 2016
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff D View Post
They do indeed, but the point is that 4K detail is so fine that viewing distance relative to size is crucial in properly appreciating it. There's no beating about that particular bush, which is what makes all this "fake 4K" whining that people do so utterly comical to me; I'd wager that most such complainers are watching on a 43" TV from the other side of the room, thus negating the very thing that people think they're being gypped out of with 2K upscales.
Fair enough; though there are other factors, as we have been discussing, that come into play with regard to the 4K format/resolution, such as HDR -- which CAN be argued CAN be appreciated from a further-from-ideal distance.
  Reply With Quote
Thanks given by:
Geoff D (01-30-2019)
Old 01-30-2019, 08:45 PM   #27
Geoff D Geoff D is online now
Blu-ray King
 
Geoff D's Avatar
 
Feb 2009
Swanage, Engerland
417
1616
5
12
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IntelliVolume View Post
Fair enough; though there are other factors, as we have been discussing, that come into play with regard to the 4K format/resolution, such as HDR -- which CAN be argued CAN be appreciated from a further-from-ideal distance.
Absolutely! HDR is the leveller, it can be appreciated from near or far, I just wanted to get that rant out of my system. But another thing with HDR is that not all TVs are created equal, and you often have to put in a fair bit of moolah to get truly decent HDR performance at whatever size, though it's often the case that sub 55" sizes are quite poorly represented with HDR.
  Reply With Quote
Thanks given by:
Al_The_Strange (01-30-2019), IntelliVolume (01-30-2019)
Old 01-30-2019, 08:52 PM   #28
IntelliVolume IntelliVolume is online now
Blu-ray Samurai
 
IntelliVolume's Avatar
 
May 2016
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff D View Post
Absolutely! HDR is the leveller, it can be appreciated from near or far, I just wanted to get that rant out of my system. But another thing with HDR is that not all TVs are created equal, and you often have to put in a fair bit of moolah to get truly decent HDR performance at whatever size, though it's often the case that sub 55" sizes are quite poorly represented with HDR.
Indeed...

Here's something I wanted to get off my chest, as well, LOL: In evaluating the UHD Blu-ray of the aforementioned Equalizer 2, I DID find that closeup shots of certain characters -- such as Denzel's McCall and the old man he becomes friendly with and whom he routinely Lyfts to the copy center -- were rendered with stunning detail and clarity, perhaps even more so than on the 1080p Blu-ray variant...so there may be an argument for the DETAIL on 4K transfers even at MY seating distance being superior (I suppose this would come down to the individual transfer).
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2019, 08:53 PM   #29
Lee A Stewart Lee A Stewart is offline
Member
 
Jan 2019
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IntelliVolume View Post
Well, I've read a lot of online articles that argue 12 feet is a decent "average" spot from where folks view their displays; of course, this is probably reflective of everyday cable TV viewing and such, and not hardcore film watching in dark environments (as we fanatics on this site engage in, LOL) but still...

At any rate, if I'm three feet beyond what the average distance should be from my display, so be it; I can't re-arrange this room nor can I fit/afford a screen as big as in excess of 80 inches. I still have a problem with people saying 12 feet is "crazy far" when they're watching a 110 inch screen from like five something feet...
In a perfect world . . .

The content being displayed has an effect on the optimum seating distance. You don't want to see the pixels that make up the image. Viewing standard definition content on a high def TV isn't going to look as good as high definition content. Doing so will reveal the pixels at the optimum seating distance for watching Hi Def. So you need to sit further back.

The closer you sit from your display, the more immersive the experience is.

Just as an experiment, put on your best looking content then place a chair at say 5 feet away (measure from the back of the chair where your eyes will be to the front of the display). Watch for about 10 minutes. Then move the chair back to 6 feet - watch or another 10 minutes and repeat until you are sitting in your normal position. It will explain everything.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2019, 09:03 PM   #30
IntelliVolume IntelliVolume is online now
Blu-ray Samurai
 
IntelliVolume's Avatar
 
May 2016
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart View Post
In a perfect world . . .

