OLED TV - Any Experience?

[Fatty Duckets]

Hey Guys and Gals,

I have been researching a OLED tv for some time now, and I came to an opportunity today to purchase a floor model for a substantial discount. The model is the LG 55EC9300. I have read numerous reviews, and it sounds like exactly what I want (coming from Plasma tvs).

My question is, does anyone here have any experience with an OLED tv? My biggest interest is how it performs on cable tv with Sports. Everything else, I am not interested in. Here is the model I am looking at:

http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/by-brand/lg/ec9300

Thanks!

[csu87]

I just went through this and ended up going for the cheaper LED 4k vs the OLED based on price point and picture quality. The OLED had a great picture, but for $1k more, I didnt feel it was that much better. Now the LG OLED 4k TV had an amazing picture, but then that one was another $1k more as well.

I was actually looking at the same model you are looking at I was not a fan. I dont like the curved TVs, as my TV is kind of in a corner out of the way, and depending on where you are, the picture gets distorted from the curve. Straight on, they give a great picture, but not from the side.

Ended up going for the Vizio 55" LED 4k and was able to work out a deal that got it for almost half price when bundling with a washer and dryer.

As for watching sports or video games or thing like that, most new TVs dont have any issue with them as long as you buy a reputable brand. Samsung, LG, Sony, Vizio...

[jlstyle]

I like mine.
Mine is 65EF9500 and compare to 65UF8500 I used to have, it's not too much of an upgrade IMO other than killer looks on the TV design. I upgrade my TV every so often because of the deal I get from my LG friend.
Picture quality isn't really something you can distinguish from cable tv as long as they are calibrated.

I know LG is blowing out OLED in month of October and I think 55EF9300 is less than $2000 now.

I'm not a tech savvy but only advantage I could see over 4K UHD was that the black level in OLED is substantially better, but again, from cable sports programs, you can't really tell the difference because you are just not exposed to the dark scenes in sports.

Just get a bigger 4k UHD TV for your money unless you are a hardcore movie fan and calibrate it well.

[Fatty Duckets]

Thank you both for the input, much appreciated. So the ec9300 I can get a floor model for $1150. But, I am nervous that by black friday or Christmas, a new one could come down even more. Thoughts on that deal?

[csu87]

Originally Posted by Fatty Duckets

Thank you both for the input, much appreciated. So the ec9300 I can get a floor model for $1150. But, I am nervous that by black friday or Christmas, a new one could come down even more. Thoughts on that deal?

That's not a bad price. They were almost $1900 at best buy when i bought my tv. If it's what you want, go for it.

[zx10guy]

I'd go here and read up some on the reviewer's impressions of video quality between the OLED and LCD. These guys do an annual TV shootout where a bunch of reviewers come in and give their impressions on the various TVs included in the shootout. This has been going on for years. The reviews also include calibration reports where you can actually have an objective comparison rather than someone's subjective comparison. If it were me and I got a decent deal, I would go OLED because of the black level performance which forms the foundation of any good picture.

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/40-ole...t-results.html

[Alfisti]

I still don't understand 4K TBH, where's the content coming from? Anything pumped through cable is just 720p which is miles and miles off of 4K.

[csu87]

Originally Posted by Alfisti

I still don't understand 4K TBH, where's the content coming from? Anything pumped through cable is just 720p which is miles and miles off of 4K.

You can get 4k sources and take full advantage of 4k TV. Not sure of cable, but I know DirectTV has them. Also, most the 4k TVs upconvert the signal if it isnt a 4k signal. I had my 4k next to my normal TV off the same HD sources and it was noticeably better on the 4k.

[Clark_Kent]

Originally Posted by Alfisti

I still don't understand 4K TBH, where's the content coming from? Anything pumped through cable is just 720p which is miles and miles off of 4K.

You can also get 4K content from Netflix and Amazon Prime TV.

[zx10guy]

Originally Posted by Alfisti

I still don't understand 4K TBH, where's the content coming from? Anything pumped through cable is just 720p which is miles and miles off of 4K.

To me it's still a fad just like 3D was. I base my buying decisions on TVs with picture quality first. This means the ability to accurately reproduce colors, contrast, and black levels. If a TV can't do any of these right, then it doesn't matter how dense the pixels are.

Manufacturers are just riding the wave of a spec that they can market and the sales people something to sell a customer to upgrade from their current TV. Look 4K is better than 1080P.

If one buys a TV (preferably one with ISF calibration modes) and has the set ISF calibrated, they'll find that investment will be leaps and bounds more than just paying for 4K.

These charts will put in perspective on why one would actually want to look at higher resolutions which is a function of screen size and viewing distance. While the charts don't have 4K in them, you can extrapolate how 4K fits in. If you're well within the area where 1080P will more than cover your viewing situation, 4K is just going to be a waste.

[Alfisti]

That's my point. i still see his-res screens that cannot handle movement well too, i'd pay extra for that over 4K.

[zx10guy]

Originally Posted by Alfisti

That's my point. i still see his-res screens that cannot handle movement well too, i'd pay extra for that over 4K.

It's a shame the majority of people just want new and think it's going to be better than "old". If people actually cared about video performance, companies like Pioneer which really pushed TV technology would still be around.

Here are some measurements done on my calibrated Pioneer 141FD. Until I find a TV that can significantly best these results, I'm not wasting my money.

[csu87]

To me, its a matter of preference. At my Best Buy they had a normal HD LED and a 4k LED right next to each other and the 4k looked better imo, even after zeroing out all the settings and after optimizing the settings. I also have a pretty new HD LED and compared to my new 4k, it isnt quite as good as a picture.

I disagree with it being a fad like the 3d. The 3d required you to have glasses to watch, which in some cases were $100+ a set, where the 4k doesnt require that, and eventually all sources will start to come with 4k capabilities. The newest PS4/XB1 are going to be shipped with 4k capabilities, DirectTV is starting to send out 4k Boxes, and almost all the new receivers are 4k capable.

I will agree that if the TV has a slow screen, then it doesnt matter what quality it is, but all the reputable brands have screens fast enough for normal watching.

[Alfisti]

Originally Posted by zx10guy

It's a shame the majority of people just want new and think it's going to be better than "old". If people actually cared about video performance, companies like Pioneer which really pushed TV technology would still be around.

Here are some measurements done on my calibrated Pioneer 141FD. Until I find a TV that can significantly best these results, I'm not wasting my money.

Which is why i bought the last of the Panasonic Plasmas. We are not big TV watchers and god knows the wife cannot tell the difference between a good and bad set (she still religiously watches SD) but for $800CDn it was the best quality picture i could buy, especially given the ability of plasma to handle movement as my TV is too big for the sitting position.

[zx10guy]

Originally Posted by Alfisti

Which is why i bought the last of the Panasonic Plasmas. We are not big TV watchers and god knows the wife cannot tell the difference between a good and bad set (she still religiously watches SD) but for $800CDn it was the best quality picture i could buy, especially given the ability of plasma to handle movement as my TV is too big for the sitting position.

Good decision. I would have jumped on the last of the Panasonic plasmas but couldn't justify just having a TV sitting around as I already have two Pioneer plasmas. Wish Panny was still making plasmas when I bought my vacation home.

[zx10guy]

Originally Posted by csu87

To me, its a matter of preference. At my Best Buy they had a normal HD LED and a 4k LED right next to each other and the 4k looked better imo, even after zeroing out all the settings and after optimizing the settings. I also have a pretty new HD LED and compared to my new 4k, it isnt quite as good as a picture.

I disagree with it being a fad like the 3d. The 3d required you to have glasses to watch, which in some cases were $100+ a set, where the 4k doesnt require that, and eventually all sources will start to come with 4k capabilities. The newest PS4/XB1 are going to be shipped with 4k capabilities, DirectTV is starting to send out 4k Boxes, and almost all the new receivers are 4k capable.

I will agree that if the TV has a slow screen, then it doesnt matter what quality it is, but all the reputable brands have screens fast enough for normal watching.

It is a fad. The human eye can only see differences in resolution up to a point which is captured by the graphs I posted. While things like color accuracy, contrast, gray scale, black levels, and video motion are easy for the human eye to pick up at any distance or screen size. If consumers focused on these aspects of picture quality instead of just a blind resolution number, TVs would be so much better.

[jlstyle]

Originally Posted by Fatty Duckets

Thank you both for the input, much appreciated. So the ec9300 I can get a floor model for $1150. But, I am nervous that by black friday or Christmas, a new one could come down even more. Thoughts on that deal?

I doubt BF or Christmas is going to give you any better pricing than that.
LG is only lowering the price for a bit to excite the market. It will rise again and stay steady above $2k. If it is $1150, I would personally get it as long as there are no scratches on the screen.

Originally Posted by Alfisti

I still don't understand 4K TBH, where's the content coming from? Anything pumped through cable is just 720p which is miles and miles off of 4K.

Upconverting feature on current 4k tv models are quite good and normal cable looks visibly better.

[P1]

My Sony XBR9 still gives me an amazing picture quality. My friend all make fun of me, saying I have an "old TV" but like many on here, are clueless about what a "good" TV really should be like. They just buy the cheapest, biggest TVs at Best Buy that have the colorful stickers.

[justinnum1]

I have a pioneer kuro elite plasma. Still considered the pinnacle. Try and find one with low hours(less than 5,000)

Originally Posted by zx10guy

Good decision. I would have jumped on the last of the Panasonic plasmas but couldn't justify just having a TV sitting around as I already have two Pioneer plasmas. Wish Panny was still making plasmas when I bought my vacation home.

that might have been a mistake. I have recieved offers over 3.5k for my 101fd(i paid 1,800 new about 5 years ago)

[zx10guy]

Originally Posted by justinnum1

I have a pioneer kuro elite plasma. Still considered the pinnacle. Try and find one with low hours(less than 5,000)



that might have been a mistake. I have recieved offers over 3.5k for my 101fd(i paid 1,800 new about 5 years ago)

When I said I would have bought a Panny, it would have been to put in my vacation property and not to replace any of my Pioneers. My 141FD probably has less than 5000 hours on it since it's not the main TV I use. It's in my media room. The main TV is the one in my family room which is a 1010HD.

[windtendo]

Originally Posted by justinnum1

I have a pioneer kuro elite plasma. Still considered the pinnacle. Try and find one with low hours(less than 5,000)



that might have been a mistake. I have recieved offers over 3.5k for my 101fd(i paid 1,800 new about 5 years ago)

I've had my pioneer elite plasma for at least 7 years and still haven't seen anything other than some of the new OLED stuff that matches the picture quality.

[justinnum1]

Originally Posted by zx10guy

When I said I would have bought a Panny, it would have been to put in my vacation property and not to replace any of my Pioneers. My 141FD probably has less than 5000 hours on it since it's not the main TV I use. It's in my media room. The main TV is the one in my family room which is a 1010HD.

i misread.