Answered Is it Worth Buying a 4K HDR TV if you already own a non HDR 4K TV ?

haujobbz

Prominent Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2003
Messages
2,518
Reaction score
239
Points
551
Age
45
Location
UK
I currently own a Sony KDL 49x8505B 4K which I bought over 2 years ago , its a 8Bit panel and the picture is great and i also love the 3D , but I love technological advancements and I am very tempted to buy a HDR 10 TV set by Samsung or Sony ?

But the questions are: Is it really worth it and is it going to be a big improvement in PQ over my current tv which wows me or is it more subtle , a few have mentioned that it not only improves colour and brightness but it also improves detail and dynamic range ? I'm also dissapointed these new sets don't have 3D as I really enjoy that option :rolleyes:

I have also noticed that some HDR TVs are way too bright in HDR mode , like dynamic picture settings on steroids with an artificial allmost cartoon like appearance , :confused:

Thanks all ;)
 
Currently using a Philips 55PUK7150/12 which is 4K and passive 3D, no HDR. Here are my thoughts.
You should be able to find an LG from 2016 range that does both HDR and 3D, though I'm not sure if they did any in 49'.
For best HDR I believe you need a display technology that can deliver high contrast levels without too much brightness such as OLED.
Unless you are happy to keep upgrading your TV every couple of years I would wait some more if only to see where HDR is going. In my part of the world there is currently very few 4K content and even fewer HDR ones. Moreover I find those 4K Blu-rays are overpriced.
If you are lucky some manufacturer might bring back 3D in a couple of years once they sorted out and absorbed the cost of HDR development.
 
But the questions are: Is it really worth it and is it going to be a big improvement in PQ over my current tv which wows me or is it more subtle , a few have mentioned that it not only improves colour and brightness but it also improves detail and dynamic range ? I'm also dissapointed these new sets don't have 3D as I really enjoy that option :rolleyes:

Strictly speaking HDR is increased contrast by pushing up the peak brightness used for highlights.

However, it seems to be being used as a platform to incorporate other improvements, notably a wider colour gamut. Presumably if you're going to the hassle of changing the gamma function you might as well make other big changes to picture standards at the same time.

It's a bigger change on the display side than 4K.

Big changes are expensive and hard to implement though. The new top of the range TVs will support more of the 'HDR' standards than the current ones, and I'd expect that to continue for years to come.

Something like the current Sony XD85 supports very little HDR. A slightly wider colour space but no local dimming ability for brighter highlights at all.

HDR definitely looks promising, but now may not be the time to buy - especially if you'd be looking at models at the same position in the range as your current TV is.

On the other hand, 3D is looking like it might be dead in 2017 so if that's important to you then it may well be worth picking up one of the 2016 higher end models that have both 3D and HDR. LG's OLEDs are supposed to have very good 3D so maybe a 55" C6 or E6.
 
I recently made the 'forced' move from a Samsung 51 inch E6500 Plasma with 3D to the LG OLED 55E6 due a screen fault on the Samsung.

I was happy with the Samsung plasma picture quality and the 3D (active but nearly cross talk free) and would not have made a move if it was not for the fault.

I demo'ed various sets but was driven towards the LG OLED due to it's outstanding 3D which was important for me but I was also interested in what 4K could deliver.

As part of the move I purchased a X Box One S and a couple of 4K discs (Dawn of Justice & X-Men Apocalypse which are supposedly real 4K masters). Sitting 7 feet from the TV I find a very slight improvement. So slight it's not really important. If you pause it and look close then it's more noticeable but it's negligible to me on a 'moving' picture. I was able to switch between the 4K in the X Box and the standard blu-ray in a LG Blu-Ray player for a scene by scene comparison.

I was also able to compare the 3D version of Dawn of Justice (rented on disc from Lovefilm) and 3D was a more enjoyable experience than the 4K.

Based on the 2 discs I've viewed, 4K/HDR is an overrated experience and I won't be purchasing any more. If I had to choose between 4K and 3D on the OLED then the 3D experience wins hands down and I'm currently buying a lot of secondhand 3D blu rays :)
 
Last edited:
I was also able to compare the 3D version of Dawn of Justice (rented on disc from Lovefilm) and 3D was a more enjoyable experience than the 4K.

Based on the 2 discs I've viewed, 4K/HDR is an overrated experience and I won't be purchasing any more. If I had to choose between 4K and 3D on the OLED then the 3D experience wins hands down and I'm currently buying a lot of secondhand 3D blu rays :)

My experience is exactly the same as yours with my new LG E6 55" TV; though with a Samsung 8500 UHD player.

UHD discs show a slight improvement over standard Blu-ray; but the 3D is jaw dropping. I'm amazed every time I put a 3D disc in my player.

I can totally recommend the LG OLED 4K TV's; but only for 3D and (ironically) not for 4K!
 
If 3D is important to you, Look at the E6 OLED as that has one of the best 3D performance of any 4k HDR TV.

HDR itself is far more than just a 'brighter' image and far more of a step up than 4k is from 1080p and I would argue more than HD was to SD. 'Good' HDR, not the HDR offered by 'budget' 4k TV's which at most only offer a bit more 'brightness', is impressive and that's with screens offering at least the minimum standards for HDR10.

Peak Brightness is just 1 aspect but its part of the aspect governing Contrast Ratio. At the other end is black level which is equally as important. Not only does HDR offer more lifelike contrast ratio with fantastic specular highlights but it also adds details in the dark areas. Instead of black blobs in the shadows, you now get more definition of the objects in those shadows. HDR also has a wider colour gamut too. Colour is more than just the value(s) of RGB but also has luminescence (brightness). A white piece of paper for example and white hot steel may have exactly the same RGB value but White hot steel has far more luminescence. Sparks (like electrical or grinding metal) and lightning, Fires etc look absolutely in HDR and much more realistic too. These 'glow' with the richness of colour and luminescence of real life. HDR TV's have a much greater colour volume.

At the moment HDR is in its infancy and like 3D was, there are some very good HDR content but also some that are mediocre at best. When it works well, the images are absolutely stunning and vibrant - most of 'demos' for example for HDR TV's are incredible (LG's Chess and Jazz are amazing) but there are a few examples of HDR that can be underwhelming. As a gamer, the HDR games I have played look stunning - Gears of War 4, Ratchet and Clank, Uncharted 4 and really looking forward to Horizon and Mass Effect next month.

HDR is certainly here to stay. I think every 4k TV releasing in 2017 will have (or at least support) HDR. The UHD alliance, HDMI and even broadcasters (with HLG) are all planning for the future and bringing HDR to the forefront. Its not limited to 4k either as its standard also include higher resolution.

Whilst 3D may 'appear' to be on its last legs - at least as far as domestic Televisions go and maybe even future releases of Blurays, I know that a number of people still want and/or have a collection of 3D content. If I was in that position myself, I wouldn't be looking at just a 4k 3D TV but looking at the few HDR10 TVs that offer 3D as well. Money no object, I would almost certainly opt for the E6 OLED but if tat was beyond my budget, maybe the Panasonic DX902 or Sony 9305. If you don't mind curved screens, then the C6 OLED might be a good alternative too. Regardless, I would still be looking at a HDR TV as I think that's more future proof and the likelihood that's where TV's are likely to go. I don't think HDR will be an 'extra' as such but become the 'standard' of content at those resolutions - much like SDR was the standard for SD and HD content.
 
Thanks for all your replies ;)

If 3D is important to you, Look at the E6 OLED as that has one of the best 3D performance of any 4k HDR TV.

HDR itself is far more than just a 'brighter' image and far more of a step up than 4k is from 1080p and I would argue more than HD was to SD. 'Good' HDR, not the HDR offered by 'budget' 4k TV's which at most only offer a bit more 'brightness', is impressive and that's with screens offering at least the minimum standards for HDR10.

Peak Brightness is just 1 aspect but its part of the aspect governing Contrast Ratio. At the other end is black level which is equally as important. Not only does HDR offer more lifelike contrast ratio with fantastic specular highlights but it also adds details in the dark areas. Instead of black blobs in the shadows, you now get more definition of the objects in those shadows. HDR also has a wider colour gamut too. Colour is more than just the value(s) of RGB but also has luminescence (brightness). A white piece of paper for example and white hot steel may have exactly the same RGB value but White hot steel has far more luminescence. Sparks (like electrical or grinding metal) and lightning, Fires etc look absolutely in HDR and much more realistic too. These 'glow' with the richness of colour and luminescence of real life. HDR TV's have a much greater colour volume.

