Sony's 4K player now available. Rentals to be $7.99

Rclark · « **on:** 4 Jul 2013, 05:42 am »

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/07/03/sonys-4k-ultra-hd-player-now-available-for-699

The player is only $699

Also, the Sony PS4 will also be a 4K player. Launching at $399. Just another option.

Pretty amazing. Just need the TV's to drop in price and we're already there on the other end. They are not messing around with this new resolution format.

EDIT: hah, appears to currently only work on Sony 4K TV's, the player does. Going for the throat, it seems. They've been making a lot of good moves lately.

jcotner · « **Reply #1 on:** 4 Jul 2013, 06:40 am »

This is not too suprising given that Sony has been playing the 4K space
heavily in the theatre world for a while.
Content is easy since they have a studio arm and have been doing
4K content for a while.
The Sony only TV thing may be an interface issue or perhaps content
protection scheme unique to Sony.
Given you have to connect both the player and the TV to the same
internet connection I would suspect it has to do with content
protection.
Still an impressive price for a 4K player.

ctviggen · « **Reply #2 on:** 4 Jul 2013, 02:30 pm »

OK, so it only works with their player and you have to rent a movie for $8? Will you be able to buy the movie? If not, there's no way I would do this.

Rclark · « **Reply #3 on:** 4 Jul 2013, 09:12 pm »

It makes sense because not many people buying 4K TV's at the moment. So it's in their best interest to make the player exclusive to their TV's for now. Since they own the movie service, the tv, and the player. Makes sense.

However, the PS4 is also a 4K player and will have access to the service, and work on any 4K tv.

I'm sure they'll unlock their regular 4K player for other brands in a year or so. Once prices begin to drop, 4K is going to explode.

And yes, the article says you can buy 4K movies for $29.99

jarcher · « **Reply #4 on:** 5 Jul 2013, 10:56 pm »

Thanks for the update - following 4K w/ interest & this news makes an even more compelling argument for the PS4 (though less so for the 4K player).

$30 list retail for a 4K movie purchase seems ok, but $8 to rent is too much : that's movie theater matinee prices, which presumably are also digitally projected at 4K in newer theaters. I'm sure they're testing waters to see if they can market it above 1080 HD rental prices and the market will trend it downwards. Or maybe they'll do some 4K subscription service down the road.........that would be sweet.

Rclark · « **Reply #5 on:** 8 Jul 2013, 02:31 am »

I think $7.99 is a surprisingly low rental price, which signifies their desire to reach mass market as rapidly as possible.

The PS4 is indeed a more compelling product, I think. Why buy a dedicated player for $200 more when it's unlikely to provide better image quality this early?

PS4 is also.. on another note, getting set to be the overwhelming favorite of the coming gen. All polls skew heavily in its favor, as does this latest international poll. There's quite a lot of depth there if you click upper right on stats.

http://www.xboxonevspsfour.com/

I'll be a 4K tv buyer in three or four years. I don't have the budget of some of you here :p

SoCalWJS · « **Reply #6 on:** 8 Jul 2013, 03:54 am »

Hope everybody has unlimited VERY high speed download capabilities (I know I don't, but I live in the sticks

), and also points out the problem of early adoption of 4K - no standards yet.

Bob in St. Louis · « **Reply #7 on:** 9 Jul 2013, 01:00 am »

Quote from: SoCalWJS on 8 Jul 2013, 03:54 am

Hope everybody has unlimited VERY high speed download capabilities (I know I don't, but I live in the sticks ), and also points out the problem of early adoption of 4K - no standards yet.

Yip. I've been thinking the same thing. In the last year I was just able to get 20Meg downloads (out here in the sticks). Last year the best I could get was AT&T DSL at about 3Meg.
I'm not sure what's needed for 4k, but I'd venture a guess that the vast majority of the country isn't able.

Is AT&T UVerse 4K capable?

Rclark · « **Reply #8 on:** 10 Jul 2013, 07:39 am »

Very good point I hadn't considered, but I know their newly acquired cloud streaming service just set a world speed record so at least they're ready on their end.

youravhandyman · « **Reply #9 on:** 11 Jul 2013, 05:41 pm »

Bob,
You would probably need the 18M Uverse option to actually stream 4K quality and even that might be suspect. If they highly compress the video to make it easier to stream then I think I can wait anyway. Play your regular blu ray through a good processor to scale it up to 4K in the mean time.
Bandwidth is the topic that everyone seems to forget. Not only would you have possible bandwidth issues but also data caps might start showing again. Especially for those trying to use a wireless product.
If anyone wants to sign up for ATT Uverse PM me. A good employee is always looking for a lead.

Matt

jarcher · « **Reply #10 on:** 11 Jul 2013, 06:00 pm »

My understanding is that it would be a download, not real time streaming. Your probably still talking hugh downloads, so a fast connection would still be necessary - unless your very patient to wait a long time before viewing.

Bob in St. Louis · « **Reply #11 on:** 11 Jul 2013, 07:50 pm »

Thanks for the info Matt.
I'm thinking it'll be another 10 years before I need to worry myself with streaming 4k in my present locale.

If it's a download, there might be a buffer time. Like you have to have half of it downloaded before you can start watching it.
I don't know. I'm just making that up.

Bob

James Romeyn · « **Reply #12 on:** 11 Jul 2013, 10:20 pm »

Anyone see 4K demos?

