Sony Officially Unveils 84-Inch 4K TV

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sep 21, 2010
375
0
18,790
1
I wouldn't mind Sony bragging about how they "lead the way" in all things 4K if the television they're showing off actually displayed at the same resolution as the camera they namedrop records at. Would the extra 256 columns of pixels have killed them?
 

back_by_demand

Splendid
BANNED
Jul 16, 2009
4,821
0
22,780
0
If Sony were to match this with a 4K Bluray player and start churning out 4K Bluray movies that are being shown in those cinemas then this would be a step in the right direction, put seriously the early adopters are going to be hosed on the cost.
 

mrmike_49

Distinguished
Feb 2, 2010
709
0
19,060
34

bison88

Distinguished
May 24, 2009
618
0
18,980
0
[citation][nom]mrmike_49[/nom]Is that true ?? Both NBC and CBS use 1080i, while ABC and Fox use 720P, AFAIK ()[/citation]


Yes, 1080i is roughly the same bandwidth as 720p. However, 720p is far superior to 1080i (although this can be debated). You can look up the difference to see why, but the lack of true 1080p content lacks because Cable systems just can't handle it, even compressing the hell out of it, it would just use up too much frequency spaces which would mean they could broadcast far fewer channels.

I'd say we'd be lucky to see 1080p content in 5 years. I wouldn't expect 4K or 8K to hit TV's for far longer than that, unless some major investments are done between now and 2017.
 

goodguy713

Distinguished
Oct 23, 2009
1,177
0
19,460
94
[citation][nom]bison88[/nom]Yes, 1080i is roughly the same bandwidth as 720p. However, 720p is far superior to 1080i (although this can be debated). You can look up the difference to see why, but the lack of true 1080p content lacks because Cable systems just can't handle it, even compressing the hell out of it, it would just use up too much frequency spaces which would mean they could broadcast far fewer channels.I'd say we'd be lucky to see 1080p content in 5 years. I wouldn't expect 4K or 8K to hit TV's for far longer than that, unless some major investments are done between now and 2017.[/citation]

more like 2020 .. another factor is that you can stream 1080p content but you need at least a 1.5 2.0 MB sec data rate just to be able to watch it fluidly over the internet most people are still in the 3 Mbit range 12Mbit is good for 720p but not reliable enough for 1080p content .. 18Mb service its reliable on but most people dont have access to something that fast and can also be cost prohibitive.. considering comcast has 100Mbit connection speeds but at 200 or so a month with a 250 GB cap sounds like ISP and Cable TV providers really just want you to have limited features .. and are not interested in taking on the extra capital investments needed to make something like this work .. Im kinda leaning more towards WI DI taking a bigger step into the Internet data pool and possibly seeing greater proliferation with higher data rates .. i think the biggest road block for ISP's is the physical need to maintain a physical cable network to every location in its service area where as with WIDI you could build a few broadcast hubs and disperse them through out the area of service or even piggy back on cell network towers. Once data rates catch up with physical transmission lines then your more likely to see greater proliferation of high resolution images .. considering 4k video is ruffly 4 times that of 1080p you would need at least a 8 to 10 MB connection to be able to stream it with out pause..

 

back_by_demand

Splendid
BANNED
Jul 16, 2009
4,821
0
22,780
0
[citation][nom]bison88[/nom]the lack of true 1080p content lacks because Cable systems just can't handle it, even compressing the hell out of it[/citation]
Surely the new draft MPEG compression story the other day could lead to 4K videos using the same bandwidth as normal HD, and TV isn't where the investment will come from, it will the premium movie channels and the ordinary TV comes after. People will be happy to watch a grinding weekly TV show in lower def, but they will insist on watching Avengers 3 in 4K and will pay through the nose to subscribe to a movie channel to get it.
 

back_by_demand

Splendid
BANNED
Jul 16, 2009
4,821
0
22,780
0
[citation][nom]RADIO_ACTIVE[/nom]I wonder if you went on Sony's facebook page and asked for a free one, if they would give a you a custom dragon tv lol[/citation]
Try it, if it works let us know, pics or it didn't happen
 

DuBZzz00

Honorable
Aug 22, 2012
35
0
10,530
0
[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]If Sony were to match this with a 4K Bluray player and start churning out 4K Bluray movies that are being shown in those cinemas then this would be a step in the right direction, put seriously the early adopters are going to be hosed on the cost.[/citation]

They already make 4k monitors and projectors now your going to have to mortage your house and take 10 loans to get 1 seeing they are $35,000 and up to $500,000.00. Here is a link to a list of 4k monitors and projectors. Now start Saving!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4K_resolution#List_of_4K_monitors_and_projectors
 

glasssplinter

Distinguished
Feb 22, 2006
111
0
18,680
0
5 years later crapple unveils the first of its kind revolutionary 84" 4k tv. Sues all companies that already had a physical tv out the door years before.
 

drwho1

Distinguished
Jan 10, 2010
1,272
0
19,310
15
I guess it will take 10 years +/- for 4K to be "affordable" and for a "fair" amount of content to be available.
Come to think of it, about the same time that took for HD to be accepted by the masses.

PS: I still prefer DVD's to Bluray for most movies given that few movies actually benefit from Bluray.
 

techy74

Distinguished
Oct 17, 2011
68
0
18,630
0
drwho1 08/30/2012 12:51 PM Hide Insert quote.
Report
--1+ .I guess it will take 10 years +/- for 4K to be "affordable" and for a "fair" amount of content to be available.
Come to think of it, about the same time that took for HD to be accepted by the masses.

PS: I still prefer DVD's to Bluray for most movies given that few movies actually benefit from Bluray.
..


How can you say you prefer DVD over Blu ray. There is no comparison. Itls not hard totell the difference between the 2 formats, on a large Plasma or LCD screen. DVD is just too low res.
 

nevertell

Distinguished
Oct 18, 2009
335
0
18,780
0
They should make a model that has 4 DVI/DP inputs so you can drive the panel with a bog standart gtx 680/7970, or a few of them. You could at least game at 4K.
 

CaedenV

Splendid
[citation][nom]soldier37[/nom]Too bad most broadcast HDTV now is still in 720p. Wont see 4K anything on TV for at least 5 more years if then. But hey they can always make computer displays in 4K waiting on that next before the TVs. Want to replace my 2560 x 1600 30 inch display with one!![/citation]
... people still watch broadcast TV and cable?
 

Skippy27

Distinguished
Nov 23, 2009
366
0
18,860
40
@bison - it is quite easy for any decent TV to upconvert 1080i content to 1080p. The data is there so there is no "guess work", it is just a matter of how they process it.

And I would disagree that 720p is far superior to 1080i. I would however agree if you said it is hard to distinguish the difference between 720p and 1080i in non-fast moving scenes. In scenes with little movement, 1080i would still look better.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Thats cool and all but until Sharp can do this I won't even bother checking up the price tag for these.
 

mrmike_49

Distinguished
Feb 2, 2010
709
0
19,060
34
[citation][nom]CaedenV[/nom]... people still watch broadcast TV and cable?[/citation]

OTA broadcasts almost always look better than cable/sat re-broadcasts of your local channels
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS