Which 49/50 inch 4KTV for £700?

tomiK

Active Member
I'm looking for a 49-50 inch 4KTV for streaming 4K and playing 4K UHD films. Gaming isn't a priority, but I may play the odd game on it.

I have had a look around and I have seen some good deals, but I am unsure whether these are able to meet my needs. One concern is the ability to handle 24p content. Most of the TVs that are within my price range are not able to handle it and therefore have juddering, according to rings.com. I have read conflicting info on this. Some people claim that it is fine for 24p but obviously that is not what rtings website state.

The TVs that interest me are the Samsung mu6400 and the Panasonic ex700. I am edging towards the Samsung as I have always been impressed with their picture. I have looked at LG but the rgbw panel being used in the 2017 range is a put off.

Any thoughts?
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
Every tv can handle 24p, just depends if they do so without using 3:2 pulldown or not. So do you notice 3:2 pulldown judder?

How far will you be viewing? about 1m is opimum for a 49" UHD TV.

Better value is found right now on 2016 models if you can still find them. See: The best time to buy a TV

Panasonic were selling the DX750 on their eBay refurb store not so long ago, much better TV than the MU6400. Or even the DX802.
 

tomiK

Active Member
I don't think I have ever had to use a TV in recent years with 24p judder. My current TV does it fine, as did my older 1080p Sony from 2008, therefore, I feel, I would probably be sensitive to it and don't think it is something to gamble on. I am quite sensitive to lcd motion blur anyway.

I am personally not keen on refurbished tvs. My apprehension is the gamble of what I will get.

My viewing distance would ideally mean I should have a 55" or more, which is around 10feet. However I am limited by space by the TV stand and 49" is the best size.
 

tomiK

Active Member
It shouldn't be in a 4K TV this size, the pixels are still far smaller than Full HD.

Sorry, not sure what you mean?

Regards the LG rgbw, it is a con for them to pretend it is true 4k when clearly it is not. It is petty bad that they get away with it,especially when 2016 range didn't have rgbw.

Anyway, for the size, I am already using a 47 inch panasonic 1080p screen, and that to me seems pretty big at the distance I am watching it at. So 49" at 4k should be noticeably sharper. I am not too happy with the 1080p Panasonic which is why I want to upgrade. It was a definite downgrade in picture quality from the 40" Samsung I had before, but that is far too small to see from the distance I now sit at. I would love to go for 55inch but would need to upgrade the TV stand and that is out of my budget. 50 inch would be okay, hence why I am looking at the ex700.
 

EndlessWaves

Distinguished Member
Sorry, not sure what you mean?

It shouldn't be a concern. I've yet to see anyone regret the purchase of a 50" LG TV because it didn't have enough detail.

Regards the LG rgbw, it is a con for them to pretend it is true 4k when clearly it is not. It is petty bad that they get away with it,especially when 2016 range didn't have rgbw.

The 2016 range between the UH600 and UH750 used exactly the same technology.

It's not strictly speaking the RGBW structure itself, LG's OLEDs use the same four subpixels, it's the fact that it only has the same number of subpixels as a normal 4K TV instead of adding a third more to account for the different grouping (as the OLEDs do).

As for it being a con, I'm of the opinion that if it quacks like a duck and looks like a duck then it's silly to argue about whether someone is right to call it a duck.

But even if we assume it's a con then it's a tiny little tiddler of a lie beside the huge whoppers all TV manufacturers spout about their support for other technologies. HDR support being the big one right now.
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
I don't think I have ever had to use a TV in recent years with 24p judder. My current TV does it fine, as did my older 1080p Sony from 2008, therefore, I feel, I would probably be sensitive to it and don't think it is something to gamble on. I am quite sensitive to lcd motion blur anyway.

I am personally not keen on refurbished tvs. My apprehension is the gamble of what I will get.

My viewing distance would ideally mean I should have a 55" or more, which is around 10feet. However I am limited by space by the TV stand and 49" is the best size.

I know what you mean, it is kind of ridiculous nowadays that you can still have 3:2 pulldown judder on tv's. I thought the same when I first started to research the TV industry seriously 2-3 years ago. I still use a Samsung M86 model which is almost 9 years old and I had a fight with Samsung back in the day when I found it didn't have a mode to display 24hz without judder. It ended in an engineer coming round and installing an experimental firmware.

Although the EDID of my TVs hdmi didn't get upgraded, I was able to force 24p from my PS3 and PC to the TV afterward. There was a bit of flicker, but it was capable of 24hz without 3:2 pulldown judder. Something I loved at the time.

Years on and still Samsungs budget TVs can't do 24p without 3:2 pulldown judder. Is it really a problem? Not really. Most people don't notice it...to be honest I struggle too still. Its a very minor problem compared to other issues TVs can have with motion and screen uniformity.

Viewing distance wise, if you are limited and can't change your viewing distance then I would not consider an UHD TV, stick with what you have and wait until you can raise your budget and afford a TV around the £1000 price category. At least then you will get decent HDR support rather than only TVs that really have a higher resolution that you won't really benefit from. Particularly when viewing SD material on a UHD can make it look worse.

Optimal viewing distance on a 49" UHD TV is around 1m

As for RGBW its a non issue, especially with current HDMI bandwidth limitations. It really isn't noticable unless you view close and view a lot of text (for example websites, word processing) and thats even at recommended UHD viewing distances. At the distance you view, it really wouldn't even be noticeable at all. Even in the most extreme of circumstances.

With HDMI bandwidth limitations right now most HDR has to be sent 4:2:0 chroma anyway which means there is a loss of sharpness in detail, particularly in text in games etc..that even is more apparent than the loss of detail from RGBW.

It is a non issue that is over exaggerated by rumours.

I know it may not be what you want to hear, but trust me, you are better off waiting a while longer and spending more when the time is right. If you can make 1k a target to save until spring next year you will likely be able to hit up a TV miles, miles better than you can now and at 49" you will want one that is at least decent with HDR to make a difference. You won't be noticing much (if any) quality increase from resolution 2160p vs 1080p at 10ft.
 

tomiK

Active Member
I know what you mean, it is kind of ridiculous nowadays that you can still have 3:2 pulldown judder on tv's. I thought the same when I first started to research the TV industry seriously 2-3 years ago. I still use a Samsung M86 model which is almost 9 years old and I had a fight with Samsung back in the day when I found it didn't have a mode to display 24hz without judder. It ended in an engineer coming round and installing an experimental firmware.

Although the EDID of my TVs hdmi didn't get upgraded, I was able to force 24p from my PS3 and PC to the TV afterward. There was a bit of flicker, but it was capable of 24hz without 3:2 pulldown judder. Something I loved at the time.

Years on and still Samsungs budget TVs can't do 24p without 3:2 pulldown judder. Is it really a problem? Not really. Most people don't notice it...to be honest I struggle too still. Its a very minor problem compared to other issues TVs can have with motion and screen uniformity.

Viewing distance wise, if you are limited and can't change your viewing distance then I would not consider an UHD TV, stick with what you have and wait until you can raise your budget and afford a TV around the £1000 price category. At least then you will get decent HDR support rather than only TVs that really have a higher resolution that you won't really benefit from. Particularly when viewing SD material on a UHD can make it look worse.

Optimal viewing distance on a 49" UHD TV is around 1m

As for RGBW its a non issue, especially with current HDMI bandwidth limitations. It really isn't noticable unless you view close and view a lot of text (for example websites, word processing) and thats even at recommended UHD viewing distances. At the distance you view, it really wouldn't even be noticeable at all. Even in the most extreme of circumstances.

With HDMI bandwidth limitations right now most HDR has to be sent 4:2:0 chroma anyway which means there is a loss of sharpness in detail, particularly in text in games etc..that even is more apparent than the loss of detail from RGBW.

It is a non issue that is over exaggerated by rumours.

I know it may not be what you want to hear, but trust me, you are better off waiting a while longer and spending more when the time is right. If you can make 1k a target to save until spring next year you will likely be able to hit up a TV miles, miles better than you can now and at 49" you will want one that is at least decent with HDR to make a difference. You won't be noticing much (if any) quality increase from resolution 2160p vs 1080p at 10ft.


Thanks, you are probably right. I would like to get a Samsung mu8000 55" ot the sony xe9005 if I'm honest. I might just save up. I just hope they don't go up towards end of next year or early spring, I doubt they will, but just something in the back of my mind.
 

EndlessWaves

Distinguished Member
Thanks, you are probably right. I would like to get a Samsung mu8000 55" ot the sony xe9005 if I'm honest. I might just save up. I just hope they don't go up towards end of next year or early spring, I doubt they will, but just something in the back of my mind.

TV prices generally drop down until about the end of November & December and then are stable or slightly higher for a few months until they get discontinued and go for clearance prices.

They'll all be gone by the end of next year, hopefully in favour of something better but not always.
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
The Sony XE90 should go down quite a bit in price, I think it will go down to 1000. The MU8000 not being great with HDR will be reduced even more. Maybe even we start the see the Sony XE93 at a good price.

Heres the price history for last years XD93. Whilst the XE93 is a much better TV, I wouldn't be surprised to see it drop in price just as much. And thats the model up from the XE90!
Sony Bravia KD-55XD9305 Price history.png
 

tomiK

Active Member
I managed to find a couple of places still selling a Samsung KS7500. I'm a bit worried about the curve affecting the panel uniformity though. I know the ks9000 for example had terrible uniformity because of the curve - acording to many customer reviews and seeing quite a few pictures. Maybe the ks7500 is an exception, but still need to be sure.
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
Uniformity is always a gamble whether its flat or curved. I don't think curved means there will be worse uniformity.

Also corresponds to the review of both curved and flat tv's on rtings.com and grey uniformity. There is barely any difference between them both.

You get uniformity complaints with every tv.
 

tomiK

Active Member
Uniformity is always a gamble whether its flat or curved. I don't think curved means there will be worse uniformity.

Also corresponds to the review of both curved and flat tv's on rtings.com and grey uniformity. There is barely any difference between them both.

You get uniformity complaints with every tv.

I know, but for some reason I see more complaints with the ks9000 uniformity over the ks8000 for example. I did a browse of the thread. Having said that, I am aware the reviews seem to say that they are excellent for uniformity so looks like it may be just a lottery thing. With all that in mind, is the ks9000 worth a shot or am I not really gaining much over the ks7500? There didn't to be much difference from what I could see spec wise, but they are now closer price wise than before.
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
Prices of both? It depends. KS9000 you get less native motion blur which is only really beneficial if you're sensitive to blur and/or watch lots of sports or play fast games.

Most people won't even notice a difference between the two tv's in PQ.

Only other thing is the KS9000 has more powerful speakers, allbeit just as poor as the speakers in the KS7500 so it doesn't really matter.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Star Wars Andor, Woman King, more Star Trek 4K, Rings of Power & the latest TV, movies & 4K releases
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom