or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › Canon can legally produce SED TVs now
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Canon can legally produce SED TVs now - Page 2  

post #31 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNG View Post

Say what you want about LCD, but there is no uneven wear or burn in on color filters.

That is quite true until you bring up LED bulbs (which it seems all LCD makers are moving to in the future) LED bulbs are just as suseptable to uneven wear as a Plasma (moreso with current LED halflife ratings) and they require a break-in period as well, and is the reason why I will never buy an LED LCD, why destroy several of LCD's advantages just to get a slightly better picture?

Led bulbs will age at a slightly different rate on their own, but since most if not all LCD TVs using these bulbs will probably have a type of local dimming tech in them, that will only make the problem worse.
post #32 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post

Led bulbs will age at a slightly different rate on their own, but since most if not all LCD TVs using these bulbs will probably have a type of local dimming tech in them, that will only make the problem worse.

Is the aging rate of LEDs worse than the fluorescent lamps currently used in most LCD displays? These fluorescent lamps rely on phosphors similar to those used in plasma displays.
post #33 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by slb View Post

Is the aging rate of LEDs worse than the fluorescent lamps currently used in most LCD displays? These fluorescent lamps rely on phosphors similar to those used in plasma displays.

I believe the half life of these LED bulbs are 50k hours, and I believe someone stated a 76% drop-off in luminance in that period..... could be wrong on that number, the problem isn't that they have a shorter lifespan than a CCFL bulb, it is the local dim tech that just adds to the problem of these bulbs having shorter lifespans than most plasma displays. (and the fact that they age far more rapidly in the first 150 hours which means that a break in is required, which is as simple as turning off the local dim during that time, which I am sure that very few owners of these LED sets are doing) This local dim tech is the problem as some bulbs will age more than the others leading to uneven wear in a few years time. (I expect some 81 series owners to start commenting on uneven wear withing the next couple of years) CCFL bulbs are always on so they don't have the same uneven wear issues as the LED bulbs.

I have no clue about Sony's RGB LEDs lifespan and rate of luminance drop off so I can't really comment on them, but to be safe I would say that they are probably slightly worse off than your average plasma in this regard. (I would bet that each color probably ages at a different rate if they use phosphors like the current Sammy LED bulbs do)
post #34 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post

I believe the half life of these LED bulbs are 50k hours, and I believe someone stated a 76% drop-off in luminance in that period..... could be wrong on that number...

I don't know where I seen this but I was surprised that it said that the luminance would drop to 70% at 50K hours. That does not seem so bad. Really 50K hours equates to 5.7 years with 24 hour days, with an average 8 hour day 16 years? I wont worry about that.

While 70% at 50K hours is good, it was not stated what half life would be, my feeling is that the luminance drop off is not strictly a linear function and 50% may be reached very quickly after that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post

I have no clue about Sony's RGB LEDs lifespan and rate of luminance drop off so I can't really comment on them, but to be safe I would say that they are probably slightly worse off than your average plasma in this regard. (I would bet that each color probably ages at a different rate if they use phosphors like the current Sammy LED bulbs do)

I think the XBR8 uses a LED to excite a RGB phosphor of some kind. If I am wrong someone can correct me on that. The Samsung uses a white light LED or some kind of Phosphor excitation system I thought.

I don't like the idea of using some kind of system like phosphor excited by LEDs, seems to much the reason I didn't buy a plasma, uneven aging o phosphors.

Sharp is using discrete Red, Green and Blue LEDs as I understand, I think this is better.
post #35 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack White View Post

Not VISABLE with SIMPTE C Phosphors on CRTs.

They are visible. When very high contrast images are moving on my PC monitor, for example a white cursor on a black background, you can easily see a dim gray trail behind it. They aren't quite as obvious as the yellow flashes you can see on a plasma but they are there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TNG View Post

Say what you want about LCD, but there is no uneven wear or burn in on color filters.

Yes there is.
post #36 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtVandelae View Post

Yes there is.

There is a difference between temporary image retention and permanent burn in and Gary Merson did not explain that well in his article. Also I would point out that Gary Merson listed "No Burn-in" as an advantage for LCD just a few days ago.
post #37 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtVandelae View Post

Yes there is.

Kind of thin on the info in that article.

The pixel itself needs a charge to "twist" the LC in the cell to show an affect. The charge comes from the buildup of charge in adjacent pixels with large differing degrees of charge and/or cells that are left with a constant charge for a long time. When turned off and left the charges are dissipated and the IR is gone.

Again a phosphor is something that ages with it's exposure to UV. A color filter may degrade with time, but will not suffer from Burn In like a phosphor.

I am not good at expaining these things, but there it is.

OLED uses a current passed through a material that will emit a light and like a phosphor will age according to use.
post #38 of 54
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Paul View Post

There is a difference between temporary image retention and permanent burn in and Gary Merson did not explain that well in his article. Also I would point out that Gary Merson listed "No Burn-in" as an advantage for LCD just a few days ago.

Also LCD TVs can burn in
post #39 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtVandelae View Post

They are visible. When very high contrast images are moving on my PC monitor, for example a white cursor on a black background, you can easily see a dim gray trail behind it. They aren't quite as obvious as the yellow flashes you can see on a plasma but they are there.



.