The content being displayed has an effect on the optimum seating distance. You don't want to see the pixels that make up the image. Viewing standard definition content on a high def TV isn't going to look as good as high definition content. Doing so will reveal the pixels at the optimum seating distance for watching Hi Def. So you need to sit further back.

The closer you sit from your display, the more immersive the experience is.

Just as an experiment, put on your best looking content then place a chair at say 5 feet away (measure from the back of the chair where your eyes will be to the front of the display). Watch for about 10 minutes. Then move the chair back to 6 feet - watch or another 10 minutes and repeat until you are sitting in your normal position. It will explain everything.
Oh, I totally get all that -- and I agree that sitting closer to a display will be more immersive. No doubt.

The point I was trying to make -- and which you touched on -- was that for me, personally, I still watch a lot of standard def content (DVD), much of which hasn't been mastered all that well, and viewing these discs on my 4K display at a 12 foot distance STILL shows imperfections in the transfers, which bothers me. I can't imagine how bad these discs would look if we would have gotten the 75 or 82 inch version of our Samsung NU8000, STILL at 12 feet...our last display was a 50 inch Sony SXRD 1080p set, at the same viewing distance, and DVDs looked better because the distance was able to hide a lot of the compression issues and such, especially when considering the screen size-to-distance ratio in that situation.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2019, 09:15 PM   #31
Lee A Stewart Lee A Stewart is offline
Member
 
Jan 2019
Default

I sit 6 feet away from my 55" HDTV (Panasonic Plasma). This limits my choice of content. I watch HD via streaming (Netflix & Hulu), BD and OTA. I also have a large DVD collection of which 99+% are "enhanced for 16x9 TVs" which raises the picture quality substantially over a normal DVD which I have trouble watching. I can't watch SD via streaming. The PQ is just too low and gives me a headache after about 15 minutes so I avoid it.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2019, 09:24 PM   #32
IntelliVolume IntelliVolume is online now
Blu-ray Samurai
 
IntelliVolume's Avatar
 
May 2016
Default

I don't do any streaming, either. All viewing is done via physical media (DVD and Blu-ray Discs).

I still, unfortunately, own a bunch of non-anamorphic DVD titles that don't fare well as scaled by my UHD BD player to 2160, to say the least; we try to avoid watching such monstrosities unless it's something we REALLY want to see at a given moment (during the holidays, we watch two DVD releases that were never given widescreen anamorphic transfers -- The Ref (Touchstone/Disney) and Home Alone 2 (Fox; actually, on this title, I'm not positive if there's a better anamorphic version in the DVD format...we own the original non-anamorphic release) -- and these are barely watchable when I blow them up to their proper aspect ratios via my UHD BD player and after the player then scales them to 2160...total disasters in the making, LOL).

Little by little, we will begin replacing some of our favorite DVDs with the UHD BD versions (if available), but I'm just glad I don't sit closer to my 65 inch display right now (or run an 82 inch or so display at this distance) while still viewing standard definition content...especially stuff that wasn't mastered great.

Last edited by IntelliVolume; 01-30-2019 at 09:37 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2019, 09:28 PM   #33
Penton-Man Penton-Man is offline
Retired Hollywood Insider
 
Penton-Man's Avatar
 
Apr 2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by goeagles5039 View Post
So the HDR content should be noticeable at any viewing distance right? Also the spot I normally sit is far away but I can sit other spots that are closer. I have a sectional.
unless you have something like cataract formation, for watching HDR content, HDR is essentially viewing distance independent as compared to resolution, e.g. from David - https://www.tvtechnology.com/show-ne...t-happens-next

if youíre unfamiliar, David was involved with the parameters for the development of BT.2020 - https://www.researchgate.net/profile/David_Wood40

P.S.
Even without HDR content I would hope that the processing in a 2019 Vizio is superior to that of an 11 year old 55 inch Samsung LED TV
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2019, 09:39 PM   #34
Lee A Stewart Lee A Stewart is offline
Member
 
