Jump to content

New TVs to watch the Jets!


Dinamite

Recommended Posts

On May 30, 2018 at 7:46 AM, IndianaJet said:

SAR is somewhat right when it comes to broadcast sports, but

11 hours ago, Dcat said:

Thanks to everyone for this thread, especially SAR because Scott knows his sh!t... he really does. 

 

Except he doesn't. SAR is full of contradictions and still doesn't grasp the difference between 1080i and 720p broadcast formats and why 720p is better for sports. "Misinformed crowd" was meant for SAR specifically. SAR has a technical mental block that's been blocked for years. He rifles off buzzwords like a showroom salesman but bench tests by experts and eyes of thousands of customers prove him wrong. Not to mention SAR discredited Rtings for being in Canada – but after further review – backtracked and spun how they convinced him to purchase a 900E. Lol. He also said "No one reviews 4K TV's on performance for HD cable and specifically live sports" when Rtings.com covers it all.  

On May 30, 2018 at 12:23 PM, SAR I said:

1080i channels (NBC, CBS, NFL, RedZone, NHL, SNY, YES) look very good on a 4K TV, still a step back from a 1080p HD panel, but very good just a tad off.  720p channels however (FOX, ESPN, ABC, FS1, MLB) look brutal, no other way to say it, there is pixelation, motion blur, smearing, screen-dooring, the works.  I've got my Fios box set to native and let my Sony handle all the processing, it's a mess.  When I see that a Jets game is on FOX my heart sinks.  720p is brutal on Fios and a 4K TV, at least in my experience and the experience of others on the Fios forum.

SAR I

None of this makes any sense. 4K TVs are 1080p with 4K capability. They are not a step back from old 1080p models. In fact, they are improved in all areas. Remember when 240hz refresh rate was cutting edge? Today's technology gets away with 60hz. Sports on 720p channels are and should be sharper than 1080i channels unless something else is sabotaging it. I suspect Fios is your main problem, not the tv, and certainly not 720p. One more time, 720p scans the full image at the same rate 1080i scans half the image (540 lines). Please learn it.

I have no issues with any of my flat screens - LED or OLED - on any channel using basic onscreen settings and DirecTV straight off the dish. And of course, I don't have the sunlight problem you have which can make any screen unwatchable. Your 900E shouldn't be "a mess" and shouldn't have 720p issues. It should only be slightly slower at motion response than a Sony OLED and slightly less crisp for sports.

On May 30, 2018 at 12:23 PM, SAR I said:

 As for OLED, it's not really about price for me but rather waiting on Fios to do something about the issues on their end with compression and bandwidth which (I'm guessing) are the true culprits here.  But since all of us are watching the NFL and half the games are 720p this is likely a problem for a large percentage of us.

SAR I

No, only those with Fios or equivalent possibly. Bottom line, you chose a budget model 900E that performs no better than OLED with 720, 1080, 4k and performs worse with motion response and glare (Rting's main criteria for sports). You chose the 900 to save a few bucks and convinced yourself it's better. That's fine. It's maybe a better value. But if the Sony OLED was the same price as the 900E you'd take the OLED and smile all the way home to JN.com and start a new thread (or hijack another) to brag about your new state-of-the-art OLED. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Digital Media Services - Tips From The Pros
 

NFL in HD – It’s all good! Or is it

NFL football in HD. Like most young-to-middle-aged American males, I love NFL football. And it has to be in HD. On a big screen. With big sound. But not all HD NFL is created equal. Most of you are aware of the two high definition television broadcast formats – 720p and 1080i. Read more about the differences between the two formats in the Digital Media Services January 2009 Newsletter. ESPN and Fox broadcast in 720p. NBC, CBS and NFL Network broadcast in 1080i. Is one format better than the other for football? You bet your jockstrap one is, and it’s the 720p format! I’ll tell you why.
 

The 720p format delivers viewers sixty 1280 x 720 progressive video frames per second. The 1080i format delivers viewers 1920 x 1080 interlaced video frames 30 times per second. While a 1280 x 720 image has less resolution than a 1920 x 1080 image frame, the other two broadcast format factors – scanning method and frame rate – give 720p an advantage when it comes to sports. The progressive scanning method handles fast motion imagery much better as the images doesn’t suffer from artifacts that appear as jittery motion, jagged lines or blurry edges as interlaced scanning formats do. Also, most of us have 720p or 1080p televisions so the progressive broadcast doesn’t have to be de-interlaced to show on our screens as 1080i broadcasts do; the de-interlacing can create a loss of detail, among other problems. The faster frame rate (60 fps vs. 30 fps) allows fast moving objects or scenes of a fast moving camera following the action appear clearer on our screens and deliver smoother, less stuttery motion. The faster frame rate also allows the digital encoders compressing the broadcast into an MPEG-2 video stream better manage the motion because there are less changes from frame-to-frame. What these technical details really mean is that the 720p format provides for a more efficient use of the limited bandwidth available to each broadcast network and therefore provides a better picture when it comes to sports.

