Author Topic: OLED TV's  (Read 757 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline hkmurali

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 1
  • Country: in
OLED TV's
« on: August 12, 2017, 02:38:58 PM »
So I happened to check the new LG OLED E7 TV . Got some cool features such as Dolby Vision and Dolby Atmos
But the 65' version costs 6,00,000 INR (9300$) . Doesn't have 3D. But the OLED screen is pretty awesome with individual illumination for every pixel
But still unsure if this is a good buy at this steep price? Any thoughts?
http://www.muralikarthik.in/2017/08/LG-OLED-TV-4K-UHD-SMART-TV.html
 

Offline wilfred

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4578
  • Country: au
Re: OLED TV's
« Reply #1 on: August 12, 2017, 03:10:49 PM »
Rich people can buy whatever they like. I've been waiting for OLED TV's to come down in price but it has been a long wait. Last I heard the blue colour was problematic insofar as fading over time so the TV has a relatively shorter life. That's if longevity is an issue still these days where TVs no longer seem to dodge the upgrade cycle before they become obsolete.

Whatever you buy it will become "the TV" soon enough. Even before the next greatest thing is released.

As a personal observation if you find yourself marvelling at the screen technology I think you should raise your viewing standards.
 

Online Rerouter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3000
  • Country: au
  • Question Everything... Except This Statement
Re: OLED TV's
« Reply #2 on: August 12, 2017, 03:20:35 PM »
It comes down to what you intend to use the TV.

To decern 4K resolution, on a 65" screen would require a viewing distance of just 1.2m. to decern better than 1080p would require a viewing distance of less than 2.5m, which is fairer. so its likely such a screen would have more apparent resolution than 1080p, but how much comes down to how far away your sitting to it.

At any given time, your colour vision can only decern a 1000:1 luminescence difference between the brightest and darkest point of your vision, so contrast ratios of higher than 100,000 are well outside of what you can see, if a single pixel towards the center of the screen is bright, you cannot tell black from very dim, its only if the entire scene was very dark, when your black and white vision takes over where 1,000,000:1 ratios become the limit of human sight, exceeding this is beyond what you are capable of telling apart. Are you planning to watch pitch black video with limited luminescence, or are you used to moves where the contrast is inflated for average people to be able to see whats happening?

Personally if i was in the market for such a TV, i would go looking on a auction site and get a 2 year old one for under $1000, but i am a scrooge.

Each pixel being able to turn fully off can reduce the faint grey glow in very dark scenes, but for $9000, i think i can live without it.
 

Offline Brumby

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 5662
  • Country: au
Re: OLED TV's
« Reply #3 on: August 12, 2017, 05:01:09 PM »
But the 65' version costs 6,00,000 INR (9300$)

That screen belongs in a stadium - and is a bargain price.  For a 65" version, that is a bit pricey.

I, too, have had a keen interest in the OLED technology - long before Sony released its rather expensive 11" screen.  While sizes are going up and prices are coming down, it is indeed the longevity issue that is making me wary of taking the plunge - and my concerns are threefold:
1. The relative changes in emissions between the colours over time.  With the blue spectrum being an issue, it means the colour balance is going to change.
2. The total change in emissions over time.  I'd hate to see that decline become noticeable.
3. The potential for burn-in.  With LCD this wasn't an issue - but now with this type of active pixel ... it's back.

What I am interested in is the progress with quantum dot.  As I understand it, that should at least be able to mitigate the first of my concerns.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf