There may be some reasons to adopt 4K format cameras, but they don't have anything to do with our clients, yet.

Here's an article from CNet about how both Sony and Samsung have locked their content to their own TVs, as in, if you want to watch 'Amazing Spider Man 2', from Sony Studios, you have to have a both a Sony device that offers streaming of their 4K library and, most importantly, it only works with a Sony TV... and Samsung is doing the same thing.

This kind of thing is likely to slow down adoption

Why are Sony and Samsung keeping 4K content to themselves? - CNET (http://www.cnet.com/news/why-are-sony-and-samsung-keeping-4k-content-to-themselves/)

//also note, from the article, that the TVs don't actually cost much more to make than current gen, but their price is WAY higher.

I think Sony is the inventor of the word "proprietary"

On the Belgian Sony website they are heavily pushing their 4K tv towards footballfans, the reason why you should buy such a tv is (mentioned on the site) that you will be able to count every single blade of grass on the field and that their tv is able to transform regular HD to a 4 times higher resolution true upscaling with their X-Reality PRO-technology.

Great! so it looks like Sony just gave my HD camera a few more years of use :)

As one that chose HD-DVD over Blu-ray initially during the HD-Disc war, this seems like Deja Vu all over again and it may ultimately be bad for the consumer that chooses the "wrong" side.

Sony and Samsung are definitely slowing down 4K acceptance in this way, that's a problem you get when companies get to big and trying to use their weight to change the buying behaviour, the loser of such a battle is always the client.

Very odd... so the TV can play 4K, but then an external box "locks" the content... that's pretty dumb. You'd have thunk that the HDDVD/BR wars and the resulting slow adoption curve for BR would have taught a few valuable lessons... sometimes stupid just won't go away...


This goes back to the lack of a delivery format... streaming will be a heavy bandwidth hog, there isn't a "4K disc"... so the options are limited.

The reasons to be fiddling with 4K are for the image quality, and to be on top of it if and when it does become more common (and a delivery method becomes apparent!).



Logically, if producing a 4K TV is not more costly, they SHOULD become more prevalent as more 4K cell phonces/tablets/cameras become available.... Since I'm using a cheap off brand TV as a 4K "monitor", it obviously wasn't much more expensive than an equivalent basic HD set... so it's going to come down to how soon "open" 4K content becomes commonly available.