Prompted by Roger's "where have all the videographers gone" post, thought I'd update my thoughts on 4k.

I'd posted back in February commenting that so many viewers don't seem to care about 4k or even 1080 for that matter.

However every time someone buys a new TV it almost invariably will be 4k - 1080 has almost disappeared from the shelves (as has 3D and curved). So I felt I needed to have this kit so as to be sure that all photo and video content I supply can be suitable for the newer TVs.Previously my main TV was a Panasonic 50" plasma plus a second Sony 42" LCD. Interestingly the latest Panasonic 4k TVs include advertising to push that these are now as good as the old plasmas!

After extensive research the main TV I bought was the LG 55B7V. This is 55" but its actual size is no larger than my last 50" as the new version does not have wide borders around the screen. The tech is OLED and this is very important for me as the blacks are actually black etc and this matters in my extensive photo presentations. Its high dynamic range (HRD10) also works well.

I did quite a few tweaks to get results similar to the lovely older plasmas. The only thing after that would be that so many programs on TV are shot and edited in truly horrid choices. For example a BBC program on mon-fri just before the 6pm news is called "Pointless". I only see the last couple of minutes but that is enough you make me want to puke. Its not to do with the TV settings, only to do with the horrible lighting and contrast. On the other hand the regular TV program "Questiontime" is usually well lit and the skin tones look great.

The 4k example on BBC iplayer looks good other than I'd say that the greens are rather too saturated.

I added a second TV which is an LG 43UJ670V. This is not OLED but it was a compromise as at 43" it is big enough to work well at wedding shows but small enough to transport it easily. It is HDR. Big difference in prices: The 55" OLED is around £1600 and the 43" non-OLED around £400.

In both cases I needed upscaling of the actual TVs for video from standard definition and high definition to 4k. These have worked astonishingly well. Even the standard def is more than adequate.

Also for both TVs I needed them to be able to handle high def video and high file size photo files via USB sticks without any delays freezes etc. Again these have worked fine.

There is of course not much to see in 4k on Netflix and Amazon so hard to compare to lower res. If you're into guns and super-heroes fine but thats not for me. I was a super-hero with lots of guns for a living in my 20's :- )

I do have a 4k bluray player and that works well with 1080 bluray discs. It can upscale but the TVs do that anyway.

I had to replace my AV home cinema receiver (Onkyo 805) with an Onkyo TX-NR676E. This is because current AV receivers offer ARC. This means that the TV can transmit the audio back to the Onkyo then out to my 5.1 speakers whereas older AV's would not do that.

Just for completeness - and not to do with presenting video and photos - I replaced SKY with a Humax 5000 plus a Humax Espresso.

My Canon 5D Mark IVs can shoot 4k (with limitations) but I'm not finding any point to it for wedding work other than if competitors have used it as a selling point.

Pete

Hi Pete,

After much research, I bought and LG 55" 4K tv last year and have been delighted with it. As you say, the blacks are 'Black' and the colours vibrant. Unfortunately, most broadcast tv doesn't seem to match up to the quality capabilities of the TV, but for checking my own footage it is excellent.

All my filming is now carried out in 4K and although I don't deliver in 4k, the editing benefits are very worthwhile for me. The ability to carry out a really slow pan or zoom in post whilst still maintaining HD quality is a joy. I also like the ability to have a wide view, but crop out a smaller section of the screen to emphasise that area. Also great for stage productions where a 4K wide view enables me to follow the action with a close crop, reducing the number of cameras I need to use.

Definitely a 4K thumbs up from me.

Roger

Timely, from a personal standpoint. My first (and still current) flatscreen was a 50" Panasonic Viera PZ850, their top of the plasma TV when I bought it in 2009. I'm limited to a certain physical width due to my living room's built-in shelving, and the bezel surrounding that screen is, shall we say, robust.

After having to replace the main power board only months after the warranty expired (an expensive experience which has soured me on that brand), it still serves presently. But I'm secretly hoping for another failure so that I can replace it with at least a 55" -- which should fit thanks to today's thinner bezels.

What's funny is that I feel no immediate need for 4K, even though I welcome the opportunity to own a UHD TV. High Definition 1080p is still the broadcast standard here in the US, and will continue to be for some time forward, I think. This point was driven home for me at NAB when JVC released its GY-HC900 Connected Cam, a top-tier live-streaming 2/3rd-inch broadcast news camera with all the bells and whistles... and it's HD, not UHD, because the market demand for television news is 1080p and will be for some time to come.

As it is for web content also. Due to my decidedly rural location, I'm still about a year away from fiber. It used to be just a pipe dream -- heh -- but thankfully in my neck of the woods it will eventually become a reality. Only then will I be in a position to adequately receive 4K content... what there is of it. Plenty of sports, no doubt, which look great in HD but should be stunning in 4K. But what I really want is the entire Turner Classic Movies catalog in 4K. *sigh*

I think once HDR starts to take off, 4K will become a more popular delivery standard. Ironically the suppliers are a little behind here. My parents were thrilled with their HDR TV, until it was made clear the limited range of content.
Then again I think I read HD was considered as a Delivery format as far back as the late 80s. Whether that is accurate or not. It took over a decade before it became something consumers could buy if that is the case. It's a bit like electric cars. You can see the benefits but technology is just not quite working hard enough to make it easily available for the average consumer. Broadcast standards always seem a decade behind current technology. Though Netflix is pushing for 4K.

My first (and still current) flatscreen was a 50" Panasonic Viera PZ850, their top of the plasma TV when I bought it in 2009.

I also got a Panasonic Viera about the same time, but mine was only 39"(about as much as I could spend at the time). Replaced it with a Sony 46" LCD after about 5 years and gave the Panasonic to my daughter's family. They still have it but it's not their main TV. That 39" plasma screen was unbelievably heavy - I could barely handle it myself. I'll bet your 50" model was a two-man call.

Still no 4k for me, frankly I'm not very interested. I suffered with sub-megabit DSL for about 11 years after moving to my rural location, then in a minor miracle, an army of Verizon trucks descended on my little town last summer and I now have 150/150 FIOS. But I only have internet, no cable package. After doing without it for 11 years, I'm fully weaned from cable.

I have two Apple TV's and mainly use them with movies and TV shows ripped from my large DVD collection, but the speed is great for downloads, I can upload a gigabyte to Vimeo in less than a minute!

No doubt the time will come when I want to shoot and view 4k but there's no rush, especially since I'd want a faster computer as well.

I'll bet your 50" model was a two-man call.

Yes the damn thing weighs almost 90 pounds. It definitely requires a helper and a spotter!

Yes the damn thing weighs almost 90 pounds. It definitely requires a helper and a spotter!

The LG 60PX990 60" plasma that I bought seven years ago weighs 50.9kg i.e. 112 pounds & has survived two house moves. It is still our main TV & while only 1080p of course it has a superb image with the deep inky blacks that plasmas are famed for. We do have a 47" 4K LCD in the bedroom but really could not justify replacing the main TV with a 4K model given the dearth of 4K material.

Incidentally I donated the first HDTV that I bought (a Samsung 46" 1290x720) to the staff coffee room of my former workplace. It is still going strong at least twelve years after it was purchased.

The LG 60PX990 60" plasma that I bought seven years ago weighs 50.9kg i.e. 112 pounds...

Good heavens Nigel that's eight stone! What is it about plasma that makes them so heavy?

Correction, made, past tense. As in, I believe plasma displays are no longer made.

An inferior technology now I suppose (because of the weight?) but it sure impressed me when I originally bought it.

Good heavens Nigel that's eight stone! What is it about plasma that makes them so heavy?

Correction, made, past tense. As in, I believe plasma displays are no longer made.

An inferior technology now I suppose (because of the weight?) but it sure impressed me when I originally bought it.
It wasn't inferior technology that caused the demise it was because it was much more expensive to manufacture than LED & much more expensive to ship considering the enormous weight compare to LED. It's only recently with OLED that the picture quality surpassed plasma

What is it about plasma that makes them so heavy?

I always thought it was because the screens are made of glass.