HDR worries

[homerhotspur5]

I am on the brink of buying a new set for the fiirst time in nearly 11 years. Our 32ex503 has been brilliant, no problems and a great picture(pre LED lighting set). I have, however, come to the conclusion that we really need a bigger set for our lounge and move the old one upstairs. That said, we find anything over 43 inches looks ridiculously big and so that rules us out of what seem to be the better equipped sets.

I am close to going for the 43xh8505/9196 but am increasingly concerned that I will regret it having read the huge variety of problems on this forum which we just haven't ever experienced.( not for this set, just generally)

I have also read a very detailed explanation on the AV forums that buying an HDR set (they all are) which doesn't really handle HDR very well is counter productive and I think the 8505 ( and all 'smaller ' tv's fall into this bracket). so can anyone re-assure me of the picture quality on these sort of sets or otherwise? We are probably not discerning enough to be too bothered by deeper blacks and whiter whites which articles seem to be obsessed about.

[Joe_Dohn]

As much as I respect everyone's opinion, I'd solely recommend actually looking at the TVs you're interested in at a nearby store instead of taking people's word (including my own).

Picture quality and the contrast ratio and all that is fairly paper spec and can be compared and everything, but without an actual point of comparison you can "SEE" it doesn't matter that much.

Whenever you can, just go ahead to a nearby store and take a look at some of them, that's what I'd do myself ^^

Hope this helps!

- JD

[homerhotspur5]

yes, thank you. I have been into look but it is difficult in a superstore to really judge picture quality because of the environment the tvs are situated and the source of the picture displayed. I was really talking about the specifc point that most of the additional cost on new tvs is on the hardware to create/take advantage of  good HDR. This superior hardware( eg local dimming) is not available on anything below around 50 inches. So, the theory goes that if you dont have the hardware to make the most out of HDR, you may as well buy a much cheaper TV as they are now all good at displaying HD content. The other, more concerning, point was that some tv's in trying( unsuccessfully) to display good HDR content, may actually make matters worse than if it wasn't available at all.

Note , I am talking about HDR (High Dynamic Range) here. not HD (High Definition)

[Joe_Dohn]

I do get your point, and local dimming does just impact HDR but the picture quality in general.

Though, if you're really not able to get a good idea/point of comparison at a store, maybe going with a cheaper TV is the all-around good option here? Especially if you wouldn't really give discerning the pixels all that much thought (I certainly wouldn't, but I mostly use my TV as a PC monitor replacement).

The better the local dimming/more zones it has, the better the overall picture quality, whether you're looking for HDR or not. That's what I was hinting at with the whole comparable spec point.

I still think making your own opinion would be best, so maybe checking the returns/replacement policy would be a good secondary option if you're into investing more into a better experience (which no one can fault, that's what it's all about in the first place!)

- JD