At the moment HDR is in its infancy and like 3D was, there are some very good HDR content but also some that are mediocre at best. When it works well, the images are absolutely stunning and vibrant - most of 'demos' for example for HDR TV's are incredible (LG's Chess and Jazz are amazing) but there are a few examples of HDR that can be underwhelming. As a gamer, the HDR games I have played look stunning - Gears of War 4, Ratchet and Clank, Uncharted 4 and really looking forward to Horizon and Mass Effect next month.

HDR is certainly here to stay. I think every 4k TV releasing in 2017 will have (or at least support) HDR. The UHD alliance, HDMI and even broadcasters (with HLG) are all planning for the future and bringing HDR to the forefront. Its not limited to 4k either as its standard also include higher resolution.

Whilst 3D may 'appear' to be on its last legs - at least as far as domestic Televisions go and maybe even future releases of Blurays, I know that a number of people still want and/or have a collection of 3D content. If I was in that position myself, I wouldn't be looking at just a 4k 3D TV but looking at the few HDR10 TVs that offer 3D as well. Money no object, I would almost certainly opt for the E6 OLED but if tat was beyond my budget, maybe the Panasonic DX902 or Sony 9305. If you don't mind curved screens, then the C6 OLED might be a good alternative too. Regardless, I would still be looking at a HDR TV as I think that's more future proof and the likelihood that's where TV's are likely to go. I don't think HDR will be an 'extra' as such but become the 'standard' of content at those resolutions - much like SDR was the standard for SD and HD content.

Very informative post ! To be honest I'm now tempted to buy a HDR10 set after reading your post ;) I have the opportunity to buy a 58 inch dx902b for a good price which is actually a 1300 nit screen as you probably know .. But I was worried about the smearing and halo issues also I hear the 3d was underwhelming on the panny .. I could also consider a sammy ks7000 but there's been a lot of reports on dodgy panels too :(. The lg OLED is out of my price bracket right now so I'm still deciding ?
 
Thanks for all your replies ;)



Very informative post ! To be honest I'm now tempted to buy a HDR10 set after reading your post ;) I have the opportunity to buy a 58 inch dx902b for a good price which is actually a 1300 nit screen as you probably know .. But I was worried about the smearing and halo issues also I hear the 3d was underwhelming on the panny .. I could also consider a sammy ks7000 but there's been a lot of reports on dodgy panels too :(. The lg OLED is out of my price bracket right now so I'm still deciding ?

No TV has a completely perfect record or performance. Even the most expensive ones have some issues - or at least potentially have issues.

The KS7000 doesn't have 3D like all of Samsungs 2016 range - one reason why I didn't mention it above. So if 3D isn't important, that opens up more TV's like the KS8000/9000 and 9500 as well as the B6 OLED. The KS7000, at launch, was the the cheapest HDR10 TV on the market and over £1k less than the Panasonic. The DX902b was originally the same price as an OLED B6/C6 and has FALD lighting. Its 3D maybe underwhelming compared to some TV's (I don't know as I never owned one) but at least it offers 3D - more than the Samsung.

The KS7000 is great for the money and its proven to be very popular - especially with gamers. For many, Samsungs TV's have been fantastic and ALL the KS series have won Best TV's of 2016 with various publications - like What Hifi for example. A 55" can be picked up for under £900 now and for that money NO other TV can match the KS7000 for HDR performance. Many 'decent' SDR or budget HDR TV's around that price may not be able to match it for SDR content too because of the darker blacks as they use IPS panels.

Personally I think all the HDR10 capable TV's have their strengths and weaknesses and all have had 'issues' for some buyers. Therefore there is NO perfect TV for everyone. Like I said if 3D is important to you, that rules out all of the Samsung range and B6 OLED. If getting the Lowest input Lag is more important, then maybe Samsung is the way to go - although others are not bad at around 35ms+ but can't match Samsungs. If you don't want Edgelit or Curve LED's that only leaves the DX902 and Sony ZD9. OLEDs ave the best blacks but can't offer the specular highlights - some also find the motion takes a bit of getting used to. Point is, that no TV offers the 'best' in all areas and maybe you will end up having to compromise on something that another TV is 'stronger' in or offers.

There are LOTS of happy customers of both the DX902 and KS7000. You do get more for your money with the DX902 as it has 3D and FALD but whether its the 'right' TV for you or not, only you can answer. The only advice I will give when it comes to buying a TV is to buy from a reputable dealer and make sure you have a decent warranty too. That way if you do get a 'dud' you can exchange it easily.
 