Jan 2019
Default

I am looking at my DVD collection and my eyes are drawn to three box sets, none of which are anamorphic: Seasons 1 & 2 of The Lost World (season 3 is anamorphic) and The Magnificent Seven (TV show). They are the only non-anamorphic DVDs I own. I never watch them since I rearranged my living room to allow me to sit closer to the TV (from 9 feet [LOL] to 6 feet). Will I ever watch them again? I can't say. Probably not. When I bought them I had a 30" HDTV. They looked fine. Now they don't. Why don't I get rid of them? Nope . . . they are part of my collection. It only gets bigger . . . not smaller.
  Reply With Quote
Thanks given by:
IntelliVolume (01-30-2019)
Old 01-30-2019, 09:57 PM   #35
StingingVelvet StingingVelvet is offline
Blu-ray Grand Duke
 
StingingVelvet's Avatar
 
Jan 2014
Philadelphia, PA
275
1873
146
19
69
Default

HDR should make it worth it at any distance IMO.

That said I am sure it's a better upgrade at at least a 30 degree FOV, and a 40 degree FOV is even better. Screen size isn't really the most important thing, FOV is. For 55" a 30 degree FOV is 7.5 feet, while 40 degree FOV is 5.5 feet.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2019, 11:13 PM   #36
goeagles5039 goeagles5039 is offline
Blu-ray Guru
 
goeagles5039's Avatar
 
Jul 2008
Wakanda
35
178
63
Default

So to everyone that replied to this topic, should I get the 55 inch p series Vizio or just wait? I probably won’t be able to get anything bigger but I don’t want to waste my money either.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2019, 11:48 PM   #37
Wingman1977 Wingman1977 is offline
Blu-ray Champion
 
Wingman1977's Avatar
 
Mar 2008
The empire state
249
982
23
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by goeagles5039 View Post
So to everyone that replied to this topic, should I get the 55 inch p series Vizio or just wait? I probably won’t be able to get anything bigger but I don’t want to waste my money either.
Hang on (if you can) to see if you can get a bigger size. A 55" at 12 ft viewing distance would be a waste of money IMO.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2019, 11:52 PM   #38
Lee A Stewart Lee A Stewart is offline
Member
 
Jan 2019
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by goeagles5039 View Post
So to everyone that replied to this topic, should I get the 55 inch p series Vizio or just wait? I probably wonít be able to get anything bigger but I donít want to waste my money either.
Is there something wrong with your current TV? What is motivating you to consider the Vizio?
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2019, 12:08 AM   #39
goeagles5039 goeagles5039 is offline
Blu-ray Guru
 
goeagles5039's Avatar
 
Jul 2008
Wakanda
35
178
63
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart View Post
Is there something wrong with your current TV? What is motivating you to consider the Vizio?
My tv is fine but I have been future proofing and have some 4k movies. I have saved up some money to get a new tv because I have wanted a 4k tv. My wife doesnít want anything bigger than 55 inch I donít think she will ever let us get a bigger one so thatís what I have to get. I am a little disappointed because I have future proofed some of the newer releases hoping to get a 4k display but now it sounds it will be a waste of money.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2019, 12:33 AM   #40
LettuceJUMP LettuceJUMP is online now
Active Member
 
Jan 2010
2
Default

I’ve only posted a handful of times although I read the forums every day but this topic caught my attention. Probably because I’m going through a similar situation.

My previous TV’s were 82” DLP 1080p Toshiba then 70” Sharp 4K (non HDR).

Then I said to my wife, I want top quality and settled on the 65” OLED B6 from two years ago. I wanted something to really impress me and my family/friends.
It is a beautiful TV, and I enjoy the black levels, detail and HDR...BUT

I sit 12 feet away from TV. From 12 feet away there is barely any distinguishing the difference between 720p and 1080p let alone 4K. So I have been searching 75” TV’s the past month to figure out a tv that will give me good quality, (LG/Sony/Samsung) with great hdr and picture, and even dolby vision like i have now.

For those of us with setups far from the tv it is a predicament. I’d love to buy the 77” OLED but it is a small fortune. But truthfully, if you are 10-12 feet away, go big, even if it means dropping picture quality and/or features. For me, bigger is better. Also, I do not have a super dark room so will look for a brighter TV as well.
  Reply With Quote
Reply
Go Back   Blu-ray Forum > Ultra HD Blu-ray and 4K > Ultra HD Blu-ray and 4K Hardware and Technology


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:51 PM.