OLED on a budget
Discussion
Its time for a new TV, my old (7 years) Panasonic plasma whilst still good and working fine, is a bit of a behemoth to be putting it on an internal wall of the new house + I don't want to do the job twice as a different TV is likely to mount differently.
OLED appear to be the latest tech but are expensive, if I am honest more than I would like to pay as I had budgeted about 2K. LG have a OLED on discount at John Lewis LG OLED55B6V which is the right size at 55" & appears to get good solid reviews but I am guessing is last years model hence the £400 discount. It's currently £1500 inc a 5 year warranty.
Assuming I stay with OLED tech, would this be a 'poorer' choice than waiting & upping my budget? to the latest models, has OLED tech moved on significantly enough since this model was introduced making it outdated and inferior to LCD/LED models from the various brands at a similar price point?.
TIA Shep
OLED appear to be the latest tech but are expensive, if I am honest more than I would like to pay as I had budgeted about 2K. LG have a OLED on discount at John Lewis LG OLED55B6V which is the right size at 55" & appears to get good solid reviews but I am guessing is last years model hence the £400 discount. It's currently £1500 inc a 5 year warranty.
Assuming I stay with OLED tech, would this be a 'poorer' choice than waiting & upping my budget? to the latest models, has OLED tech moved on significantly enough since this model was introduced making it outdated and inferior to LCD/LED models from the various brands at a similar price point?.
TIA Shep
Edited by shep1001 on Monday 29th May 09:25
IMO OLED still has a couple of years to mature as a technology. It's no where near as bright as a good LED panel so if you watch TV/films in a bright room that might be an issue. Also, image retention is starting to rear its ugly head on a few '15/16 sets.
On the flipside, an OLED will have better contrast than a LED, so colours will 'pop' more, it's thinner and lighter and you don't have to worry about 'blooming' when watching a film with dark scenes in a dark room.
There's also HDMI 2.1 to consider, which should start appearing next year. If you do buy a new TV, make sure it has a 5 year warranty so if anything happens to the panel you can get it fixed for free
On the flipside, an OLED will have better contrast than a LED, so colours will 'pop' more, it's thinner and lighter and you don't have to worry about 'blooming' when watching a film with dark scenes in a dark room.
There's also HDMI 2.1 to consider, which should start appearing next year. If you do buy a new TV, make sure it has a 5 year warranty so if anything happens to the panel you can get it fixed for free
Didn't go for the LG OLED panel in the end, opted for the Panasonic 58DX902B not quite as sexy thin but it just looked better with bright colours, very little in it on cost, was £100 cheaper in JL inc a 5yr warranty. There was also an offer for a Panasonic 4K dvd player & sound bar for £99 each which will do in the interim as I need funds to finish the house off at the moment.
My opinion for what it's worth. Every high-end LCD/LED outperforms a low end OLED in many areas that are important in the real world e.g upscaling, motion and brightness.
Put a B6 LG directly next to a E6 LG and the difference is staggering, the B6 looks really weak. I opted for a top of the range Sony XD LCD/LED over the bottom of the range B6 OLED from LG.
Put a B6 LG directly next to a E6 LG and the difference is staggering, the B6 looks really weak. I opted for a top of the range Sony XD LCD/LED over the bottom of the range B6 OLED from LG.
at the risk of hijacking the OP's thread, one problem I have with a lot of the modern LCDs is viewing angles. Something OLED appears much better at.
Are there any decent LCDs that give a true 90deg (ie plus and minus 45 deg) viewing angle without loss of contrast or colour saturation?
My room layout means that half the family are viewing at 45deg to straight on so this is pretty much essential to me, my current TV is just about ok for this (it is a Panasonic TX-32LZD80 which I think is an IPS panel).
Are there any decent LCDs that give a true 90deg (ie plus and minus 45 deg) viewing angle without loss of contrast or colour saturation?
My room layout means that half the family are viewing at 45deg to straight on so this is pretty much essential to me, my current TV is just about ok for this (it is a Panasonic TX-32LZD80 which I think is an IPS panel).
brman said:
at the risk of hijacking the OP's thread, one problem I have with a lot of the modern LCDs is viewing angles. Something OLED appears much better at.
Are there any decent LCDs that give a true 90deg (ie plus and minus 45 deg) viewing angle without loss of contrast or colour saturation?
My room layout means that half the family are viewing at 45deg to straight on so this is pretty much essential to me, my current TV is just about ok for this (it is a Panasonic TX-32LZD80 which I think is an IPS panel).
You need to look for another IPS panel LED TV. The only ones I know of are LG ones, however the compromise is that blacks are more grey than black! They do tend to show more light bleed in the corners too. Best to go and have a look at one in the flesh.Are there any decent LCDs that give a true 90deg (ie plus and minus 45 deg) viewing angle without loss of contrast or colour saturation?
My room layout means that half the family are viewing at 45deg to straight on so this is pretty much essential to me, my current TV is just about ok for this (it is a Panasonic TX-32LZD80 which I think is an IPS panel).
