Guide
Are there decent TVs for less than CHF 1,000.–? Yes, there are
by Luca Fontana
Pixels: the folly of grandeur
16.1.2019
Translation: machine translated
There's nothing better for marketing than innovation. So manufacturers regularly launch new products, whether or not they really add anything. Like 8K TVs.
The first 8K home cinema TV was released last October. Built by Samsung, it goes by the sweet name of Q900R. Its price isn't completely unreasonable. In any case, compared with OLED TVs of 75 inches or more. The latter are so expensive that Samsung's sweet pixel madness would almost pass for a bargain.
But my enthusiasm has its limits. No, it's not because of the poor picture quality. Quite the contrary. Last summer, I was able to test Samsung's flagship QLED TV, the Q9FN. A good TV that had no reason to be ashamed of the OLED competition. One thing is clear, Samsung knows how to make good TVs.
What makes me sceptical is rather the 8K definition, or what should actually be called UHD-2. As things stand, there's no point.
Why 8K is useless
An 8K TV, i.e. UHD-2, has 7680 pixels per row and 4320 pixels per column. So, in total, we get 33,177,600 pixels. That's four times more than a UHD TV and 16 times more than the full HD found on Blu-rays.
The minimum standback distance
If you want to take full advantage of 8K, you're going to have to sit very close to the TV. It's either that or a TV bigger than most living room walls. Either way, you'll barely be able to tell the difference between 4K and 8K.
Let me give you an example: if you sit 2.5 metres away from the screen, you'd need a 227-inch TV, i.e. a diagonal of 5.77 metres, to get the full 8K experience. You can find the formulas for your calculations here:
Pixel density vs colour rendering
Lack of content and bandwidth
Only thing is, the more you interpolate, that's what we call extrapolation, the further the image moves away from the real quality of the original content. In fact, the TV set's interpretation will never provide us with the best image quality.
Finally, it's the bandwidth required for data transmission that finishes off 8K TVs: content with such high definition generates an unimaginable amount of data. A quantity of data that has to be transferred to your TV from a database.
In other words, the infrastructure for the transfer rates and bandwidth needed to handle the data volumes of 8K are only available in a small minority of homes. As a result, streaming platforms like Netflix or Hollywood giants like Disney will certainly refrain from producing 8K programmes.
Samsung Q900R: why now?
You can analyse the situation from every angle, but there's only one conclusion: it's still too early for 8K TV sets. The right content and infrastructure don't exist yet. The extra pixels are kind of pointless. And yet Samsung has launched an 8K TV. Why?
It might even work. And the winners in the bargain are consumers, as we benefit from the advances that come from this technological warfare between manufacturers. Find out what the Q900R is really capable of in my next test report. And who knows? Maybe Samsung will change my mind.
Luca Fontana
Senior Editor
Luca.Fontana@digitecgalaxus.chI write about technology as if it were cinema, and about films as if they were real life. Between bits and blockbusters, I’m after stories that move people, not just generate clicks. And yes – sometimes I listen to film scores louder than I probably should.
Opinion
This is a subjective opinion of the editorial team. It doesn't necessarily reflect the position of the company.
Show all