NFL HDTV Formats

But forget all the technical mumbo-jumbo for a moment; perform a test yourself. This Sunday, watch a 720p broadcast on Fox and compare it to a 1080i broadcast on CBS. If you can’t catch the games on Sunday afternoon, NBC (1080i) has Sunday night games, ESPN (720p) has Monday night games and NFL Network (1080i) has Thursday night games. What I think you’ll find is that the 1080i broadcasts are not quite as clear as the 720p broadcasts and you’ll see much more artifacting such as macro-blocking and picture breakup – especially during scenes with fast motion or fast-moving full-screen graphics – with the 1080i broadcasts. These artifacts appear as small, square-shaped distortions of the picture image, almost like a pixelized digital photo. Additional factors playing a role in the quality of an image include whether or not your cable or satellite provider re-compresses the incoming broadcast signal and how well your HDTV’s internal de-interlacer performs. I subscribe to Verizon FiOS, a fiber optic data delivery system, which does not re-compress any of their incoming broadcast signals, so I’m seeing exactly what the networks are sending out. Dish Network, DirecTV and Comcast, among others, re-compress at least some of their transmissions.

Knowing full well the strengths and weaknesses of the two different broadcast formats, you’d think the networks would adapt their style of production to deliver the best picture quality. But I see no evidence of that. NBC continues to use full-screen, fast-moving transition graphics that create macroblocking every time they’re displayed. And the 1080i networks’ use of fast camera moves during close-up shots can create really poor-looking visuals. The 720p broadcasts from ESPN, ABC and Fox don’t have near the quality issues the 1080i broadcasters experience.

I’m interested in hearing feedback from readers about experiences with 720p vs. 1080i NFL broadcasts as well as what the various cable and satellite providers are sending out.

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

12 minutes ago, jetrider said:
Digital Media Services - Tips From The Pros
 

NFL in HD – It’s all good! Or is it

NFL football in HD. Like most young-to-middle-aged American males, I love NFL football. And it has to be in HD. On a big screen. With big sound. But not all HD NFL is created equal. Most of you are aware of the two high definition television broadcast formats – 720p and 1080i. Read more about the differences between the two formats in the Digital Media Services January 2009 Newsletter. ESPN and Fox broadcast in 720p. NBC, CBS and NFL Network broadcast in 1080i. Is one format better than the other for football? You bet your jockstrap one is, and it’s the 720p format! I’ll tell you why.
 

The 720p format delivers viewers sixty 1280 x 720 progressive video frames per second. The 1080i format delivers viewers 1920 x 1080 interlaced video frames 30 times per second. While a 1280 x 720 image has less resolution than a 1920 x 1080 image frame, the other two broadcast format factors – scanning method and frame rate – give 720p an advantage when it comes to sports. The progressive scanning method handles fast motion imagery much better as the images doesn’t suffer from artifacts that appear as jittery motion, jagged lines or blurry edges as interlaced scanning formats do. Also, most of us have 720p or 1080p televisions so the progressive broadcast doesn’t have to be de-interlaced to show on our screens as 1080i broadcasts do; the de-interlacing can create a loss of detail, among other problems. The faster frame rate (60 fps vs. 30 fps) allows fast moving objects or scenes of a fast moving camera following the action appear clearer on our screens and deliver smoother, less stuttery motion. The faster frame rate also allows the digital encoders compressing the broadcast into an MPEG-2 video stream better manage the motion because there are less changes from frame-to-frame. What these technical details really mean is that the 720p format provides for a more efficient use of the limited bandwidth available to each broadcast network and therefore provides a better picture when it comes to sports.

NFL HDTV Formats

Thanks for the additional information on OLEDs and resolution for NFL games.  Although I must say that just by the eye test in my older HD TV, I prefer when games are on CBS/NBC than FOX.   The games look crisper, brighter even.  It could be my cable box, as you mention (xfinity) but it is noticeable.  