Yeah, but your computer monitor uses P22 phosphors, not SMPTE C phosphors. Also, that's phenemenon you may see 1/100th of 1 percent of the time vs up to like 20% of the time on Plasmas.
post #40 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack White View Post

Also, that's phenemenon you may see 1/100th of 1 percent of the time vs up to like 20% of the time on Plasmas.

Do you have FACTS to back up this theory?
post #41 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack White View Post

Yeah, but your computer monitor uses P22 phosphors, not SMPTE C phosphors. Also, that's phenemenon you may see 1/100th of 1 percent of the time vs up to like 20% of the time on Plasmas.

I can see the same dim trails on my XBR CRT as well so, no, it isn't because of the phosphor type.
post #42 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaMan1970 View Post

Also LCD TVs can burn in

Same article that Artvandelae linked to. This just shows that LCD can have IR, not burn in. Burn in is permanent, IR is something that can be gotten rid of. Again no burn in on color filters. I have been to Bic Camera Stores in Japan and have seen this first hand. Change the static image on the screen for awhile to something else and it is gone, even on the sets that show the same image for days on end.
post #43 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtVandelae View Post

I can see the same dim trails on my XBR CRT as well so, no, it isn't because of the phosphor type.

I have never seen them on any of my Trinitron CRTs, NOT EVEN WITH THE TEST DISC. I tried very hard to look for them on one old HP CRT computer monitor and I eventually did, but only when moving the mouse really fast on a black background. The difference is that I had to work really hard to find them wereas with the plasma they found me, I didn't have to go looking.
post #44 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaMan1970 View Post

Canon is clear to launch a new type of TV after winning a patent lawsuit about SED technology that has delayed its progress for more than 3 years.



SED TVs can produce the wide viewing angle and deep colours of a traditional CRT, but are as thin as a LCD, or Plasma display.

Oh so glorious!! I wait for the day. We've been through so many trials and tribulations maybe the time has finally arrived to liberate us from the dark ages of display technology we're currently in.
post #45 of 54
Quote:


. People were amazed with SED when it first came out mainly because of the black levels which (at least with the Pioneers) is becoming a non-issue

SED is vastly superior to Pioneer plasma is every single area of display technology. There isn't one area of display techology where plasma surpasses SED. Also, were talking SED from 2006. We don't know what kind new version of this technology will be available.

Also, there is no such thing as dirty whites with SED. SED is brighter than plasma as well. The technology is just vastly superior to plasma, which still looks digital.
post #46 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Auditor55 View Post

SED is vastly superior to Pioneer plasma is every single area of display technology. There isn't one area of display techology where plasma surpasses SED.

How about display size, cost, production and availability?
post #47 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeBiker View Post

How about display size, cost, production and availability?

My statement was about display technology more so than the economy of the technology.

SED is vastly more flexible than the obsolete PDP. SED can be implemented in cell phones as well as Stadium size displays.
post #48 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Auditor55 View Post

SED is vastly more flexible than the obsolete PDP. SED can be implemented in cell phones as well as Stadium size displays.

that's great, but it doesn't matter if it can't be made widely available at prices competitive with today's technology.
post #49 of 54
[quote=Auditor55;15287915] There isn't one area of display techology where plasma surpasses SED.

QUOTE]

Sure there is, the ability to produce a screen size in the 50" and 60" category that's affordable.

When SED gets there, then I'll be interested.
post #50 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Auditor55 View Post

SED is vastly superior to Pioneer plasma is every single area of display technology. There isn't one area of display techology where plasma surpasses SED. Also, were talking SED from 2006. We don't know what kind new version of this technology will be available.

Also, there is no such thing as dirty whites with SED. SED is brighter than plasma as well. The technology is just vastly superior to plasma, which still looks digital.

Does anyone have the feeling of fighting over spilt milk? Or he mysterious feelin of deja vu? O_o
post #51 of 54
Reality Check:

No matter what that certain hopped up SED Head keeps claiming, Pioneer has no plans to introduce SED now.

Straight from the Horse's Mouth:

http://www.engadget.com/2008/12/02/c...e-world-doesn/

Excerpt from the 12/2/2008 article.

"Comically enough, it may actually be too late for Canon to even salvage the win, with president Tsuneji Uchida noting that "at times like this, new display products are not introduced much because people would laugh at them." Shh... nobody tell him the world's been laughing at SED for years."

Since the President of Canon said that on 12/2/2009, it is clear that he has no intention of being laughed at, so folks, feel free to just keep on laughing at our resident hopped up SED head.
post #52 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Auditor55 View Post

SED is vastly superior to Pioneer plasma is every single area of display technology. There isn't one area of display techology where plasma surpasses SED. Also, were talking SED from 2006. We don't know what kind new version of this technology will be available.

Also, there is no such thing as dirty whites with SED. SED is brighter than plasma as well. The technology is just vastly superior to plasma, which still looks digital.

Sheet, it's the SED Village Idiot again! Not so fast Audi my boy. Not a good time to be counting those SED stock options. You might as well be using that paper to twist up your doobies. One good way to prove yourself though, just bring over one of those SED's and let's put it to a display shootout...oh, I forgot...they only exist in your mind.
post #53 of 54
Fantasies and vaporware are always vastly superior to mundane reality.
post #54 of 54
[quote=Auditor55;15287915]Also, there is no such thing as dirty whites with SED.QUOTE]

Care to explain that statement?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
This thread is locked  
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › Canon can legally produce SED TVs now