# $1500 50" 4K TV by Seiki, slated for late April



## keithlock (Feb 5, 2013)

TigerDirect, Amazon, and QVC, among other retailers will be shipping out Seiki's affordable 50" 4K TV later this month. Some analysts suggest the technology is still to tender to be coming out with such a low-priced model this early in the game, but those who want the bragging rights of owning a 4K will have that opportunity very soon.








This 50" 4K/2K Ultra HDTV model (#SE50UY04) is the first to hit the U.S. market for Seiki, but plans are already in the works for a 65" set later this year.

"The introduction of Ultra HDTV is perhaps the biggest news since the first arrival of HDTV, and SEIKI is leading the charge to make the next generation of high-definition entertainment attainable for today's television buyers at an affordable price," said Frank Kendzora, executive vice president at SEIKI.

"The SEIKI 4K2K picture quality is stunning with clarity and vivid colors that far surpasses conventional HDTVs. At the SEIKI price point, today's TV buyers can future-proof their next purchase with the latest Ultra HDTV technology, enjoy current high-definition video content, and be ready to experience 4K content as it becomes available in the near future."

*Seiki 50" Class 2160p LED HDTV*

Specs include: 3840 x 2160 resolution, 16:9 aspect ratio, 3 HDMI ports, 120Hz refresh rate, 6.5ms response time, and 5000:1 contrast ratio (bright whites and deep blacks).

Other inputs include VGA (15-Pin D-Sub), Component In, RCA, and Composite Video In. The outputs include RCA, Coaxial Digital Audio, and Headphone (Stereo Mini-Jack).

*Should you be an early adopter?*

With price tags of $25k for a Sony 84" 4K TV, and some Bravia sets around the $5k mark, it's hard not to like a price tag of sub-$2K for a TV with this new and exciting technology.

Is it worth going out to get one? Perhaps for nothing more than bragging rights it is.

As <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/12/seiki-50-inch-4k-1300/" target="_blank">pointed out</a> by Richard Lawler on Engadget at the end of last week, being an early adopter might not be wise.

"In the meantime, there are plenty of reasons not to be an early adopter -- the infamous eye charts suggest 4K's impact at this size may be reduced, it's an unknown company with unknown standards for quality and service, a new HDMI standard may be incoming and there's no content until the $699 FMP-X1 player arrives this summer," said Lawler in a blog post.

The price point is not $1300 like originally thought last week, but $1500 still is rather low for such a TV. TigerDirect is reporting to <a href="http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=7674736" target="_blank">have some in stock</a> right now, and is offering "Free Shipping Today."

It weighs around 55 pounds and comes with a 1 year limited warranty. Of course, TigerDirect also offers a SquareTrade upgrade to the warranty for an extra 2 or 3 years.


----------



## Jon Liu (May 21, 2007)

I'm very glad to see this. It's nice to see companies being bold enough to put new technologies out there for reasonable prices. This gives the consumers an opportunity to jump into future-proofing, without having to invest too much. Or at the price point it makes it easier just to "test the waters" as opposed to "jumping head-first" into the technology.


----------



## Todd Anderson (Jul 24, 2009)

I'm not sure how good or bad this is.

There is so much that goes into image quality beyond just pixels... and while I realize the pixel difference between 4K and 1080P is large, I'm reminded of the fervor over 720p and 1080p. I still have a Pioneer PDP 50 inch display that people say looks amazing (and they don't even know it's 720p)!

I won't be one of the early adopters on this one... just doesn't seem to make sense.


----------



## Jon Liu (May 21, 2007)

True, Todd. There is DEFINITELY more than just pixels that goes into picture quality. That's the reason I have yet to replace my Pioneer Elite with anything else.

At $1500 one does wonder what kind of shortcuts (if any) this company may be making in order to make a "4K" display, but then again without prior knowledge of this company personally, I will not pass judgment until I see it for myself.

Looking back at Oppo Digital, for example. I remember back in the day when they were one of the first to provide upconversion from 480p to 1080p and people gawked in disbelief that they could price their product so low at sub-$150. They also provided some of the best performing dvd players for low-prices.

It could be a sales strategy in order to get their name more well-known in the market.


----------



## tripplej (Oct 23, 2011)

I like the price but I am not so sure of the brand. Will wait for the reviews..


----------



## typ44q (Apr 7, 2008)

Todd Anderson said:


> I'm not sure how good or bad this is.
> 
> There is so much that goes into image quality beyond just pixels... and while I realize the pixel difference between 4K and 1080P is large, I'm reminded of the fervor over 720p and 1080p. I still have a Pioneer PDP 50 inch display that people say looks amazing (and they don't even know it's 720p)!
> 
> I won't be one of the early adopters on this one... just doesn't seem to make sense.


Exactly, I remember in the early days when people were comparing 720p plasma to 1080p LCD and everyone would pic the plasma as having the better picture quality because the other factors made a bigger impression than the overall resolution. 
I think it is great that a company is pushing prices like this but honestly aside from the higher resolution (which is probably not that noticeable at most viewing distances) this TV will probably perform about as well as a $600 ish 50" LCD, which is to say not very good. 
I would love to see it compared to other 1080p sets in its price range, I have a feeling they will have better overall picture quality.


----------



## AVoldMan (May 15, 2011)

Todd Anderson said:


> ...There is so much that goes into image quality beyond just pixels... and while I realize the pixel difference between 4K and 1080P is large, I'm reminded of the fervor over 720p and 1080p. I still have a Pioneer PDP 50 inch display that people say looks amazing (and they don't even know it's 720p)!


I have not seen any 4K displays yet and do remember the arguments that 720P is just as good as 1080P screens. I think it really gets down to how critical the viewer is or the quality of the source material. I do believe the if the right program material is shown on a well calibrated screen the results are amazing!

However, I think that 4K will be preferred over time. As history has show and though my experience with the 720 vs 1080 comparison, there is a difference when program material matches the native screen resolution. It seems that if you are even somewhat critial the eye/brain becomes more aware or atuned to the differences with time. Even now on causual viewing when I see HD material and it doesn't look quite right - fuzzy, I look down at the cable box and sure enough the 720P light is on vs 1080P indicator. The brain adapts and becomes more acute though training - viewing.


----------



## typ44q (Apr 7, 2008)

AVoldMan said:


> I have not seen any 4K displays yet and do remember the arguments that 720P is just as good as 1080P screens. I think it really gets down to how critical the viewer is or the quality of the source material. I do believe the if the right program material is shown on a well calibrated screen the results are amazing!
> 
> However, I think that 4K will be preferred over time. As history has show and though my experience with the 720 vs 1080 comparison, there is a difference when program material matches the native screen resolution. It seems that if you are even somewhat critial the eye/brain becomes more aware or atuned to the differences with time. Even now on causual viewing when I see HD material and it doesn't look quite right - fuzzy, I look down at the cable box and sure enough the 720P light is on vs 1080P indicator. The brain adapts and becomes more acute though training - viewing.


I agree completely, all other things being equal the higher resolution with the content to go along with it is going to look better, even if you have to get up close to tell the difference. 
My concern was with the quality of the $1,500 4K set that probably does not look at good as a $1K 1080p plasma. (this is based on nothing but my opinion and would love to be wrong about it!)

I have no doubt that 4K is the future and with pricing like this it might be sooner than everyone expected I just hope overall picture quality does not suffer in a rush to get these things to market just for bragging rights.


----------



## tripplej (Oct 23, 2011)

See latest news report from gizmodo. 

It does mention it has a one year no question warranty. That is a nice plus.


----------