Stormfly1985 said:
You need to look for another IPS panel LED TV. The only ones I know of are LG ones, however the compromise is that blacks are more grey than black! They do tend to show more light bleed in the corners too. Best to go and have a look at one in the flesh.
Thanks, I had a feeling that might be the answer. Shame as the one thing I don't like about my existing TV is the poor blacks, but I guess there has to be a compromise somewhere...... 
I have an LG 55EG910 OLED which is 1080p, and also bought a Sony 55XD93 which is a 4K HDR LCD.
The OLED is a better set on everything but some seriously bright demo clips that show off HDR.
Even playing the same 4k demo on both the OLED still looks better and from the sofa I can't see the extra resolution.
With decent HDR material you can see why HDR is more important than the 4K it comes with, it does make things look more natural, but in all honesty it brings the LCD closer to OLED.
The one area where the Sony wins is motion with some material. Sony uses Clear Plus to increase motion which inserts black frames and increases motion resolution to around 900 lines, this is better than LGs resolution/motion enhancers. However, I prefer processing off, just looks more natural to me, which means there is very little between the two in that regard.
I have no problem with the black levels on the Sony, where LCD still struggles though is when it has to do ansi contrast, where there is a real mix of bright and dark on screen at the same time, it simply looks a bit washed out in areas you know are meant to be almost black.
I would be happy with either, but the XD93 wasn't the replacement for the 1080 oled I had hoped. Shame as I only paid £800 for it.
The OLED is a better set on everything but some seriously bright demo clips that show off HDR.
Even playing the same 4k demo on both the OLED still looks better and from the sofa I can't see the extra resolution.
With decent HDR material you can see why HDR is more important than the 4K it comes with, it does make things look more natural, but in all honesty it brings the LCD closer to OLED.
The one area where the Sony wins is motion with some material. Sony uses Clear Plus to increase motion which inserts black frames and increases motion resolution to around 900 lines, this is better than LGs resolution/motion enhancers. However, I prefer processing off, just looks more natural to me, which means there is very little between the two in that regard.
I have no problem with the black levels on the Sony, where LCD still struggles though is when it has to do ansi contrast, where there is a real mix of bright and dark on screen at the same time, it simply looks a bit washed out in areas you know are meant to be almost black.
I would be happy with either, but the XD93 wasn't the replacement for the 1080 oled I had hoped. Shame as I only paid £800 for it.
Well it is only LCD that suffer with viewing angles, IPS not as bad but then they have a washed out picture to start with.
The Sony is meant to be a bit better than the Panasonic in this regard, but if you sat on either end of the sofa (directly in front of the TV) the image would fall apart on the Sony.
The Sony is meant to be a bit better than the Panasonic in this regard, but if you sat on either end of the sofa (directly in front of the TV) the image would fall apart on the Sony.
gizlaroc said:
I have an LG 55EG910 OLED which is 1080p, and also bought a Sony 55XD93 which is a 4K HDR LCD.
The OLED is a better set on everything but some seriously bright demo clips that show off HDR.
Even playing the same 4k demo on both the OLED still looks better and from the sofa I can't see the extra resolution.
With decent HDR material you can see why HDR is more important than the 4K it comes with, it does make things look more natural, but in all honesty it brings the LCD closer to OLED.
The one area where the Sony wins is motion with some material. Sony uses Clear Plus to increase motion which inserts black frames and increases motion resolution to around 900 lines, this is better than LGs resolution/motion enhancers. However, I prefer processing off, just looks more natural to me, which means there is very little between the two in that regard.
I have no problem with the black levels on the Sony, where LCD still struggles though is when it has to do ansi contrast, where there is a real mix of bright and dark on screen at the same time, it simply looks a bit washed out in areas you know are meant to be almost black.
I would be happy with either, but the XD93 wasn't the replacement for the 1080 oled I had hoped. Shame as I only paid £800 for it.
Your XD93 must be broken or badly calibrated. As an XD93 owner who compared it longingly to a B6 your comments couldn't be further from my experience. The OLED is a better set on everything but some seriously bright demo clips that show off HDR.
Even playing the same 4k demo on both the OLED still looks better and from the sofa I can't see the extra resolution.
With decent HDR material you can see why HDR is more important than the 4K it comes with, it does make things look more natural, but in all honesty it brings the LCD closer to OLED.
The one area where the Sony wins is motion with some material. Sony uses Clear Plus to increase motion which inserts black frames and increases motion resolution to around 900 lines, this is better than LGs resolution/motion enhancers. However, I prefer processing off, just looks more natural to me, which means there is very little between the two in that regard.
I have no problem with the black levels on the Sony, where LCD still struggles though is when it has to do ansi contrast, where there is a real mix of bright and dark on screen at the same time, it simply looks a bit washed out in areas you know are meant to be almost black.
I would be happy with either, but the XD93 wasn't the replacement for the 1080 oled I had hoped. Shame as I only paid £800 for it.
As for comparing it to the 910, firstly the 910 doesn't support HDR and secondly every review of the 910 says it suffered from severe uniformity issues. So saying it outperforms the XD93 in all areas is a bit bizarre.
Each to their own but I know from personal experience that the XD93 would walk all over a 910. When calibrated properly the XD93 trumps motion, brightness and really trumps when upscaling.
