27 inch Wega here, dating myself.
Mom: "Dont sit too close to that thing"
Fast forward 20 years, a 27 inch monitor is right up on my face, contemplating a 32 or 43.
Mom: "Dont sit too close to that thing"
Fast forward 20 years, a 27 inch monitor is right up on my face, contemplating a 32 or 43.
Definitely a 32. 43 is a bit much.
Edit: Unless you're an office manager and plan on watching football most of the day.
Ignore the other commenter, there is no such thing as too big as long as there are enough pixels!
4K is absolutely too few pixels for 55” for me. To go 55”, I’d need at minimum 2.5x that many personally. As such a thing doesn’t exist, I use two 27” 5K monitors and endure the bezel divider.
Fun fact: it had a special "anamorphic" mode. You know how widescreen movies on 4:3 displays are cropped? Someone had the idea that maybe instead of cropping them, you could use all of the resolution must just direct the electron beam to display it on middle 3/4 (vertically) of the screen. There, an extra 33% better vertical resolution and brightness for free?
There weren't a whole lot of DVDs mastered that way, but when you could get one, and your DVD player supported it, and your TV supported it, it looked freaking fantastic.
Tbh I'll prefer 27" 4k.
43 might be a bit better because you can move the screen a little farther away.
In fact it’s nicer in that I can sit a little further back than a 27” which ultimately is better for my eyes.