Rclark · « **Reply #13 on:** 11 Jul 2013, 10:22 pm »

You know, I remember when Bluray was announced, they said it was highly scalable, to terabyte size. I imagine they will have 4K disc players eventually.

TV's are currently in the 5K+ range.

Not seen a demo, myself.

jarcher · « **Reply #14 on:** 12 Jul 2013, 04:18 am »

I've seen 4K demos at the Magnolia sections of Best Buy on the 84' Sony 4K set : I was impressed.

Will be interesting to see how they handle the technical issues w/ 4K on blu ray. Considering 4K movies are reported to be anywhere from +100GB to 250GB, that would be double to fives times the current blu ray capacity on the usual 25GB blu ray disc, though blu ray is available up to 100 - 128GB (triple / quadruple layer), though these require suitable drives, not your $80 home movie blu ray player. I'm guessing they'll try to find a 4K format that can fit a 4K movie on a 4 layer BDXL (i.e. 128GB) and launch suitable players which are also backward compatible with regular (1080P) blu ray material.

http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=11016

I still see a 4K blu ray disc as being more consumer friendly. Assuming even a 100GB download, that would be 22+ hrs over a 10mbps line, dropping to over 4hr on a 50mbps line (which comcast / verizon offer regularly). Even though +4hr may not seem bad - assuming you don't run into your internet providers data cap - presumably you should add at least another hour to that if you're going to use your internet connection for something else simultaneously.

In any case, what it means is you're unlikely to be spontaneously choosing / watching a 4K movie from a download service (like you would do currently w/ Netflix etc). Not unless you've got a +100mbps connection. It will have to be a pre determined choice for later viewing......unless they really compress / etc the file for streaming purposes.

If you want to run the #'s for laughs, check out: http://www.numion.com/calculators/time.html

youravhandyman · « **Reply #15 on:** 13 Jul 2013, 08:01 pm »

I have seen 4K demos at trade shows and some just blow your mind. But it does make me wonder about content since the demo material was all on hard drive. Using that handy streaming calculator from jarcher a 100M movie will take me almost 24 hours to download on my current internet plan.
Coolest demo I saw at a show was for Planar on their 84" 4K display. It was of a young asian model who comes into a restaurant where they prepare more and more dishes for her. You could see in the closer shots not only that her eyelashes were all cross braided but also that her contacts were tinted with little hearts. I have never seen such a clear image before. On a whole, the video was kinda creepy though. One added feature that a 4K display should be capable of is to display 4 1080P images at once. Instant video wall. Sorry for geeking out on you guys.

North Star · « **Reply #16 on:** 13 Jul 2013, 08:11 pm »

Quote from: Bob in St. Louis on 11 Jul 2013, 07:50 pm

Thanks for the info Matt.
I'm thinking it'll be another 10 years before I need to worry myself with streaming 4k in my present locale.
If it's a download, there might be a buffer time. Like you have to have half of it downloaded before you can start watching it.
I don't know. I'm just making that up.

Bob

I'd say five, here in my own present locale. ...And I'm a physical media type of guy, so Ultra HD Purple-rays (discs). ...Or Rainbow-rays (don't matter to me).

* In addition; 3D will benefit from Ultra HD. ...You'll have now not only four times the Blu-ray resolution, but for each single eye! ...Active 3D that is.

James Romeyn · « **Reply #17 on:** 13 Jul 2013, 09:10 pm »

Quote from: youravhandyman on 13 Jul 2013, 08:01 pm

I have seen 4K demos at trade shows and some just blow your mind. But it does make me wonder about content since the demo material was all on hard drive. Using that handy streaming calculator from jarcher a 100M movie will take me almost 24 hours to download on my current internet plan.
Coolest demo I saw at a show was for Planar on their 84" 4K display. It was of a young asian model who comes into a restaurant where they prepare more and more dishes for her. You could see in the closer shots not only that her eyelashes were all cross braided but also that her contacts were tinted with little hearts. I have never seen such a clear image before. On a whole, the video was kinda creepy though. One added feature that a 4K display should be capable of is to display 4 1080P images at once. Instant video wall. Sorry for geeking out on you guys.

Cool username!

Hey, an hour here, an hour there, all of a sudden you're up to 24 and you're talking real hours.

What? Should I stop braiding my eye lashes and stop wearing tinted contacts with little hearts?- What's with all the hatin'?

Did 3D come and go faster than anything in the history of HT? "Daddy I lost my glasses and can't watch the movie"...sob, sob...

Bob in St. Louis · « **Reply #18 on:** 13 Jul 2013, 10:35 pm »

Quote from: North Star on 13 Jul 2013, 08:11 pm

I'd say five, here in my own present locale. ........

Seven or eight years ago, my location was able to upgrade from Dial-Up to DSL.

So I was being generous saying I could stream 4k in ten years.

skriefal · « **Reply #19 on:** 14 Jul 2013, 09:49 pm »

It isn't just speed that's a problem. It's also monthly transfer limits. That's why I see 100GB 4K movie downloads as a pipe dream at this point. Wide availability of 40+ Mbps speeds with higher monthly transfer limits (1 TB+) is likely at least another decade off in the USA. Japan and Korea will have this long before we do. Ay 4K downloads will almost certainly be highly bitrate-limited, even moreso than current physical 1080p Blu-ray discs. 10GB downloads are more likely.