I think the new midrange SONY, X900F does a better job with motion.  Perhaps not as well rated as the SONY OLEDs (A1e or the new one) but still pretty good it seems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Dcat said:

oh.

Now I'm confused.  I'm going to need help choosing when the time comes and I don't really understand the tech.

You're being given misinformation from someone who has a vendetta from 15 years ago on JI.  It's insane how immature and disrespectful some people can be.

My point is simple-  if you go OLED, spend a lot of money and get a very good one that has tremendous upscaling capabilities.  If you go for a budget OLED you'll be disappointed with broadcast cable performance as budget OLED means budget upscaling and it's the upscaling circuits that convert each single pixel of information in a 1080i into 4 pixels on a 4K panel.  If the circuitry isn't good it's going to do a poor job of scaling and that's what causes a degraded picture that will make you feel like you got a brand new TV that looks worse than your old one when watching Jets games.

In my situation, might be different than yours, I have an extremely bright great room, 3 walls of floor-to-ceiling windows, I need the very brightest display so for now OLED is out.  And because 90% of what we watch is on regular cable TV the OLEDs, even the very good ones, amplify imperfections,  it's one of the rare instances where older technology does a better job with older content sources.  My Sony is a FALD LCD which is the step down from OLED and to many is best for those of us who spend more than 50% of our time watching live sports, live news, sitcoms, and the rest on broadcast cable.  Things didn't improve when TV's went from 1080p to 4K for broadcast cable, especially if you go up a screen size.

Also, let's talk price.  My Sony 65" 900E, generally thought to be the best FALD TV on the market, was $1,500.  A 65" Sony OLED with the type of scaling quality I'm referring to is $3,800.  If price matters to you, that's a big delta.

This is a good article to refer to when the time comes:

https://dgit.com/oled-vs-lcd-vs-fald-51999/

SAR I

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, SAR I said:

You're being given misinformation from someone who has a vendetta from 15 years ago on JI.  It's insane how immature and disrespectful some people can be.

My point is simple-  if you go OLED, spend a lot of money and get a very good one that has tremendous upscaling capabilities.  If you go for a budget OLED you'll be disappointed with broadcast cable performance as budget OLED means budget upscaling and it's the upscaling circuits that convert each single pixel of information in a 1080i into 4 pixels on a 4K panel.  If the circuitry isn't good it's going to do a poor job of scaling and that's what causes a degraded picture that will make you feel like you got a brand new TV that looks worse than your old one when watching Jets games.

In my situation, might be different than yours, I have an extremely bright great room, 3 walls of floor-to-ceiling windows, I need the very brightest display so for now OLED is out.  And because 90% of what we watch is on regular cable TV the OLEDs, even the very good ones, amplify imperfections,  it's one of the rare instances where older technology does a better job with older content sources.  My Sony is a FALD LCD which is the step down from OLED and to many is best for those of us who spend more than 50% of our time watching live sports, live news, sitcoms, and the rest on broadcast cable.  Things didn't improve when TV's went from 1080p to 4K for broadcast cable, especially if you go up a screen size.

Also, let's talk price.  My Sony 65" 900E, generally thought to be the best FALD TV on the market, was $1,500.  A 65" Sony OLED with the type of scaling quality I'm referring to is $3,800.  If price matters to you, that's a big delta.

This is a good article to refer to when the time comes:

https://dgit.com/oled-vs-lcd-vs-fald-51999/

SAR I

thank you!  The TV in our family room faces the southern exposure sliders to our deck and it can be VERY bright all afternoon.  We usually close the blinds just to watch a game decently, so yes, brightness is a major issue in the daytime on sunny days.  I'll be calling on you when the time comes because there is no way I can digest all this right now.  But I am gratefull for yours and others contributions.  And of course, budgeting is important here, although we can stretch as much as we want, but prefer an attempt at fiscal responsibility to compensate for the fiscal irresponsibility of being a Jets Season Ticket Holder in a premium section at the Air Conditioner Stadium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SAR I said:

You're being given misinformation from someone who has a vendetta from 15 years ago on JI.  It's insane how immature and disrespectful some people can be.

My point is simple-  if you go OLED, spend a lot of money and get a very good one that has tremendous upscaling capabilities.  If you go for a budget OLED you'll be disappointed with broadcast cable performance as budget OLED means budget upscaling and it's the upscaling circuits that convert each single pixel of information in a 1080i into 4 pixels on a 4K panel.  If the circuitry isn't good it's going to do a poor job of scaling and that's what causes a degraded picture that will make you feel like you got a brand new TV that looks worse than your old one when watching Jets games.

In my situation, might be different than yours, I have an extremely bright great room, 3 walls of floor-to-ceiling windows, I need the very brightest display so for now OLED is out.  And because 90% of what we watch is on regular cable TV the OLEDs, even the very good ones, amplify imperfections,  it's one of the rare instances where older technology does a better job with older content sources.  My Sony is a FALD LCD which is the step down from OLED and to many is best for those of us who spend more than 50% of our time watching live sports, live news, sitcoms, and the rest on broadcast cable.  Things didn't improve when TV's went from 1080p to 4K for broadcast cable, especially if you go up a screen size.

Also, let's talk price.  My Sony 65" 900E, generally thought to be the best FALD TV on the market, was $1,500.  A 65" Sony OLED with the type of scaling quality I'm referring to is $3,800.  If price matters to you, that's a big delta.

This is a good article to refer to when the time comes:

https://dgit.com/oled-vs-lcd-vs-fald-51999/

SAR I

That was a very helpful article, thank you SAR I.   The x900f is FALD too and it looks pretty impressive in handling motion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On May 31, 2018 at 1:21 PM, Dinamite said:

Thanks for the additional information on OLEDs and resolution for NFL games.  Although I must say that just by the eye test in my older HD TV, I prefer when games are on CBS/NBC than FOX.   The games look crisper, brighter even.  It could be my cable box, as you mention (xfinity) but it is noticeable.  

I think the new midrange SONY, X900F does a better job with motion.  Perhaps not as well rated as the SONY OLEDs (A1e or the new one) but still pretty good it seems.

You're very welcome and you are correct. The new 900F is brighter and faster than the 900E. Sony also redesigned the base if that matters for your needs. The 900E is "best in its class" after prices dropped for 2017 models. However, the 900F isn't "best in its class" because it's sold at full retail. But the 900F is indeed a better product. 

In theory, SAR's hypothetical would be true if inferior OLEDs existed. But nobody makes such a beast. There are no "budget" OLEDs with "budget upscaling circuits" that upscale worse than the best LED TV. They simply don't exist and there are only a half dozen OLED models on the market. There are brighter LED TVs but overall they typically underperform in all other areas. Particularly for sports. The RTings.com chart with reviews is all you need. It's all there. Lab-tested scientific data. Every model. It's hands down the best thing in this thread. Your choice: scientific lab results or wishy-washy wiffle-waffle from someone that has problems with his own equipment.

The Sony 900E is a great LED TV. The new 900F is even better. But for performance other than brightness it's not "better" for sports (or anything else) for any of the reasons SAR invents compared to any OLED. It's all in the charts and graphs.

 

On June 1, 2018 at 9:42 AM, Dinamite said:

The x900f is FALD too and it looks pretty impressive in handling motion.

Rtings.com did a special report on local dimming and covered all 12 full array (FALD) models. if anyone bothered to click the links. They just don’t rave about FALD like it’s anything special. They ran actual tests instead. FALD is better than most edge-lit budget LEDs. OLEDs don't have backlight.

 

Local dimming on TVs Direct-lit, edge-lit, full-array

       What it is: The lights behind the LCD layer adapt to the picture displayed, improving the contrast ratio.
When it matters: Dark scenes viewed in a dark room.
Score components: Subjectively assigned

Local dimming is a feature on LED TVs that dims the backlight behind parts of the screen that are displaying black. This makes blacks appear deeper and darker on those parts of the screen, which can be a big bonus for people who watch videos with darker scenes, like movies and TV shows. Unfortunately, the feature can also introduce a few issues to the picture.

To test local dimming, we play a test video on the TVs to see their local dimming capability in action. We then subjectively evaluate the TVs based on whether the feature improves picture quality. 

