What premium would you pay for OLED? - AVS Forum
View Poll Results: What premium would you pay for OLED?
I will never buy an OLED 2 2.41%
None (1X the price of LED/LCD) 15 18.07%
10% (1.1X the price of LED/LCD) 23 27.71%
50% (1.5X the price of LED/LCD) 32 38.55%
100% (2X the price of LED/LCD) 10 12.05%
150% (2.5X the price of LED/LCD) 0 0%
200% (3X the price of LED/LCD) 1 1.20%
Voters: 83. You may not vote on this poll

Forum Jump: 
 3Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 43 Old 07-15-2014, 02:00 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,744
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 324
What premium would you pay for OLED?

For whatever LED/LCD TV you have recently purchased or are shopping for, how much of a premium would you be willing to pay for a similar-sized OLED?
stas3098 likes this.
fafrd is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 43 Old 07-15-2014, 02:02 PM
Senior Member
 
Bassment's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 378
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 174 Post(s)
Liked: 66
double
Bassment is online now  
post #3 of 43 Old 07-15-2014, 02:32 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,744
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bassment View Post
double

didn't see your vote.


If you mean you would pay double for OLED what you would pay for LED/LCD, you should vote for '100%' (which still has no votes).


If you meant you would pay a premium of double what you would pay for LED/LCD, you should vote for 200% (which also has no votes).
fafrd is online now  
post #4 of 43 Old 07-15-2014, 03:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
westa6969's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: From Michigan now Retired to Naples, FL
Posts: 6,813
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 64 Post(s)
Liked: 125
Were I comparing lets say the 75" HU8550 that can be found for under $5K presently I would offer up to $7500 for an LG 77" OLED but understand that may remain out of site for another year whereas the 65" should be retailed for around $6K but it's hard upgrading to the same size you already own - hard to make the leap without seeing it in action though.

I've recently read in Asian Trade Journals that LG has discovered ways to dramatically increase production volumes of OLED and this may lead to price drops in the future unless Price Fixing collusion occurs if and when Sony, Panny and others partner with their supply. China has about three manufacturers partnered with LG also with the OLED. Problem with the survey is price thresholds vary dramatically for LED to guess a true percentage.

Samsung 65F8000, 60D8000, 40HU6350, Panasonic 50E60 LCD's
westa6969 is offline  
post #5 of 43 Old 07-15-2014, 03:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,728
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 114 Post(s)
Liked: 192
Right now you are an early adopter when you buy an OLED. I ain't gonna be a guinea pig so i ain't gonna buy a OLED right now. Once OLED is a working affordable tech i am willing to pay the same i would pay for a LCd.
8mile13 is offline  
post #6 of 43 Old 07-15-2014, 07:47 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 9
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Not really interested in OLED to be honest, I'm fine with LED/LCD for now.
ChronoDetector is offline  
post #7 of 43 Old 07-15-2014, 09:53 PM
Member
 
Eternitay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 46
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Looking to get a 65" vizio m this year, if there was a 65" oled available for 50% more I would make the jump and stretch the credit, maybe even 70%. At $3k though, I'd rather have a larger set than perfect black levels.
Eternitay is offline  
post #8 of 43 Old 07-16-2014, 10:46 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,744
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eternitay View Post
Looking to get a 65" vizio m this year, if there was a 65" oled available for 50% more I would make the jump and stretch the credit, maybe even 70%. At $3k though, I'd rather have a larger set than perfect black levels.

After 24 votes, average comes to 1.72X the price of LED/LCD (72% premium), so your sentiments appear to represent the average (for he moment :-).


The median is currently 1.1X and 1.5X is the current leader of the poll..


Keep those votes coming!
fafrd is online now  
post #9 of 43 Old 07-16-2014, 05:10 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,744
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post
After 24 votes, average comes to 1.72X the price of LED/LCD (72% premium), so your sentiments appear to represent the average (for he moment :-).


The median is currently 1.1X and 1.5X is the current leader of the poll..


Keep those votes coming!

After another 5 votes, average comes to 1.26X the price of LED/LCD (26% premium), median is still 1.1x which has also now become the leading vote in the poll.
fafrd is online now  
post #10 of 43 Old 07-16-2014, 07:07 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Cleveland Plasma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 11,840
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 198 Post(s)
Liked: 454
OLED is amazing....... I voted 50%
Cleveland Plasma is online now  
post #11 of 43 Old 07-17-2014, 11:08 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,744
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleveland Plasma View Post
OLED is amazing....... I voted 50%

So did I :-)


And I suspect if I had placed this poll in the plasma forum, that would be the consensus and we'd even have more 100% (2X the price) votes.


But here on the LCD forum, where folks are a bit less fanatical when it comes to black levels and off-axis viewing and are also probably a bit more value conscious as a rule, after a total of 36 votes, the average has returned to 26% (1.25X) while the median and the current leader of the pole both remain at 10% (1.1X).


Since LCD customers represent the vast majority in the market today, I thought this was the more appropriate forum to post the thread (and it also speaks to the challenge LG will be facing when they begin umping out 4000 OLEDs/day later this year!).


My only regret is that I did not include a vote for 25% (1.25X) since it seems that may be a meaningful midpoint between the two mot popular votes of 10% (1.1X) and 50% (1.5X)...


But still, interesting data - thanks to all who have contributed.
fafrd is online now  
post #12 of 43 Old 07-17-2014, 12:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,728
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 114 Post(s)
Liked: 192
I would like to see what these folks who voted pay for an LCd. When paying 500 bucks (1.5X $750) for an LCd is not the same as paying 5,000 bucks (1.5X $7,500) for a LCd. Only two folks commented on that. Whatever it is what folks are willing to pay for an OLED nobody who voted actually bought an OLED, so they are willing to buy an OLED in their dreams. In their dreams folks are willing to pay more than what they actually would pay in real life Also folks do not seem to be fully aware that OLED is not a mature technology..


btw I am willing to pay €2,000 for a TV that is about it be it a LCd, Plasma or OLED.
Ken Ross likes this.
8mile13 is offline  
post #13 of 43 Old 07-17-2014, 01:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
dsinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,648
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 59
^ I paid slightly more than $7K for a 70" Sharp Elite when they were first released. I am thinking of paying $8K for the 77" OLED in 2d half 2015 if they prove to have no serious problems. Paying a 10% premium (my vote) over LCD would be well worth it to avoid the panel lottery so many people experience.
dsinger is offline  
post #14 of 43 Old 07-17-2014, 01:52 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,744
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post
I would like to see what these folks who voted pay for an LCd. When paying 500 bucks (1.5X $750) for an LCd is not the same as paying 5,000 bucks (1.5X $7,500) for a LCd. Only two folks commented on that. Whatever it is what folks are willing to pay for an OLED nobody who voted actually bought an OLED, so they are willing to buy an OLED in their dreams. In their dreams folks are willing to pay more than what they actually would pay in real life .

Not sure I agree. Just by being members here on AVS Forum, it's pretty safe to assume that anyone responding qualifies as a 'video enthusiast' - that alone moves them from members of the broad 200Mu/year TV market to the smaller 20Mu/year enthusiast / high-end TV market. 20Mu/year equates to 1.7Mu/month.


Once LGs M2 manufacturing line is full ramped-up later this year, they will be producing 4000 55" WOLEDs/day, or over 120,000 per month, representing over 7% share of the enthusiast / high-end market. For that to happen, there need to be a great deal of customers for a new high-end TV will to switch their buying decision from LED/LCD to OLED (regardless of how much they are spending). Whether LG can or is offering the right products to satisfy market demand for OLED is another question, but the premium customers would be willing to pay for OLED is independent of price-point.


Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post
btw I am willing to pay €2,000 for a TV that is about it be it a LCd, Plasma or OLED.

So I guess you are the reason that the 0% (1X the price of LED/LCD) votes have increased from 1 to 2 :-)


After 39 votes, holding steady at 1.25X average, 1.1X median and highest vote-getter (by a hair :-)


p.s. for what it is worth, the top 7% of voters so far (3 votes) would be willing to pay 2X for OLED


p.p.s. but AVS Forum members probably already represent the top 7% or less of the high-end market (don't think we have anywhere near 1,400,000 members in the video forums, do we?)

Last edited by fafrd; 07-17-2014 at 02:21 PM. Reason: another p.s.
fafrd is online now  
post #15 of 43 Old 07-17-2014, 01:58 PM
Senior Member
 
Bassment's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 378
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 174 Post(s)
Liked: 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post
Not sure I agree. Just by being members here on AVS Forum, it's pretty safe to assume that anyone responding qualifies as a 'video enthusiast' - that alone moves them from members of the broad 200Mu/year TV market to the smaller 20Mu/year enthusiast / high-end TV market. 20Mu/year equates to 1.7Mu/month.


Once LGs M2 manufacturing line is full ramped-up later this year, they will be producing 4000 55" WOLEDs/day, or over 120,000 per month, representing over 7% share of the enthusiast / high-end market. For that to happen, there need to be a great deal of customers for a new high-end TV will to switch their buying decision from LED/LCD to OLED (regardless of how much they are spending). Whether LG can or is offering the right products to satisfy market demand for OLED is another question, but the premium customers would be willing to pay for OLED is independent of price-point.





So I guess you are the reason that the 0% (1X the price of LED/LCD) votes have increased from 1 to 2 :-)


After 39 votes, holding steady at 1.25X average, 1.1X median and highest vote-getter (by a hair :-)


p.s. for what it is worth, the top 7% of voters so far (3 votes) would be willing to pay 2X for OLED
What % of the 4000 TV's per day are flat screens?
Bassment is online now  
post #16 of 43 Old 07-17-2014, 02:27 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,744
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bassment View Post
What % of the 4000 TV's per day are flat screens?

I think it can be almost anything LG would like, but there is only a single Gen-1 flat model and none of the new Gen-2 models being released soon are flat, so I suspect the % will be very, very small (at least until the market teaches Samsung and LG a lesson!).


The last 3 votes (42 total) have all been for 1.5X, bringing the average to 1.24X (I must have made a mistake earlier), and the highest vote getter to 1.5X (though the median remains 1.1X).
fafrd is online now  
post #17 of 43 Old 07-17-2014, 02:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,728
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 114 Post(s)
Liked: 192
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd
Not sure I agree. Just by being members here on AVS Forum, it's pretty safe to assume that anyone responding qualifies as a 'video enthusiast' - that alone moves them from members of the broad 200Mu/year TV market to the smaller 20Mu/year enthusiast / high-end TV market. 20Mu/year equates to 1.7Mu/month.
Those, in the LCd Forum who buy the cheap LEDs, many visitors, many threads of those, are not 'video enthusiasts'. On Forums like this 'video enthusiasts' are less than 50% i think.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd
Once LGs M2 manufacturing line is full ramped-up later this year, they will be producing 4000 55" WOLEDs/day, or over 120,000 per month, representing over 7% share of the enthusiast / high-end market. For that to happen, there need to be a great deal of customers for a new high-end TV will to switch their buying decision from LED/LCD to OLED (regardless of how much they are spending). Whether LG can or is offering the right products to satisfy market demand for OLED is another question, but the premium customers would be willing to pay for OLED is independent of price-point.
Seems to me that the vast majorty of those who wanted to buy a larger sized OLED already did. They don't care to much about money and do not mind being a early adopter. Those who are left are waiting for the tech to mature and pricedrops. Everybody else needs to be convinced that OLED is the way to go..
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd
So I guess you are the reason that the 0% (1X the price of LED/LCD) votes have increased from 1 to 2 :-)
(1X the price of LED/LCD) has 8 votes. The two folks who voted 'i will never buy an OLED' must be jokers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd
After 39 votes, holding steady at 1.25X average, 1.1X median and highest vote-getter (by a hair :-)


p.s. for what it is worth, the top 7% of voters so far (3 votes) would be willing to pay 2X for OLED
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsinger
^ I paid slightly more than $7K for a 70" Sharp Elite when they were first released. I am thinking of paying $8K for the 77" OLED in 2d half 2015 if they prove to have no serious problems. Paying a 10% premium (my vote) over LCD would be well worth it to avoid the panel lottery so many people experience.

For me it is way to early for OLED. I hope it works out well for you
8mile13 is offline  
post #18 of 43 Old 07-17-2014, 04:58 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,744
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post
Those, in the LCd Forum who buy the cheap LEDs, many visitors, many threads of those, are not 'video enthusiasts'. On Forums like this 'video enthusiasts' are less than 50% i think.

Unfortunately, I believe anyone who actually goes to the trouble of adjusting the settings on their flat-panel probably qualifies as a 'video enthusiast' (or by the same token, anyone who takes the trouble to do anything online to learn more about TVs or TV technology). From what I can tell, 'normals' are the exception rather than the rule here on the Forum (nowhere near 50% of members).


Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post
Seems to me that the vast majorty of those who wanted to buy a larger sized OLED already did. They don't care to much about money and do not mind being a early adopter. Those who are left are waiting for the tech to mature and pricedrops. Everybody else needs to be convinced that OLED is the way to go..

Seems to me to. And I definitely qualify for the middle category (waiting for the tech to mature and the price to drop). The point is that if the tech has not matured sufficiently and if the prices have not dropped to the right level by the time LGs shiny new M2 manufacturing plant starts pumping out Gen 2 OLEDs in (relatively-speaking) high volume later this year, LG will be in a world of hurt and their entire OLED initiative may be dead before we even get to 2016.



Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post
(1X the price of LED/LCD) has 8 votes. The two folks who voted 'i will never buy an OLED' must be jokers.

You are right, my bad. 'I will never buy an OLED' is effectively 0X, not 1X)' And either those who voted for 'I will never buy an OLED are jokers or they believe they have read the writing on the wall and OLED will be dead before it ever really takes off.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post
For me it is way to early for OLED. I hope it works out well for you

If you are right (about Gen-2 still being 'way to early for OLED'), then I fear LGs WOLED initiative will die on the vine. If the M2 production of Gen 2 WOLEDs does not sell through within the next 12 months, I doubt we will ever see a Gen 3.


If Gen proves to be ready for prime time and LG succeeds in getting the prices to where they need to be over the next 6-12 months, it may work out well for LG (and hopefully for me and others as well :-)


p.s. 1.1X and 1.5X now in a dead heat with that latest vote (for 1.1X :-)
fafrd is online now  
post #19 of 43 Old 07-17-2014, 05:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
rlindo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: ON, Canada
Posts: 4,732
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Liked: 129
I'd say normals are the majority at this LCD forum based on my time here of the last 3 months. The projector forum normals are the minority and probably for the plasma forum as well but for LCD it's clear most are your regular type of viewer.

As for the OLED premium, I'd easily pay 50% over a top LCD set for the superior image the OLED would bring. Me, I'm waiting for the tech to mature a bit and for there to also be real flat sets (sorry, having to wall mount something in a frame is not an option or a real flat alternative) to be out on the market before I buy. A shame since while I have not seen an OLED set in person, I know how important black level and contrast is to image quality and I have no doubt the OLED image will utterly destroy LCD.