Thanks for all your replies ;)



Very informative post ! To be honest I'm now tempted to buy a HDR10 set after reading your post ;) I have the opportunity to buy a 58 inch dx902b for a good price which is actually a 1300 nit screen as you probably know .. But I was worried about the smearing and halo issues also I hear the 3d was underwhelming on the panny .. I could also consider a sammy ks7000 but there's been a lot of reports on dodgy panels too :(. The lg OLED is out of my price bracket right now so I'm still deciding ?
I have a 65dx902 and have only watched Hugo and saw 3d on it over the last month even though I've owned the tv for a year lol.
I have nothing to compare it to other than cinema. It seems less dark and if you increase the depth of 3d via the tv options it has much more depth to it.
Other than slight ghosting every now and then which may be software related and to me wasn't a deal breaker I much prefer watching films this way and have been buying them from music magpie second hand good as new for £3 or so.
Give it a go you've got nothing to lose and if you don't like it you've still a stonking 4k tv that can play 4k bluray and normal 2d bluray on.
Dx902 is best value for money on the market bar none. LG oled best blacks but not bright enough for me which is a shame. Samsung ks8000 good but inferior blacks to dx902. Haven't seen the ks9500 but it's curved and can't imagine the price/quality improvement is worth the extra money.
Hope this helps.
 
I have a 65dx902 and have only watched Hugo and saw 3d on it over the last month even though I've owned the tv for a year lol.
I have nothing to compare it to other than cinema. It seems less dark and if you increase the depth of 3d via the tv options it has much more depth to it.
Other than slight ghosting every now and then which may be software related and to me wasn't a deal breaker I much prefer watching films this way and have been buying them from music magpie second hand good as new for £3 or so.
Give it a go you've got nothing to lose and if you don't like it you've still a stonking 4k tv that can play 4k bluray and normal 2d bluray on.
Dx902 is best value for money on the market bar none. LG oled best blacks but not bright enough for me which is a shame. Samsung ks8000 good but inferior blacks to dx902. Haven't seen the ks9500 but it's curved and can't imagine the price/quality improvement is worth the extra money.
Hope this helps.

Thanks nick ;)
 
The DX902 does seem to be the best value for me now its dropped so much in price. At launch, the 58" was the same price as the 55" B6/C6 OLEDs - nearly £3k but has dropped over £1k now in price. Its the cheapest FALD option LED. The KS9500 is Samsungs only FALD but its curved and doesn't have 3D. Samsungs are brighter and more vibrant in colours but if you want a flat screen, then you have to have edge lit. I have a KS8000 and the blacks are incredible with SDR but with HDR, it can show the limits of LED technology - even FALDs can show limitations too mind.
No TV is perfect or the 'best' in every category. OLED's may be better suited to HDR because they don't suffer from any backlighting issues but really can't reach the level of brightness and are known to crush detail in the blacks. Their motion is handled differently which may take some getting used to as well. As with all the manufacturers, apart from Samsung, they clip content mastered at over 1000nits. Point I am making is that TV's have strengths in some areas and other TV's have strengths in others. One TV may be better on Blacks or Peak Brightness, 3D or input lag, so you will have to decide what's most important and compromise elsewhere - of course budget may also dictate which TV's you can look at.
As a gamer and someone who spends as much time gaming as watching TV, the KS8000 was the better option for me than the rest. I am not bothered by 3D and barely used it on my HU7500 or on my H6400 bedroom TV so compromising on 3D wasn't an issue. There isn't a great deal of HDR available at the moment so I wasn't to bothered about having a 'perfect' HDR but I did want one that meets the minimum specs. With full screen HDR (not 21:9 movies), I don't see any issues with the picture. With movies, the black bars are not perfectly even but they are very dark and not distracting and Haloing only tends to occur during credits. Gaming HDR looks absolutely stunning too as that's always full screen - at least so far. SDR though looks stunning and no light issues either! So far its suited my needs perfectly and is easily the best TV I have owned.
As stated, if you are looking to buy, you really need to pick the TV that suits your needs. If you want 3D, then I advise buying now as next years models seem to be dropping 3D altogether. LG's OLEDs seem to be the best for 3D. Draw up what's most important to you and buy from reputable retailer with a decent warranty too. All TV's it seems have a chance that they could be 'duds' and at least if you get one of those, you can replace it relatively easily.
 

The latest video from AVForums

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