Test Results

Test Bench: 
* Scores Approximated
Add Column/Filter
Product Year   Type Resolution Local Dimming Video Local Dimming Backlight Local Dimming Our Reviews
Sony A8F 2018 55" 65" OLED 4k Video No N/A 10 See Review
LG C7 2017 55" 65" OLED 4k Video No N/A 10 See Review
LG C8 2018 55" 65" 77" OLED 4k Video No N/A 10 See Review
LG E7P 2017 55" 65" OLED 4k Video No N/A 10 See Review
Sony A1E 2017 55" 65" 77" OLED 4k Video No N/A 10 See Review
LG B7A 2017 55" 65" OLED 4k Video No N/A 10 See Review
Sony X940E 2017 75" LED 4k Video Yes Full-Array 8.5 See Review
Sony Z9D 2017 100" 65" 75" LED 4k Video Yes Full-Array 8.5 See Review
Samsung Q9FN 2018 65" 75" LED 4k Video Yes Full-Array 8.0 See Review
Vizio P Series 2017 2017 55" 65" 75" LED 4k Video Yes Full-Array 8.0 See Review
Sony X900F 2018 49" 55" 65" 75" 85" LED 4k Video Yes Full-Array 7.0 See Review
Samsung Q8FN 2018 55" 65" 75" LED 4k Video Yes Full-Array 7.0 See Review
Sony X930E 2017 55" 65" LED 4k Video Yes Edge 7.0 See Review
Sony X900E 2017 49" 55" 65" 75" LED 4k Video Yes Full-Array 6.5 See Review
TCL P607 2017 55" LED 4k Video Yes Full-Array 6.0 See Review
TCL R617 2018 55" 65" LED 4k Video Yes Full-Array 6.0 See Review
Vizio M Series 2017 2017 50" 55" 65" 70" 75" LED 4k Video Yes Full-Array 5.5 See Review
LG SK9000 2018 55" 65" LED 4k Video Yes Full-Array 5.0 See Review
Samsung Q9F 2017 65" 75" LED 4k Video Yes Edge 2.0 See Review
Samsung Q7FN 2018 55" 65" 75" LED 4k Video Yes Edge 1.8 See Review
Samsung MU8500 2017 55" 65" LED 4k Video Yes Edge 1.8 See Review
Samsung MU9000 2017 55" 65" 75" LED 4k Video Yes Edge 1.8 See Review
Samsung Q8C 2017 55" 65" 75" LED 4k Video Yes Edge 1.8 See Review
Samsung NU8000 2018 49" 55" 65" 75" 82" LED 4k Video Yes Edge 1.8 See Review
Samsung Q7F 2017 55" 65" 75" LED 4k Video Yes Edge 1.8 See Review
Samsung MU8000 2017 49" 55" 65" 75" 82" LED 4k Video Yes Edge 1.8 See Review
Vizio E Series 2017 2017 43" 50" 55" 60" 65" 70" 75" 80" LED 4k Video Yes Full-Array 1.5 See Review
LG SJ9500 2017 65" LED 4k Video Yes Edge 1.5 See Review
LG SJ8500 2017 55" 65" LED 4k Video Yes Edge 1.5 See Review
LG SK8000 2018 49" 55" 65" LED 4k Video Yes Edge 1.5 See Review
LG UJ7700 2017 49" 55" 60" 65" LED "4k" Video Yes Edge 1.0 See Review
Element Fire TV 2017 43" 50" 55" 65" LED 4k Video No Direct 0.0 See Review
Samsung MU6300 2017 40" 43" 50" 55" 65" 75" LED 4k Video No Direct 0.0 See Review
Sony X850E 2017 65" 75" LED 4k Video N/A Edge 0.0 See Review
Sony X690E 2017 50" 60" 70" LED 4k Video No Direct 0.0 See Review
Samsung M5300 2017 32" 40" 43" 49" 50" LED 1080p Video No Direct 0.0 See Review
Samsung MU6100 2017 58" LED 4k Video No Direct 0.0 See Review
LG UJ6300 2017 43" 49" 55" 65" LED "4k" Video No Direct 0.0 See Review
Vizio D Series 1080p 2017 2017 24" 32" 39" 40" 43" 48" 50" 55" LED 1080p Video No Direct 0.0 See Review
TCL S405 2017 43" 49" 55" 65" LED 4k Video No Direct 0.0 See Review
Samsung M4500 2017 24" 28" 32" LED 720p Video No Direct 0.0 See Review
Samsung MU6290 2017 40" 43" 49" 55" 65" 75" LED 4k Video No Direct 0.0 See Review
LeEco Super4 2017 43" 55" 65" LED 4k Video No Edge 0.0 See Review
Samsung MU7600 2017 49" 55" 65" LED 4k Video No Edge 0.0 See Review
Sony X850F 2018 65" 75" 85" LED 4k Video No Edge 0.0 See Review
Samsung NU7100 2018 40" 43" 50" 55" 65" 75" LED 4k Video No Edge 0.0 See Review
Samsung MU6500 2017 49" 55" 65" LED 4k Video No Direct 0.0 See Review
TCL D100 2017 32" 40" 49" LED 1080p Video No Direct 0.0 See Review
Samsung MU7000 2017 40" 49" 55" 65" LED 4k Video No Edge 0.0 See Review
Sony X800E 2017 43" 49" 55" LED 4k Video No Edge 0.0 See Review
TCL S305 2017 28" 32" 40" 43" 49" LED 1080p (except 28", 32") Video No Direct 0.0 See Review
LG UK6300 2018 43" 49" 55" 65" LED "4k" Video No Direct 0.0 See Review
LG LJ5500 2017 43" 49" 55" LED 1080p Video No Direct 0.0 See Review
Sony X720E 2017 43" 49" 55" LED 4k Video No Direct 0.0 See Review
TCL C807 2017 55" 65" 75" LED 4k Video No Edge 0.0 See Review
TCL S517 2018 43" 49" 55" 65" LED 4k Video No Edge 0.0 See Review
 

 

 

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, jetrider said:

In theory, SAR's hypothetical would be true if inferior OLEDs existed. But nobody makes such a beast. There are no "budget" OLEDs with "budget upscaling circuits" that upscale worse than the best LED TV. They simply don't exist and there are only a half dozen OLED models on the market.

Thank you.  I was just about to chime in that during the year of research I did I never came across these budget OLEDs Sar keeps referring to.  Up until last year when I bought my C7 if you wanted an OLED you had to buy an LG, a Sony (which uses LG panels and their own processing), or fly to Europe and get a Panasonic OLED which isn't sold in the US.

There are no Sanyo or Magnavox OLEDS...  The LG lineup uses the same panels and circuitry on all their models so picture performance on the cheapest option will match the performance of the top of the line model.  The difference in price is for speakers and aesthetics - not performance.

The case can definitely be made to get a Sony instead of an OLED if you're in a bright room with a lot of sunlight but if you value movie watching via disc or streaming then the OLED wins hands down.

I had both of these TV's -- the 940E and C7.  I wanted to love the Sony but DirecTV looked like sh-t.  The girlfriends remarks at how it looked worse than the Plasma it replaced felt like a kick to the nuts, but she was right.

After 2 weeks the geek squad dropped of a C7 and her passive aggressive remarks about the Sony turned to awe at the OLEDs performance when I popped in a 4K disc.

And lastly the 900E isn't generally considered the best performing FALD, the Z9D is.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 5/24/2018 at 7:05 AM, SAR I said:

Happy to help. 

If you make your purchase from a retailer with a good return policy with no restocking fees you can try out the new TV for a week and make sure the size and technology are working for you. 

If you do go the Sony route I can provide calibration settings that make the TV look terrific for live cable sports from my own experience.  My TV for reference.

SAR I

 

 

Thanks for the offer and advice @SAR I  . I ended up getting the Sony x900f.  So far so good, really fantastic picture.   If you were  kind enough to share a website you suggest with calibration settings for sports I would truly appreciate it.  Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the offer and advice [mention=9488]SAR I[/mention]  . I ended up getting the Sony x900f.  So far so good, really fantastic picture.   If you were  kind enough to share a website you suggest with calibration settings for sports I would truly appreciate it.  Thanks!
Of course you could hire a professional to calibrate your set too ... First thing to do ... Turn every damn picture/motion enhancing option OFF

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/19/2018 at 9:41 PM, Dunnie said:

Of course you could hire a professional to calibrate your set too ... First thing to do ... Turn every damn picture/motion enhancing option off
 

That was true a decade ago on old HDTV’s but unfortunately bad advice for a 4K panel being fed a 1080i/720p cable signal.  Those enhancing features actually help now. Keep in mind there is no longer 1:1 pixel mapping; all HD cable is 75% upscaled as 1 actual pixel needs to become 4, thus it’s already being significantly processed. 

SAR I

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was true a decade ago on old HDTV’s but unfortunately bad advice for a 4K panel being fed a 1080i/720p cable signal.  Those enhancing features actually help now. Keep in mind there is no longer 1:1 pixel mapping; all HD cable is 75% upscaled as 1 actual pixel needs to become 4, thus it’s already being significantly processed. 

SAR I

Disagree... Especially samsungs motionflow... Makes stuff look like a soap opera ... Perhaps it help sports broadcasts a bit ... Even on the very top of the line OLEDS (I am about to purchase a 77 inxh AE1) watch a blu ray or 4k Blu Ray with motion enhancement on and off ... Tell me which feels cinematic and natural ... if you like the look of 'The Hobbit' which was released at a high frame rate ... Your right. Technogy is not always an improvement.

 

Now ... Regarding upscaling ... That is typically handled by the sets processor (sometimes a player will have a better processor can... As the OPPOS used to have) .. As it should be and always working.

 

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Dunnie said:

Disagree... Especially samsungs motionflow... Makes stuff look like a soap opera ... Perhaps it help sports broadcasts a bit ... Even on the very top of the line OLEDS (I am about to purchase a 77 inxh AE1) watch a blu ray or 4k Blu Ray with motion enhancement on and off ... Tell me which feels cinematic and natural ... if you like the look of 'The Hobbit' which was released at a high frame rate ... Your right. Technogy is not always an improvement.

 

Now ... Regarding upscaling ... That is typically handled by the sets processor (sometimes a player will have a better processor can... As the OPPOS used to have) .. As it should be and always working.

I was referring strictly to live 1080/720 cable TV sports which is the Achilles heel of 4K TV.  Using noise reduction and motion enhancers were taboo on old HDTV's but help improve the picture on 4K TV's.  As 4K means "4x the pixels" and there are only 1x the pixels available for 1080/720, 75% of the picture we see is manufactured artificially by the processors and those processors need all the help they can get for non-4K sources.

Like you, I would never recommend these features for film or native 4K/HDR content.  Only live cable sports.

SAR I

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎5‎/‎22‎/‎2018 at 8:15 PM, SAR I said:

Sony XBR90E 65" is the highest rated non-OLED TV.  It's just been replaced by a very similar XBR90F.  You can get a great deal on the 90E, it's a great TV. 

Note that if you haven't yet gotten a 4K TV that for live sports and cable TV it's a step back from the 1080p panel you currently have.  It's fantastic for streaming content either via Apple TV or built-in apps but it amplifies the imperfections from your set top box.

SAR I

Agree completely.  The 2017 model Sony TVs are fantastic and reasonably priced 4k Smart TVs if you can find them still.  I have a 55" and a 65" model.  Far superior to my two Samsungs, my other Sony Smart TV, and my LG 4K.

I still like my old Panasonic Viera Plasma for non 4K movie watching though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree completely.  The 2017 model Sony TVs are fantastic and reasonably priced 4k Smart TVs if you can find them still.  I have a 55" and a 65" model.  Far superior to my two Samsungs, my other Sony Smart TV, and my LG 4K.
I still like my old Panasonic Viera Plasma for non 4K movie watching though.
Yup .. still amazed that Plasma bit the dust... Great tech for movie watching. I guess.the panels were to costly to make and QA.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/21/2018 at 7:23 PM, SAR I said:

I was referring strictly to live 1080/720 cable TV sports which is the Achilles heel of 4K TV.  Using noise reduction and motion enhancers were taboo on old HDTV's but help improve the picture on 4K TV's.  As 4K means "4x the pixels" and there are only 1x the pixels available for 1080/720, 75% of the picture we see is manufactured artificially by the processors and those processors need all the help they can get for non-4K sources.

Like you, I would never recommend these features for film or native 4K/HDR content.  Only live cable sports.

SAR I

 

This...the TV in my bar where I mostly watch sports has all of the motion enhancing effects on...the main TV I use for movies and regular TV watching has them off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, IndianaJet said:

This...the TV in my bar where I mostly watch sports has all of the motion enhancing effects on...the main TV I use for movies and regular TV watching has them off.

Yeah, it becomes common sense once you A/B content on your DVR as live sports on cable TV needs the help that the motion and noise-reduction features can provide.  Different for films, different for sitcoms.

What's been an interesting epiphany for me has been watching the World Cup on FOX and FS1 and comparing it to the streams on the FOX app and while the stream via the app is clearer it isn't that much better.  What I blamed for years on cable TV compression is actually some really poor cameras or something technical in the production chain.  4K just doesn't like green grass and movement and what the networks could get away with on 1080 panels is very visible now.

The Yankees center field camera on YES needs to be upgraded, pronto.  Same thing going on there.

SAR I

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
On 5/30/2018 at 10:46 AM, IndianaJet said:

I've got a 65 inch LG OLED C7P and a 65 inch OLED E7P.  Both are out of this world and I would swear by them even for the exorbitant price.

SAR is somewhat right when it comes to broadcast sports, but it essentially comes down to the quality source your provider is getting the signal from. For whatever reason, my ABC looks like sh*t for sports but the other networks are very good.  Watching NBA on TNT vs. ABC is 1000 times better for whatever reason.

The other thing to consider is that the vast majority of broadcast sports is not broadcast in true 4K HDR.  Direct TV has three 4K HDR dedicated channels.  One is a PPV movie channel, the other has lots of nature type content and the last is a special event channel that usually broadcasts one or two random games per week in true 4K HDR, including at least one college football game per week.  (No NFL games though).  So watching sports in true 4K HDR is limited. 

As for other content, any true streaming content that is 4K HDR is also out of this world.  I have two X-Box One Xs on both TVs and streaming 4K HDR is off the charts as well as 4K HDR DVDs.

If you do take the plunge, look for deals on websites like Massdrop.  I got my 65 inch E7P last summer (retail $3999.99 at the time) for $2600.

When you spend that much for a TV, you should also consider spending the extra money to have it professionally calibrated once you have it installed.  That could set you back a few hundred dollars more....but well worth it.

 

 

On 5/27/2018 at 1:18 AM, Pac said:

I researched for many months before settling in on a TV last year.

I bought a 75 inch Sony 940E which had 4K, HDR, highly rated, etc etc..  It lasted about 2 weeks in my house before I called Best Buy and told them to haul it out of here.  4K looked ok but everything on DirecTV looked like dog sh-t.  I tweaked settings, enlisted the help of guys at the AVS forum, googled etc but there was no solution.  Perhaps asking for a 75 inch TV to produce the same kind of picture as the 55 inch Plasma it had replaced was too much to ask...

Anyway I wound up going with a 65 inch LG OLED C7 and right when they hooked it up and I turned it on I new I had my new TV.  4K Blu Rays via the Oppo player I have look incredible..  Netflix looks awesome...  Amazon Prime awesome.. Playstation 4 Pro is mint.. and DirecTV looks very good to great. 

I think the Samsungs are a bit overpriced and the picture looks a little unnatural. 

Buy an OLED, bring the lights down in the room, throw in a 4K blu ray, and thank me later.

You can probably find the C7 or B7 (Costo's version - same TV) for near 2G's.  Instabuy.

Necro'ing this.

I've decided I want a c7 however I'm concerned about burn in. I use the TV primarily for gaming and the occasional movie. Normally gaming sessions aren't too long but occasionally on a weekend I've been known to play 8 -10 hours in a day. 

 I've read that HUD elements in games can "burn in" on OLED and it's really stopping me from making the purchase. I believe both of you game, have you had any issues?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, CTM said:

 

Necro'ing this.

I've decided I want a c7 however I'm concerned about burn in. I use the TV primarily for gaming and the occasional movie. Normally gaming sessions aren't too long but occasionally on a weekend I've been known to play 8 -10 hours in a day. 

 I've read that HUD elements in games can "burn in" on OLED and it's really stopping me from making the purchase. I believe both of you game, have you had any issues?

 

 

burn in was an issue for plasmas and early OLEDS but it's virtually been eradicated.

the C7 has an automatic pixel refresher that happens when you turn off the TV after it's been on for at least 4 hours.

that is a 8 - 10 minute process that will happen without you really knowing it (unless you put your ear by the back of the TV and you can hear it doing something).

there is also a more thorough refresher that happens automatically once the TV hits 1000 hours or so.  you can also trigger the longer refresher any time you want in the settings menu.

long story short -- don't worry about it.  You really only have to be extra careful in the first 100 hours or so.  just don't leave static images like the ones on ESPN or NFL Network on for hours at a time..  that doesn't meant don't watch those channels..  just change the tv for a bit after an hour or 2.

I haven't noticed any burn in and these days leave it on NFL network for hours at a time.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, CTM said:

 

Necro'ing this.

I've decided I want a c7 however I'm concerned about burn in. I use the TV primarily for gaming and the occasional movie. Normally gaming sessions aren't too long but occasionally on a weekend I've been known to play 8 -10 hours in a day. 

 I've read that HUD elements in games can "burn in" on OLED and it's really stopping me from making the purchase. I believe both of you game, have you had any issues?

 

 

oh and don't buy Best Buy's calibration when you get the TV.  it's worth eventually getting it calibrated but with OLEDs you want to wait a couple hundred hours for it to "settle".  The colors after that initial 100-200 hours will be slightly different than they are out of the box.  it's subtle but a change does happen.

and don't just turn it on and watch without going through the settings and making changes.  you won't get the best picture possible without doing some experimentation.  that goes for any tv, not just oleds. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...