I imagine many people who say things like "I don't need a deep or a perfect black level" have no idea how important that is to image quality (and have probably never seen a display with a really good black level) as they only think it matters to displaying anything that is black.

ROB
rlindo is offline  
post #20 of 43 Old 07-17-2014, 06:17 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,744
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlindo View Post
I'd say normals are the majority at this LCD forum based on my time here of the last 3 months. The projector forum normals are the minority and probably for the plasma forum as well but for LCD it's clear most are your regular type of viewer.

I think we're probably talking about different definitions of 'normals'. Normals are the folks who purchase a TV from the store, plug it in and begin using it without ever even entering the settings menu. Most normals are using their TVs in manufacturer default settings (which is often torch mode).


You seem to be talking about 'normal videophiles' as opposed to obsessive/fanatical videophiles. Just about anyone who owns a Kuro or a Panasonic VT or a Samsung F8500 or an OLED can be classified as an obsessive/fanatical videophle (as opposed to a 'normal videophile'). Me, I owned a 65ZT60 for a full 2 weeks before returning it, so I'm not sure where I fit in :-)

Quote:
Originally Posted by rlindo View Post
As for the OLED premium, I'd easily pay 50% over a top LCD set for the superior image the OLED would bring. Me, I'm waiting for the tech to mature a bit and for there to also be real flat sets (sorry, having to wall mount something in a frame is not an option or a real flat alternative) to be out on the market before I buy. A shame since while I have not seen an OLED set in person, I know how important black level and contrast is to image quality and I have no doubt the OLED image will utterly destroy LCD.

I suspect that confidence in the term 'utterly destroy' will prove to be overstated. LED/LCD keeps getting better and cheaper and OLED currently has a range of PQ deficiencies of its own to address (near-black greyscale non-uniformity chief among them). If uniform off-angle color reproduction is the PQ attribute that is most important to you, OLED just might destroy LED/LCD but for those that count off-angle viewing and deepest blacks without any visible blooming for any and all content being viewed as 2 important PQ attributes among a much longer list of PQ attributes (which is the vast majority of the TV market), LCD will probably never be destroyed (please, don't tell Artwood :-)

Quote:
Originally Posted by rlindo View Post
I imagine many people who say things like "I don't need a deep or a perfect black level" have no idea how important that is to image quality (and have probably never seen a display with a really good black level) as they only think it matters to displaying anything that is black.

LED/LCD can deliver better-than-plasma-level blacks, just not without some visible content-specific blooming in certain scenes. OLED should be better than plasma (perfect?) but in any case, the difference between OLED and top-tier FALD LED/LCD for sweet-spot viewing will continue to narrow going forward.


Off-angle performance is a more fundamental weakness of LED/LCD that in my opinion, no amount of time, money, or ingenuity will be able to match against OLED or other emissive display technologies such as plasma.


But you are correct - most 'normals' don't know about or care about black levels, which is why edge-lit LED/LCDs have come to dominate the flat screen market (and is also why OLED will never be in a position to displace LED/LCD as the king of the hill until it becomes the less expensive technology).


p.s. After 46 votes, we are settling in at an average of 1.25X, median od 1.1X, and both 1.1X and 1.5X tied with 16 votes (35% of the votes or each value).
fafrd is online now  
post #21 of 43 Old 07-18-2014, 03:24 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,744
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 324
That last vote (47 total) puts 1.5X ahead of 1.1X by one vote again.


Another mildly interesting statistic is that there have been 455 visitors but only 47 votes in the poll, so only about 1 out of 10 visitors have an opinion on the question.


Hoping enough more Forum members vote to get over 100 votes total, so KEEP THOSE VOTES COMING :-)
fafrd is online now  
post #22 of 43 Old 07-18-2014, 04:11 PM
Newbie
 
darealist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 11
If they still have burn in issues like they have now, someone has to pay me to use it. Practicality >>>>>> blacker than black guys. Just look at one-trick pony Plasmas.
darealist is offline  
post #23 of 43 Old 07-19-2014, 08:53 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,744
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by darealist View Post
If they still have burn in issues like they have now, someone has to pay me to use it. Practicality >>>>>> blacker than black guys. Just look at one-trick pony Plasmas.

Was hoping to avoid a reemergence of the age-old flame war between plasma lovers and LCD lovers on this thread (if that is possible :-).


If the care-and-feeding requirements of OLED are not equal to those of LCD (meaning basically none - set it and forget it), OLED will be relegated to a high-end niche and will never even reach the success of plasma at it's peak (when plasma had a first-mover advantage into the realm of flat-screen, an advantage that is long-gone now).


So for the purpose of this discussion (and pole), the maturity of OLED (or lack of it) is not relevant - the question is what premium you would be willing to pay for the 'perfect picture' of OLED over the current king of the hill LED/LCD (all else being equal, including maturity and care and feeding requirements).


With a total of 49 votes in, the average is 1.26X, the mean is 1.1X, and the leading vote-getter is 1.5X (by two votes).


Still hoping for a few more votes over the weekend...
fafrd is online now  
post #24 of 43 Old 07-19-2014, 09:31 AM
Member
 
Nodscene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 31
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 9
Actually it would have been nice to have a 25% premium option

It's a bit of a tough question to answer as the price of lcd/led's are all over the place. You can get a 60" for $700 or $3000. I haven't seen any OLED tv's so can only go by what people say and what my preconceived notions of it will be. It's really going to depend on the price/performance ratio for me. I'm not willing to spend an extra $500 or more for a 5% difference in picture quality. I'd rather put that extra money towards a bigger screen
Nodscene is online now  
post #25 of 43 Old 07-19-2014, 01:24 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,744
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nodscene View Post
Actually it would have been nice to have a 25% premium option

It's a bit of a tough question to answer as the price of lcd/led's are all over the place. You can get a 60" for $700 or $3000. I haven't seen any OLED tv's so can only go by what people say and what my preconceived notions of it will be. It's really going to depend on the price/performance ratio for me. I'm not willing to spend an extra $500 or more for a 5% difference in picture quality. I'd rather put that extra money towards a bigger screen

Yeah, if I could do the poll over again, I would have included a 25% premium option. On the other hand, it seems like about half the voters are 'rounding down' their votes and half are 'rounding up' so with more and more votes, it looks like there is a good chance the poll will end up in the same place.


Totally get what you're saying about not wanting to spend $500 for only a 5% increase in PQ but since everyone is looking for a different size screen and different pricepoint, % premium just seems like the more effective way to try to get a sense of the premium members would be willing to spend on OLED.


With 52 votes in, average remains at 1.25X, top vote remains 1.5X by 2 votes, and median remains 1.1X.
fafrd is online now  
post #26 of 43 Old 07-19-2014, 02:00 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,283
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 451 Post(s)
Liked: 582
Although I voted for the 50% option, I'm not sure I'd pull the trigger on the curved screen.

Since I will only buy a 4K display that's 77" or larger, the upcoming 77" curved OLED therefore presents a potential problem. I'm also very concerned about IR and a bit less so about ABL and motion handling. IR seems worse than plasma in that regard and I'm unsure how ABL compares to plasma.

It's just counterintuitive that this spanking new tech is presenting us with some of the same issues that made many shy away from plasma.

So to enter the world of large-screen OLED, I must be prepared to accept:

* curved screens
* IR
* potential for burn-in
* ABL

Hmm, can I take back my 50% premium vote and rethink this?
fafrd likes this.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #27 of 43 Old 07-19-2014, 03:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MCaugusto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: BOSTON --- MA ---
Posts: 1,196
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Very well put, Ken Ross.
Like any other A/V enthusiast i am also very curious about OLED technology, specifically "inky blacks to die for" but i would never purchase an OLED UHDTV until LG has ramped up production significantly and it is in its third or fourth year of manufacturing; That way i would hopefully avoid any unwelcome surprises based on past experiences purchasing new tech A/V gear.
Have you guys taken a look recently at the LG 9800 thread ? It's scary, with several owners stating they had to go through several units before finding one without visible flaws, IR burn issues, burnt pixels, ABL issues, etc.
When you mention TV sets selling for thousands of dollars you should be able to get a reliable product with all specifications fully met by the manufacturer, otherwise go back to the drawing board, analyze + fix failures and re-introduce the product as it should have been released in the first place.
On the other hand, why should i pay any premium for an OLED HDTV over an LCD HDTV when the latter has already achieved "infinite contrast" ratio (?) with full screen black image - and some units have even tested below 0.001 ft-L minimum black level with a small white logo in black image, the only way to truly ascertain FALD contrast ratio ?
Gimme an FALD LCD UHDTV (enough acronyms ?) without banding, spotlights, flashing, lighter corner edges, etc, great video processing, reasonable pricing and expected long term reliability and i would be a very/very happy camper... Vizio 70" P-Series UHDTV, anyone ?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcos
MCaugusto is offline  
post #28 of 43 Old 07-19-2014, 05:05 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,744
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by MCaugusto View Post
Very well put, Ken Ross.
Like any other A/V enthusiast i am also very curious about OLED technology, specifically "inky blacks to die for" but i would never purchase an OLED UHDTV until LG has ramped up production significantly and it is in its third or fourth year of manufacturing; That way i would hopefully avoid any unwelcome surprises based on past experiences purchasing new tech A/V gear.
Have you guys taken a look recently at the LG 9800 thread ? It's scary, with several owners stating they had to go through several units before finding one without visible flaws, IR burn issues, burnt pixels, ABL issues, etc.
When you mention TV sets selling for thousands of dollars you should be able to get a reliable product with all specifications fully met by the manufacturer, otherwise go back to the drawing board, analyze + fix failures and re-introduce the product as it should have been released in the first place.
On the other hand, why should i pay any premium for an OLED HDTV over an LCD HDTV when the latter has already achieved "infinite contrast" ratio (?) with full screen black image - and some units have even tested below 0.001 ft-L minimum black level with a small white logo in black image, the only way to truly ascertain FALD contrast ratio ?
Gimme an FALD LCD UHDTV (enough acronyms ?) without banding, spotlights, flashing, lighter corner edges, etc, great video processing, reasonable pricing and expected long term reliability and i would be a very/very happy camper... Vizio 70" P-Series UHDTV, anyone ?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcos

Totally agree with your list as long as off-angle viewing (a fundamental limitation of LED/LCD) and blooming/halo (a content-specific limitation of FALD LED/LCD) are not included it's hard not to see OLED as being within the 'less than 5% better' category (and that's not taking into account the curve as well as any greater care-and-feeding requirements as Ken has pointed out).


With 56 votes in average is at 1.24X, median is still at 1.1X and highest vote-getter is 1.5X (by three votes).
fafrd is online now  
post #29 of 43 Old 07-19-2014, 05:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wtfer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,360
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
Although I voted for the 50% option, I'm not sure I'd pull the trigger on the curved screen.
50% option for what is essentially a 1000% increase in picture quality & contrast.
I choose the 100% option.
OLED is already down to $5,000 MSRP at stores this year.

By next year, it'll be down even more, probably twice the price of a mid range LCD!'
wtfer is offline  
post #30 of 43 Old 07-19-2014, 10:50 PM
Senior Member
 
Gradius2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iquique, Chile
Posts: 398
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 13
10% here. I saw that LG, blacks are what it stand out, but the rest didn't impressed me. Probably I used to see my Note 3 OLED everyday and for screen quality I prefer my Note 3.

[]s,
Fernando
Gradius2 is offline  
Reply LCD Flat Panel Displays

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off