[kprocivic]

I wasted 400 bucks on a 50in 4k tv. Should have kept my 1080 40inch.

[fbsm]

Originally Posted by kprocivic

I wasted 400 bucks on a 50in 4k tv. Should have kept my 1080 40inch.

There's so little avail for 4k that it seems premature to me to jump to it.....I suspect there will still be quite a bit of change/evolution of the "standard" before there is much content avail

[davis449]

Originally Posted by BayMoWe335

So you basically ignored the advice here and did whatever you originally thought?

Sweet...

If the OP went with the Samsung UN65KS9000FXZA, he didn't really ignore everyone's advice. Since the OP was hell bent on buying a 65" 4K TV right now, he made a good choice. He listened to those that said buying a $1000 65" 4K TV was a waste of money because they are crap...and they are. He went for the upper end of LED TV's. My dad has one of these and I think it's an excellent TV. That said, I am still holding out for OLED since the price of a TV like this one is, from my POV, way too close to OLED $$$ for me to want to buy one.

[Ali Shiralian]

Right now the best picture on a TV belongs to LG OLED , waiting on Samsung to bring theirs and I'll get one...

[imserious]

Picture quality is pretty good these days. Tech is ahead of content.

I would prioritize size over features at this point. I think you get more wow for your buck with size than some obscure performance number that you can't really discern.

75"+ you'll like it.

[P1]

Still big price differences between 65" and 75"...

[bimmerfrk]

If you are into gaming and can afford to run a 4k rig, then a 4k set is well worth the money... other than that I would say hold off.

Also if you are gaming make sure to get a TV that has low lag and high hertz rate.


check here: http://www.displaylag.com

battlefield1 in 4k =

[ASAP]

LG C8 Oled 65 inch

[shoei]

Originally Posted by AutoMobileDecor

As title I am thinking about a 65" 4K TV, my question is this, can I buy a 4K 65" monitor with a picture equal to the 4K TVs out there?

Man that post was old lol... I did just get a 83" Samsung lolol... Even better than the 65" but it's two years newer tech so expected...

To answer your question though, TVs have larger pixels than monitors, and lower refresh rates with stronger backlights. They're designed to be looked at from several feet away. Also good monitors tend to have a higher consistency of quality among the pixels. Monitors are also designed to have lower input lag, which is really obvious when you move a mouse and there's a delay on the screen. It's possible to use TVs as monitors but it'd get uncomfortable after a while.

[Mardio]

Originally Posted by F80_M

What you need is this.....

I just read the Amazon reviews on that tv, absolutely hysterical.