or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › LCD Flat Panel Displays › Samsung 2010 LCD/LED line up [NO price talk]
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung 2010 LCD/LED line up [NO price talk] - Page 2

post #31 of 1059
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feddie View Post

So it could actually be worse in quality or just the same given there is no info?

Worse, the same or better - nobody knows for sure right now.
post #32 of 1059
Quote:
Originally Posted by bill4903485 View Post

Although these ultra-thin edge-lit screens are unappealing to me. I value picture quality too much. The larger the panel the more difficult to get a uniform screen with adequate off-axis viewing performance. And I doubt the diffusers have been improved that much. I guess we'll see.

I also hope that CCFL hasn't gone the way of the dodo.

Sorry, but CCFL is on life support and the plug pulling is not that far off. Example of Facts: Vizio swaps being number one with Samsung for over a year and their entire line will become LED top to bottom this year. Samsung is in fact Number one globally.

They may be unappealing to you but you are obviously not Joe Six Pack consumer seeing how the dominant sales to consumers are favoring that thin form factor with no difficulty selling inventory. Displaysearch has predicted that 184 million panels will be sold this year globally with strong growth in LED and the consumers simply are not agreeing with you - if Samsung PQ matched up to your assertions then they would not hold onto number one status globally and often N. America.

Your assertions on energy consumption don't make sense and you seem to post opinions without test results when many of the new panels will meet or exceed Energy Star 4 - the panels listed haven't debuted yet and your telling us you know the comparative test results? I simply think arguing against LED is a losing argument!

Also, that concept that a larger panel has difficulty presenting a uniform picture is dinosaur bunk - I never had an issue on my 57" for 3.5 years getting uniform PQ or on my 60" SXRD - none whatsoever - just kick ass immersion! Off angle perhaps if you have a long distance viewing situation but if your panel is within THX standards for HD - you get immersion - SIZE within the proper seating distance means you have no off angles unless your sitting adjacent to the sides of the panels which would be foolish. Yes, some LED's have more noticeable drop-off's but that should evolve with the technology. Perhaps if your staring at a 32" weenie tv at ten feet but 55" - 70" at ten feet with 1080P should not be a problem. Not saying your wrong for you but obviously Consumers don't agree with you and your assertions.

BTW --- Per CNET Tables the Sharp 46" 700U LED is using same or less energy than the best CCFL 32" LCD panels and so Sharp LED is pretty much leading in the cost per inch. A 46" Panny plasma energy costs calibrated are about 400% more. Sharp 46" @$13.83 --- Plasma 46" @$60.69
post #33 of 1059
Quote:
Originally Posted by westa6969 View Post

Sorry, but CCFL is on life support and the plug pulling is not that far off. Example of Facts: Vizio swaps being number one with Samsung for over a year and their entire line will become LED top to bottom this year. Samsung is in fact Number one globally.

They may be unappealing to you but you are obviously not Joe Six Pack consumer seeing how the dominant sales to consumers are favoring that thin form factor with no difficulty selling inventory. Displaysearch has predicted that 184 million panels will be sold this year globally with strong growth in LED and the consumers simply are not agreeing with you - if Samsung PQ matched up to your assertions then they would not hold onto number one status globally and often N. America.

Your opinion has more to do with marketing though. Of course PQ isn't always going to be a top priority. Part of the problem with LED is their extremely directional nature. No one has figured out to tame them yet. CCFL is diffuse and more forgiving.

Quote:
Originally Posted by westa6969 View Post

Your assertions on energy consumption don't make sense and you seem to post opinions without test results when many of the new panels will meet or exceed Energy Star 4 - the panels listed haven't debuted yet and your telling us you know the comparative test results? I simply think arguing against LED is a losing argument!

According to CNet, their highest rated models in power consumption....

WCG-CCFL LCD
Samsung LN52B750 128.86 watts -- .11 watts/sq inch
Sony KDL-46W5100 110.55 watts -- .12 watts/sq inch

LED LCD
Samsung UN55B8500 123.99 watts -- .1 watts/sq inch
LG 47LH90 107.16 watts -- .11 watts/sq inch
Samsung UN46B7000 93.02 watts -- .1 watts/sq inch

Quote:
Originally Posted by westa6969 View Post

Also, that concept that a larger panel has difficulty presenting a uniform picture is dinosaur bunk - I never had an issue on my 57" for 3.5 years getting uniform PQ or on my 60" SXRD - none whatsoever - just kick ass immersion! Off angle perhaps if you have a long distance viewing situation but if your panel is within THX standards for HD - you get immersion - SIZE within the proper seating distance means you have no off angles unless your sitting adjacent to the sides of the panels which would be foolish. Yes, some LED's have more noticeable drop-off's but that should evolve with the technology. Perhaps if your staring at a 32" weenie tv at ten feet but 55" - 70" at ten feet with 1080P should not be a problem. Not saying your wrong for you but obviously Consumers don't agree with you and your assertions.

BTW --- Per CNET Tables the Sharp 46" 700U LED is using same or less energy than the best CCFL 32" LCD panels and so Sharp LED is pretty much leading in the cost per inch. A 46" Panny plasma energy costs calibrated are about 400% more. Sharp 46" @$13.83 --- Plasma 46" @$60.69

Yes, the larger the edge-lit display the more difficult to uniformly diffuse light. The average LED LCD I'm seeing have horrible uniformity and off-angle viewing. The LED LCD on the market appear as if they have overdriven gamma levels. The top of the line 8500 has overdriven bluish blacks. Current LEDs themselves are also too large to ever come close to representing the resolution of 2.1 million pixels that comprise 1080p. Maybe in a few more years they will perfect LED LCD.

As for these fundamental (and unappealing to me) problems with Samsung's LED LCD, according to CNet:

Samsung UN55B8500
"As much as local dimming helps, it's important to note that the number of LED elements behind the LCD screen still can't come close to matching the number of pixels in the LCD itself (1,920x1,080, or roughly 2.1 million), so the dimming isn't as local as it could be. Some of the elements remain lit in "black" areas, for example, which can produce visible "blooming" onscreen."

Samsung UN46B7000
"We also noticed some uniformity issues, primarily in dark scenes as well, that are probably caused by the edge-lit LED system."


As for uniformity and off-angle viewing...

Samsung UN55B8500
"The biggest weakness of LED-based LCDs comes in the arena of off-angle viewing, and the 8500 follows suit. When we moved just one couch cushion to either side, the blacks lightened considerably, becoming brighter, more washed-out, and less realistic, and taking the rest of the image quality down with them.

Even when in the sweet spot, simply hard leaning to either side caused the far edge of the screen, especially letterbox bars and other dark areas, to lighten noticeably (we were seated about 9 feet from the 55-inch model, so seating distances that are farther away will shorten the angle and lessen this issue). Blooming also became significantly more obvious from off-angle, and a bluer tinge crept into the dark areas. Dark scenes and low ambient lighting make the washout and increased blooming more obvious, but the falloff was still visible in brighter scenes and lighting. The 8500 seemed to suffer from this issue worse than other LCDs in our subjective comparison, but again that's most likely because its black levels were deeper than the others to begin with."

Samsung UN46B7000
"The Samsung UNB7000 exhibited worse uniformity across the screen than the other flat-panel displays in our comparison--although it was better than the edge-lit Sony's KLV-40ZX1M. We noticed a brighter area along the bottom-left of the screen, as well as in the corners, that showed up in letterbox bars and darker scenes, such as the star field behind the opening credits, the interior of Keanu's tent and the dark lecture hall in Chapter 3. We also noticed that in brighter, flat fields such as the all-white of alien ball in Chapter 5, the left side of the screen appeared slightly darker than the rest.

In gray fields (from 10-70 IRE on our Sencore test pattern generator), we noticed more brightness variations across the screen, including a darker area across the top and subtle brighter splotches elsewhere. We didn't notice these variations much during program material, but they were more noticeable in test patterns than on any of the other displays in our test. It's worth noting that these issues can vary more than others from review sample to review sample.

When seen from off-angle, the UNB7000 also looked worse than any of the other displays in our comparison. Dark areas quickly washed out and became bluer, while brightness variations intensified, as we moved to either side of the sweet spot in the middle of the couch. The UNB7000 did seem to preserve its vertical viewing angle a bit better than the Sony or the Samsung A950, but both beat the UNB7000 in horizontal viewing angle."
post #34 of 1059
And don't get me wrong. LED has many wonderful benefits over even WCG-CCFL. I actually would choose local-dimming LED (A950) over CCFL if they weren't so overpriced. Although, especially the 2009 ultra-thin edge-lit sets still seem premature and more at home on drawing boards.

I like my viewing to be immersive, but not to the point of exclusion. Sounds like there's only room for one on that LED LCD viewing couch. Place a bunch of 3D glasses on everyone and it's almost comical. Welcome to 2010.
post #35 of 1059
Quote:
Originally Posted by davegow View Post

I didn't claim this. My efficiency example was for house lighting. There is a long list of other advantages relevant to TVs.

But the basic science is that LEDs are the most efficient form of lighting currently in wide use. Of course in a particular application energy use is due to a variety of causes, so I can't comment on CNET's results.

Sorry, I thought you were tying those two sentence together relating to power consumption. Believe it or not, LEDs were once less efficient than CCFL. My point was that both LED and CCFL continue to make improvements in power consumption. The lead will continue to change hands. Although right now CCFL currently has LED soundly beaten in price per lumen. This too could change.
post #36 of 1059
A few pics of the ports on this bad boy.... Click Here

high def junkies.com
post #37 of 1059
Your link doesn't work
post #38 of 1059
Quote:
Originally Posted by obsidian View Post

Your link doesn't work


Maybe the site isn't allowed on here.. No space

http://www.highdef junkies.com/showthread.php?t=4922&page=3
post #39 of 1059
I didn't see one 52" set in that 2010 Samsung list ??
(which just happens to be, with my bad luck, the best size for my entertainment area)
post #40 of 1059
Quote:
Originally Posted by bill4903485 View Post

... both LED and CCFL continue to make improvements in power consumption. The lead will continue to change hands. Although right now CCFL currently has LED soundly beaten in price per lumen. ...

Flourescents are a far older and mature technology than LEDs. R&D and tooling costs have long been written off. I doubt that much new remains to be discovered but anything is possible I guess. But the bottom line is like the transistor, LEDs are solid state, whereas like vacuum tubes, CCFLs are bulky, complex, fragile and complicated. History tell us who the winner will be.
post #41 of 1059
Quote:
Originally Posted by TravisBean View Post

I didn't see one 52" set in that 2010 Samsung list ??
(which just happens to be, with my bad luck, the best size for my entertainment area)

It is possible that the bezel on the new models are not as wide, so the overall dimension will be closer. The width and height differences between a 52" and 55" are 2.5" and 1.6" resp.
post #42 of 1059
Quote:
Originally Posted by BPlayer View Post

It is possible that the bezel on the new models are not as wide, so the overall dimension will be closer. The width and height differences between a 52" and 55" are 2.5" and 1.6" resp.

I'm now hoping that that might be the case. The opening in my wall is 52 1/2 inches and most current 55 inch models in all brands won't fit, so I have been trying to decide which 52 inch model will best suit me.

I don't want to settle for a 46 or 47 inch TV as I currently have a 46 inch Samsung DLP which I want to replace with something at least a little bigger. The DLP has a very sharp picture but contrast and black level really suck big time.
post #43 of 1059
Quote:
Originally Posted by BPlayer View Post

It is possible that the bezel on the new models are not as wide, so the overall dimension will be closer. The width and height differences between a 52" and 55" are 2.5" and 1.6" resp.

Yea, I was thinking the same thing, that with an even thinner bezel for 2010, the width difference could now be under 2 inches.
I also thought it might have had something to do manufacturing efficiency.
(which I know nothing about, but someone is always pointing out something about how certain economic factors play a role in what the factories decide to tool up for)
post #44 of 1059
nooo C650 with ugly chin again. What are they thinking.
post #45 of 1059
In my humble opinion, the chinny-chin-chin looks FABULOUS.
post #46 of 1059
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleveland Plasma View Post

LN37C650
LN40C650

LN37C630
LN40C630

Any pics and specs of these sets out yet?
post #47 of 1059
Quote:
Originally Posted by LonestarROB View Post

Any pics and specs of these sets out yet?

I'm guessing that's a negative?
post #48 of 1059
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandude View Post

I'm now hoping that that might be the case. The opening in my wall is 52 1/2 inches and most current 55 inch models in all brands won't fit, so I have been trying to decide which 52 inch model will best suit me.

The LN55C650 is looking like it will be 51.6 inches wide. Search Google for LN55C650 or other TV. There are a few specs and pictures showing up. Nothing final though I suspect. Some show the 2009 style stand and some the four point stand. /Dan
post #49 of 1059
Quote:
Originally Posted by danki6x View Post

The LN55C650 is looking like it will be 51.6 inches wide. Search Google for LN55C650 or other TV. There are a few specs and pictures showing up. Nothing final though I suspect. Some show the 2009 style stand and some the four point stand. /Dan

This is what came up:


They should have kept the original glass stand. But hopefully they didn't add another ToC like on their C7000.
post #50 of 1059
When do the new models typically start to show up in stores? I was going to buy one of the Samsung LED's, but with all the flashlighting/clouding problems I figured I'd wait and spend a little more on a 2010 set with 3D.
post #51 of 1059
Quote:
Originally Posted by m3tric View Post

When do the new models typically start to show up in stores? I was going to buy one of the Samsung LED's, but with all the flashlighting/clouding problems I figured I'd wait and spend a little more on a 2010 set with 3D.

I'm in the same boat. I want to get a 46" LED, but at this rate I'll wait till the 2010s are out. Any time frame that has been announced?
post #52 of 1059
Depending by the models, the first sets should be availible from March on.
post #53 of 1059
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris J View Post

and don't forget about that remote for the last one... Not something you would want to lose or drop... Looks like it will cost you a lot of $$$ to replace...


That remote's pretty, but as someone that operates their remote by touch alone, that screams 'form over function' to me.
post #54 of 1059


This low rent $15 special suits me just fine !
post #55 of 1059
Quote:
Originally Posted by bk.secret23 View Post

This is what came up:


They should have kept the original glass stand. But hopefully they didn't add another ToC like on their C7000.

So wait. Is that the real 650? I thought I read they were bringing back the big red chin like in last years model?

If you had to guesstimate, how much will the 40C650 retail for when it releases? How much was the B650 when it first released?
post #56 of 1059
Quote:
Originally Posted by LonestarROB View Post

How much was the B650 when it first released?

About 30% more than what it sells for now. (rough guesstimate)
post #57 of 1059
No kidding. This remote definitely adds to the cost.



BTW, what's interesting is that Westinghouse apparently proposed new sets of LED edge-lit in sizes of 42, 46, and 55".
Doesn't it look too familiar?

post #58 of 1059
when are the approximate release dates for the new Sammys,like March or April maybe.?
post #59 of 1059
Just picked up the LN40B750 last week. Not completely sold on it. Thinking about taking it back and waiting for either the C750 or most likely the C650.

Thoughts?
post #60 of 1059
The B750 is already a very good tv. I think the main diffrence will be 3D in the C series. If you want that you should switch. If you don't care about 3D now or in the near future than enjoy the B750.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: LCD Flat Panel Displays
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › LCD Flat Panel Displays › Samsung 2010 LCD/LED line up [NO price talk]