Question I'm 100% lost and need some advice please

Killkennyza

Standard Member
Joined
May 24, 2018
Messages
8
Reaction score
3
Points
3
Age
39
Location
London
Hi everyone,

I've recently purchased a new house, and because I was living with a friend before, I need to buy a new tv for the first time in about 6 years.

I have been reading up a lot on reviews and the new tv tech, and to be honest I have got completely lost.

My original budget was around £600, and I was seconds away from buying a £1500 telly last night. So it's safe to say that I don't have a clue what I'm doing :)

My viewing habits currently would be dominated by Netflix and Amazon Prime. I've recently bought my friend's PS4 for £50 to see if I use it enough for the investment into a Pro. So my HDR usage is limited, but I would like it there so that I can use it in the future if needed. I'm not intending to use sky, but I might get a subscription to NowTV.

I would be roughly 3m away from the TV, so I'm thinking 65" would make sense. Here are some of the options I was looking at. Ideally I would like to stick to about £1k.

Samsung QE65Q6F (This is well over the budget, but if you are telling me I have to have it, then that would be good to know :) )
Samsung QE55Q7F (Obviously this is 55", but the specs look really good. Would it be worth going smaller for this?)
Samsung UE65MU7000
Sony Bravia KD65XE7003
Panasonic TX-65EX700B
Panasonic TX-65EX600B (Not sure what the difference between this and the one above to be honest.)
Hisense H65N6800
Samsung UE65MU6120

And of course if there is anything that I don't have in my list that I should be looking at, please let me know.

Thanks very much in advance for any advice anyone has for me!
 
HDR isn't just something a TV supports or not sadly, there are numerous attributes that contribute to a HDR picture worth having and it carries quite a premium.

So basically you need to decide whether to go for a smaller, more capable TV with HDR like the Samsung Q7 or Sony XE9005. These two models have decent HDR. Alternatively the LG B7 or C7 OLED that can be had now with discount codes at £1350 which will give you good HDR and thats at 55".

If you don't want to place any importance on HDR and I certainly wouldn't if you don't currently having a plethora of HDR sources you are going to use, then you can look at larger models which will still be very good televisions for SDR, but lack the HDR hardware needed to reproduce HDR pictures to a decent standard.

At 3m away you view too far to benefit from UHD, optimally you want to aim to view around 1.2m from a 65" TV and 1m from a 55" to see the extra detail compared to FHD. At 2.4m and 2m you won't be able to tell a difference.

To put this into real life practice, I own a 65" UHD TV and I can barely tell a difference when Amazon instant video switches up from FHD to UHD. I have good vision.

With that aside, at 3m away on a 65" UHD TV poorer quality sources such as Now TV will look pretty soft, whilst on a 55" TV they will look better. Whilst a 65" TV will also make better sources, including broadcast 1080p TV and streams look better at 3m away.

I guess you need to decide what quality content you will use with the TV, whether you have immediate plans to use HDR content such as HDR games, HDR UHD Blu-Rays and streaming in HDR. Then you also need to decide which screen size you go for, the larger the more detail you get from a good source, the more immersion too, but you lose the ability to play HDR to a decent level. Smaller the better poorer quality content will look, but HDR will start to look like its worth having.

Then you want to figure out if you can adjust seating distance to benefit from UHD, so when you do play back that material you are able to view close enough to benefit from it.

Note that UHD and HDR are separate entities, UHD relates to the resolution and is dependant on how close you view to see extra detail.

Whilst HDR can be benefited from regardless of how close you view since its improvements are in other areas outside of resolution.

Some threads you may find useful:
Should I upgrade? - UHD vs FHD
My best value TVs, 2017 Edition
 
Wow, okay. Thanks for the detailed answer! I must say it's not what I was expecting.

To make sure I have it correct, I just want to outline what I've taken away from this...

HDR is not a priority at the moment. Until I invest in a PS4 Pro, there aren't any games that I would be able to play that would benefit from that tech, and the only other content I would have access to would be the limited lineup on Netflix and Amazon. So I'm pretty much discounting this completely at the moment.

Next up would be UHD vs FHD. From what you said it seems like UHD shouldn't really be a factor either given the viewing distance that I have in the room. Having said that, if my usual viewing distance is going to be between 2.7 and 3m, then I would assume that bigger would be better. Is this a fair assumption? In which case 65" would be the right choice, and then it would be easier for me to arrange things to reduce the viewing distance when playing games or watching UHD content?

The issue here, is that to be honest I'm struggling to find a tv that *doesn't* support UHD and HDR(I understand that there is more to HDR that it being supported or not). This raises a couple questions:

1. I'm I being crazy/blind or are there some out there that have no UHD or no HDR that you think would be better?
2. If HDR is now pretty much standard, would it now be a case of just ignoring the bad points that relate to HDR in reviews?
3. Is there a tv that springs to mind that would tick most of these boxes?

Thank you again so much for replying! Sounds like I was going to spend a lot of money on something I wasn't really going to be able to get the benefit out of.
 
Next up would be UHD vs FHD. From what you said it seems like UHD shouldn't really be a factor either given the viewing distance that I have in the room. Having said that, if my usual viewing distance is going to be between 2.7 and 3m, then I would assume that bigger would be better. Is this a fair assumption? In which case 65" would be the right choice, and then it would be easier for me to arrange things to reduce the viewing distance when playing games or watching UHD content?
The chart is a good guideline to get the most out of a resolution yes, like most people you are about optimal for FHD on a 65" which is great, it should mean to you that with FHD sources you get a lot more detail than you did before. Since a lot of content is still in FHD then that's only a good thing despite being too far away to benefit from UHD. If for example you used mostly sources that weren't even HD then I'd say go for a smaller model.

1. I'm I being crazy/blind or are there some out there that have no UHD or no HDR that you think would be better?
There is the 55" LG A7 OLED but it has limited availability and only in 55".

2. If HDR is now pretty much standard, would it now be a case of just ignoring the bad points that relate to HDR in reviews?
Yes, especially when your budget doesn't permit buying a 65" model with HDR worth having, just buy the TV on the face of it being an UHD model with the ability to at least accept a HDR signal.

3. Is there a tv that springs to mind that would tick most of these boxes?
There are various good options at 65". Some of which you already mentioned. A TV like the Hisense N6800 is priced very well at the moment and is a lot of TV for the money. It has been reviewed well here on AVF and received a recommended award when it was priced at £1100. Now since it can be had for as little as £800 if you use cashback and discount codes, that makes it even better value. This TV is plenty for most people and the perfect stop gap until HDR becomes more popular.
Hisense H65N6800 4K LED TV Review

Then if you want to spend more, there are TVs in the mid range like the Samsung MU7000 which builds on the Hisense with a 120hz panel which is useful if you are someone who wants to use motion enhancements, useless for gaming but most useful for sport when it comes to clearing up blur and judder from a source. If you do not use motion enhancements though, its questionable whether its worth spending more than the Hisense mentioned previously. Here is a review of the 55" MU7000, the 65" will be the same: Samsung UE55MU7000 4K LED TV Review

A small step up from the Samsung the most serious addition to TVs is the introduction of better anti reflection filters, if you have a room with windows or lights often reflecting on to the TV, this can be a dealbreaker. TVs like the Samsung MU8000/MU9000, Sony X85xx series and Panasonic EX750 all have good anti reflection filters to deal with this light better. Here is a review of one of those TVs, again in 65" but will be the same at 65" Sony KD-55XE8596 4K LED TV Review

Now if you can stretch your budget to £1500 then you may well be able to get a good balance between good HDR and also good SDR quality in the Sony XE9005. If you did want to spend this much, I'd recommend this TV for someone who first wants a taste of what HDR to look like, but of course your value in spending this much would depend on how important you regard HDR.

Sony BRAVIA KD-65XE9005 HDR 4K TV Review
 
Just wanted to say thanks again for all your advice.

In the end I've decided to go for the Hisense H65N6800. I got Richer Sounds to drop their price to £820, after I told them about the Curry's deal at £799. I hate Curry's with a passion, and they only give 2 years guarantee, so this seems pretty fair.

Thanks loads!
 
Just wanted to say thanks again for all your advice.

In the end I've decided to go for the Hisense H65N6800. I got Richer Sounds to drop their price to £820, after I told them about the Curry's deal at £799. I hate Curry's with a passion, and they only give 2 years guarantee, so this seems pretty fair.

Thanks loads!
Great, hope you love the tv, quite a bargain indeed and avoiding Currys is only ever a good thing.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom