Sharp this week introduced its second-generation 8K ultra-high def TVs at IFA in Berlin. The new televisions use the company’s new panels as well as the latest processors that can upscale Full-HD and Ultra-HD 4K content to a 7680×4320 resolution.

The initial lineup of Sharp’s 2nd Gen Aquos 8K UHD TVs will include models featuring sizes of 60, 70, and 80 inches. The new televisions will be based on the company’s new image processor that doubles its compute throughput over the predecessor and can upscale 2K as well as 4K content to an 8K resolution with a 100/120 Hz refresh rate.

The largest Aquos 8T C80AX1 80-inch flagship TV will rely on the company’s new UV2A II LCD (presumably IPS/IGZO) panel featuring a 100/120 Hz refresh rate, an “ultra-high brightness”, a “new wide color gamut”, and “high speed response”. The company does not quantify its claims, but it is logical to expect the new TV to be better than the existing Sharp Aquos LC-70X500E UHD TV that features a 400 nits typical brightness, a 1000 nits peak brightness for HDR (HDR10, HLG are supported), and an 8 ms GtG response time. Meanwhile, it is unclear whether a wider color gamut means a better coverage for the BT.2020 color gamut by a new 10-bit panel, or usage of a 12-bit panel.

Sharp plans to commercially launch its Aquos AX1-series 8K UHD TVs in Asia in late 2018 with European release sometimes in Q1 2019. The manufacturer said nothing about availability of its 2nd Gen 8K UHD TVs in the U.S., but since it calls the new family a “global 8K lineup”, it is logical to assume that the televisions will eventually be available in North America as well.

Related Reading:

Sources: Sharp, Technite-Video.de

POST A COMMENT

49 Comments

View All Comments

  • lothar98 - Tuesday, September 4, 2018 - link

    I would be more surprised to see Best Buy in 4 years. Reply
  • Lolimaster - Saturday, September 1, 2018 - link

    More than focusing on resolution, contents needs to focus on the actual video quality, which means better cameras, standarized quality for many light scenarios (real life content), start to ditch 4-2-2 chroma for 4-4-4. Reply
  • Murloc - Sunday, September 2, 2018 - link

    you're talking about insanely niche stuff. Reply
  • Azurael - Monday, September 3, 2018 - link

    That's not really an advantage to the half of the planet for whom SD content is in 720x576i50 though, is it? Reply
  • edzieba - Friday, August 31, 2018 - link

    Only with a naive measurement of acuity (ignoring everything except line-contrast acuity), and only with overly long viewing distances (i.e. too small viewing angles). Same 'problem' as when HDTV started rolling out and people 'couldn't see the difference', because they were sitting at the same distance from the same size SDTV set (whose recommended subtended angle was based on the capabilities of the older standard). Reply
  • Lolimaster - Saturday, September 1, 2018 - link

    Just give me a god damn 27-28" 2560x1440 120-144Hz VA 3000:1 FULL GLOSSY with no curve. All I ask. Reply
  • Grizzly1991 - Saturday, September 1, 2018 - link

    Don't hate just because you cannot afford Reply
  • bug77 - Saturday, September 1, 2018 - link

    This is incredible news! You mean I can now miss 8k content on 2nd generation hardware? I'll take two! Reply
  • Senectus - Sunday, September 2, 2018 - link

    Why 60, 70 and 80 inch? 8K is great, but these physical sizes are just completely wrong - too big for a PC monitor and too small for a TV.

    8K would be amazing for a 46" PC monitor - it will have the same viewing area and elements on the screen will be the same size as that of of 4 traditional 23" 1080p monitors (but with the benefit of no bezels) and it can be run at 200% Windows Scaling/macOS Retina mode for perfect HiDPI mode pixel doubling for super crisp text/icons/UI. That would be exactly 192 DPI which is the same DPI as the Microsoft Surface Studio's screen which is a beauty.

    For an 8K TV, it will have to be much bigger than even 80 inches - I haven't done the exact calculations based on typical TV viewing distances, but I'm thinking a least 100" if not significantly more.
    Reply
  • mr_tawan - Monday, September 3, 2018 - link

    Can I ask, how large is your living room? Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now