I was an ISF calibrator for nearly 7 years, so I know how to calibrate a set.
My 910 doesn't have any dirty screen effect, no vignetting, there is a tiny bit of pink push on the outer 1/4 of the panel on a 100 and 90ire full field, which is not there on a 90 or 100ire field window.
My XD93 had no light bleed, not DSE, it was a very good example, but hat matters is when you sit down and watch content.
For me the OLED still looked 'nicer' and that is all I care about.
My 910 doesn't have any dirty screen effect, no vignetting, there is a tiny bit of pink push on the outer 1/4 of the panel on a 100 and 90ire full field, which is not there on a 90 or 100ire field window.
My XD93 had no light bleed, not DSE, it was a very good example, but hat matters is when you sit down and watch content.
For me the OLED still looked 'nicer' and that is all I care about.
Ire is simply the unit we use to describe grey levels.
0ire is black and 100ire is white.
An OLED can produce 0ire perfectly as it can turn each pixel off, in fact it can control each pixel, so if you have a scene with say someone is a black jacket with lots of creases it will show all that detail properly, which is where the Sony, being an LCD, falls down. The Sony either makes it all look black (which I don't actually mind) but often makes everything look a milky grey as it tries to show the grey bits and then the backlight lights the black too much because it is next to it.
This gives a good example, although this scene is actually one which really shows where even the best LCDs still stuggle....
In the pic above because there is bright in the background and on his face etc. the screen has to turn on the backlight running along the top and bottom to light this which then washes out the areas that are meant to be black, or near black.
The photo above makes it look worse than it does in real world settings, but it is a good example of where any backlit display will struggle.
0ire is black and 100ire is white.
An OLED can produce 0ire perfectly as it can turn each pixel off, in fact it can control each pixel, so if you have a scene with say someone is a black jacket with lots of creases it will show all that detail properly, which is where the Sony, being an LCD, falls down. The Sony either makes it all look black (which I don't actually mind) but often makes everything look a milky grey as it tries to show the grey bits and then the backlight lights the black too much because it is next to it.
This gives a good example, although this scene is actually one which really shows where even the best LCDs still stuggle....
In the pic above because there is bright in the background and on his face etc. the screen has to turn on the backlight running along the top and bottom to light this which then washes out the areas that are meant to be black, or near black.
The photo above makes it look worse than it does in real world settings, but it is a good example of where any backlit display will struggle.
Some OLEDs have a slight push towards green or pink at the edges, normally left and right 1/3 of the screen pushes pink slighly, where as the centre pushes green.
This is only obvious on certain IRE ranges, as I said, if I put up a 100% (full screen coverage) white window (100ire) you can see the tinge slightly..
The above is an image I found showing a really bad example, most are far more subtle than that.
If I put up a 90% 100% window it is even more subtle.
However, the scenes where there is reality are pretty much non existent, you may get 25% or even 50% of the screen show white, even on films where people are walking across snow I can't see it.
The problem is people go looking for issues, and although we can use slides and patterns to look for issues what really matters is how 'nice' a TV is to just sit back and watch.
I calibrated my LG OLED when I got it and 400 hours in, and other than that I haven't touched it since.
What I found with the Sony was I was always tweaking it depending on whether I was watching in the day, at night and even depending on the content, I could watch a studio based show and it look stunning, but then put on a dark film and I had to tweak the black levels to stop it looking washed out.
I guess it also depends where you are coming from?
I had a Sony W905 before that I loved, it was bought as a second, neat looking TV, and my mine set was a seriously tweaked Pioneer Kuro, but in many ways I preferred the Sony. But after living with the OLED I just don't think I can go back to LCD now. OLEDs are not perfect, but to be honest, if I could never buy another TV again I woudn't care, the images I am getting from this are stunning.
This is only obvious on certain IRE ranges, as I said, if I put up a 100% (full screen coverage) white window (100ire) you can see the tinge slightly..
The above is an image I found showing a really bad example, most are far more subtle than that.
If I put up a 90% 100% window it is even more subtle.
However, the scenes where there is reality are pretty much non existent, you may get 25% or even 50% of the screen show white, even on films where people are walking across snow I can't see it.
The problem is people go looking for issues, and although we can use slides and patterns to look for issues what really matters is how 'nice' a TV is to just sit back and watch.
I calibrated my LG OLED when I got it and 400 hours in, and other than that I haven't touched it since.
What I found with the Sony was I was always tweaking it depending on whether I was watching in the day, at night and even depending on the content, I could watch a studio based show and it look stunning, but then put on a dark film and I had to tweak the black levels to stop it looking washed out.
I guess it also depends where you are coming from?
I had a Sony W905 before that I loved, it was bought as a second, neat looking TV, and my mine set was a seriously tweaked Pioneer Kuro, but in many ways I preferred the Sony. But after living with the OLED I just don't think I can go back to LCD now. OLEDs are not perfect, but to be honest, if I could never buy another TV again I woudn't care, the images I am getting from this are stunning.
Gassing Station | Home Cinema & Hi-Fi | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff