or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › News Forum › Latest Industry News › LG LA9700 55" & 65" UHDTVs Now Available for Purchase
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

LG LA9700 55" & 65" UHDTVs Now Available for Purchase - Page 2

post #31 of 67
I'm waiting on HDMI 2.0 as well. I have plenty of 4K and 1080p/3D PC games waiting for the right TV to come along, but max 24fps isn't going to cut it. I dunno what the max bandwidth on HDMI 2.0 is supposed to be, but I don't think I'd want to buy a TV that couldn't theoretically support 4K/60fps or 1080p/120fps. I already have a PC monitor that can handle 1080p/144fps over DVI...and I paid $250 for it.

What is taking HDMI 2 so long?
post #32 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

I dunno what the max bandwidth on HDMI 2.0 is supposed to be, but I don't think I'd want to buy a TV that couldn't theoretically support 4K/60fps or 1080p/120fps.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI#Version_2.0
post #33 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbug View Post

For anyone in the Chicago land area, Abt has an unveiling on Thursday of this week. I plan on being there. One thing I noticed in the announcement is that the price went up by 999.00, so the 65" is now 9,000 and gets a WOW from me. That's a "suggested" price but maybe they got it right this time with their nano tech and are charging accordingly. I hope an LG technician is there to answer questions.

You Are Invited To An Exclusive
LG Electronics Event at Abt

Thursday, July 18th | 6pm - 8pm
The Atrium at Abt
1200 N Milwaukee Ave, Glenview

Experience the evolution of High Definition. With a resolution four times the pixel count of Full HD, every show, movie, game and sport looks clearer, richer and livelier than ever imagined. And, with LG's Tru-Ultra HD Engine you can upscale any content to near Ultra HD so you can get that richer experience today.

Attendees will be eligible to win a $500, $250 or $100
Abt gift card towards any LG product and receive LG gear*.

Drinks and hors d'eourves will be served.
Space is limited. RSVP today.

Link to 55 - 84" sets with raised prices: http://www.lg.com/us/ultrahdtv/index.jsp


I was just there Sunday and spent about 4 hours in the store with the wife and great granddaughter. That happens every time we go there.

Will await your experience:

For more info, go to abt.com/documents/49001/
post #34 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

Paraphrasing from the latest WSR magazine: "although in theory you'll need to stand 7' away for 4K, I can clearly see the difference even from 12' away"

I don't think so. At that distance there will be no difference at all between 1080p and 2160p.

I know you're excited for 4K but lets be realistic about this. A 55" and 65" 4K set isn't going to have much advantage over a 1080p set. Especially plasmas. And especially using the same HD standards. People are focused too much on pixel count.
post #35 of 67

Just thought I would disagree with your opinion. I have checked out the Sony 4K TV's and I can see a difference from 8 feet with the 65". So you might not have to upgrade but I perfer to.

post #36 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by saprano View Post

I don't think so. At that distance there will be no difference at all between 1080p and 2160p.

I know you're excited for 4K but lets be realistic about this. A 55" and 65" 4K set isn't going to have much advantage over a 1080p set. Especially plasmas. And especially using the same HD standards. People are focused too much on pixel count.

If you "don't think so", kindly ACTUALLY EXPERIENCE professionally calibrated UHDTV in a proper lighting condition THEN start posting stuff. Oh, and maybe reading the WSR magazine that I paraphrase from would be a good idea too. rolleyes.gif
post #37 of 67
You're a little too touchy and aggressive with this 4K stuff.

First people were saying doubters should actually see 4K in person before making judgements on it. Watching an online video is no way to notice the extra resolution. Now 4K displays are available everywhere for everyone to see and the new excuse is that we need to see it "calibrated under proper lighting conditions". Uhhh, ok.

I've seen enough content on 84" to 55" 4K displays to make an informed judgement that 4K resolution, excuse me, 2160p is not too noticeable on 65" and under. And the crazy distances you guys are talking about it's practicality eliminated. Unless you know what to look for, which i do, but then that's trying hard to look.
post #38 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

I have plenty of 4K

What 4K content do you have?
post #39 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by biliam1982 View Post

What 4K content do you have?

PC games. The vast majority of them can run in native 4K right now, even games made 10 years ago.
post #40 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by p5browne View Post

Will await your experience:

For more info, go to abt.com/documents/49001/

Hmm! Dual core processors whereas others have moved on to quad. Processing power is important for picture quality as well as apps.
post #41 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by saprano View Post

You're a little too touchy and aggressive with this 4K stuff.

First people were saying doubters should actually see 4K in person before making judgements on it. Watching an online video is no way to notice the extra resolution. Now 4K displays are available everywhere for everyone to see and the new excuse is that we need to see it "calibrated under proper lighting conditions". Uhhh, ok.

I've seen enough content on 84" to 55" 4K displays to make an informed judgement that 4K resolution, excuse me, 2160p is not too noticeable on 65" and under. And the crazy distances you guys are talking about it's practicality eliminated. Unless you know what to look for, which i do, but then that's trying hard to look.

It's very noticeable to me, no doubt whatsoever. That and the brighter, sharper, clearer, added depth 3D make this a winner not to mention 4k content down the road.
post #42 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbug View Post

Hmm! Dual core processors whereas others have moved on to quad. Processing power is important for picture quality as well as apps.

And the Sony use 6-core just for the upscaling plus another dual-core for the rest of their TV operations.
post #43 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

And the Sony use 6-core just for the upscaling plus another dual-core for the rest of their TV operations.

Wow! That's another plus for the Sony's.
post #44 of 67
Yup. In terms of upscaling, so far nothing is better than Sony 4K TVs.

According to Sony, if they include the same 4K Reality upscaling board into their 5800 receiver, the price of the receiver will double. It is that expensive.
post #45 of 67
David, that doesn't seem to pan out with my Sony's X900A vs. Samsung's S9 observations today. It could be the full array local dimming that makes Samsung's S9 image look crisper and sharper as the contrast ratio is apparently higher on S9, but the S9 definitely and clear;y looks significantly sharper than Sony's X900A. I spend over an hour at Value Electronics today and they have both UHD TVs with Blu-ray and cable content running to both TVs simultaneously. Both looked beautiful, but unquestionably the Samsung looked sharper and had more saturated colors.

BTW, I know I exceeded one hour looking at these TVs as my expired meter parking ticket is proof of the good UHD experience I had that made me loose track of time. I can't wait to tell that excuse to the town court judge.
post #46 of 67
When I tested the Samsung vs Sony vs Seiki vs LG, I compare each display upscaling capability vs the original 4K source playing from the Sony 4K movie server. I agree that the Samsung gives a more "wow" upscaling quality. However, when compared to the native 4K, the upscaled video appears to be sharper and more vivid in colour than the 4K source.

I subjectively conclude that there is too much processing done by the Samsung upscaler because a good upscaler should make the 2K look like 4K and not "better" than the native 4K file.
post #47 of 67
I understand the disadvantages of over-processing and although I'm not sure I agree that Samsung is over-processing 1080p as the image is extremely clean.

How did you get the Sony 4k server to feed other brands of TVs? In the Value Electronics store they told me Sony's 4k server can only work with a Sony 4k TV.

David, you are definitely the pro and it's no fun disagreeing with pro's, but if the Samsung can scale and up-convert 1080p to look as good as it does and add no anomalies how can anyone argue with that? Most of what the UHD users will be watching is 1080p content so the scaling and up-conversion performance is very important to buyers. I had the fortune to examine these UHDTVs up close and next to each other with lots of varied content from broadcast to Blu-ray and I must tell you Samsung's S9 clearly produced a better image quality overall. Sorry I could not see the same 4k content on both displays at the same time, but I was told they will be demonstrating the same 4k content in the next few weeks.
post #48 of 67
I have zero problem with anybody disagreeing with me, especially when it's a subjective comparison. Also from disagreement I can always learn somebody else's opinion and that's very important to me.

Regardless, as previously mentioned, I agree that Samsung upscaling gives a higher "wow" factor.
post #49 of 67
WOW does not equal Natural! When I go outside, I don't see WOW, I see Natural. What we want is the big set being a Big Picture Window to look out at the World, and it should look exactly the same as if we by passed the Window, and went out and took a look out the door. Yes there are Natural Wows out there to see outside the door, but not all the time - loses it's lustre over time!
post #50 of 67
As someone who OWNS the LG 84 inch 4k and Sony 65 4K set i can say this......

The LG is a super set VERY sharp 4k is like looking through a window.

The Upconvert on the LG is also fantastic and looks almost as good...

As for the Sony it has a LESS sharp picture, not that it is not sharp but if you put it up to some of the good 1080P sets there are some that look better with regular HDTV programs IMHO

The 4k looks much much better tho at least off my computer on the Sony... Im sure the Sony will be better once I can get my Round server to work with the TV ( got a service call this Monday)

If I could say anything I would say the genaral public should wait till the standards are all done and prices go down.

Can't wait to try OLED smile.gif Thats next on my to buy list ......

Tj8xp
post #51 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by p5browne View Post

Will await your experience:

For more info, go to abt.com/documents/49001/

LG had a very nice unveiling. They had great snacks & drinks also. It was an exclusive event as for now Abt (Glenview, IL) is the only place one can pick up the 55 & 65" UHD sets. They had the 84" there also, it was in the middle and the 55 & 65 were at it's sides. One thing I learned at the presentation about 3D UHD LED is that viewing 3D at too high or two low angles will reveal ghosting and distortion of the image on the smaller UHD screens. Due to it's size (screen height) It is no problem with the larger 84"UHD sets. The LG reps that were there initially had the 65" set doing 3D but quickly ended it because of the bad off angle that invitees, standing around had. They did it so fast that It was like they were trying to hide it from the crowd. This "side effect" has been discussed in the Sony UHD owners thread. Until I saw the LG presentation, in the back of my mind I thought it was just a Sony thing. The off angle 3D thing was mentioned in one of the early Sony reviews done by Widescreen Review. Hmm, it looks like set manufacturers aren't forthright on this issue at all.

Other than that, the newest LG UHD sets looked great doing their thing with the native 4k demo material and up-converting blu ray material. On the 84" they had the 3D, BD, Rio playing but it did not look crisp, sharp and colorful at all. Instead the colors looked flat and the image quality was flat and dull. I don't know what happened there but on the LG 3D demo material that can be seen in say Best Buy for example on their half-rez, 3D HD sets there is a clip of a baseball game and the colors looked much better in comparison though the picture quality didn't look as sharp or clear as I thought it should be. Perhaps it's LG's up-conversion chip not being up to the task overall though the picture on the 55" playing the recent 2D Oz movie looked great.

I asked a rep about LG's plans for HDMI 2.0 and he said for now they will be using a dongle but the sets coming out this September will have it installed within. Before I could ask if that meant that 2.0 would be official in the fall he was whisked away. They had a nice raffle of four, $100.00 gift cards, two 250.00 cards and the granddaddy $500.00 card. If my wife or I had won, I'd have mentioned it in the first sentence.
post #52 of 67
Ahh, but would you have bought, even if you'd won the $500 certificate?
post #53 of 67
Personally, because I have dealt and consult for some of the companies researching OLED, I wouldn't buy any screen with that technology at their current technological stated even if they're priced at $1500 for a 50".

Maybe one year after these companies utilize the NHK OLED technology I'd buy one even at $5,000 but not today's iteration of OLED. It's far from ready.
post #54 of 67
^^^ You are right about that.

4K UHD TV interest causing an OLED rethink


http://www.whathifi.com/news/4k-uhd-tv-interest-causing-an-oled-rethink
post #55 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

Personally, because I have dealt and consult for some of the companies researching OLED, I wouldn't buy any screen with that technology at their current technological stated even if they're priced at $1500 for a 50".

Maybe one year after these companies utilize the NHK OLED technology I'd buy one even at $5,000 but not today's iteration of OLED. It's far from ready.

What's wrong with it?
post #56 of 67
^^^ the severe uneven wear of the blue OLED have always been the problem. Even with voltage driving control to compensate the wear of blue OLED is not enough to truly compensate its severity.

Reportedly NHK just found out the way to compensate the blue-wear a couple a month ago and none of the OLED makers signed up to use that technology yet.
post #57 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreaux View Post

^^^ You are right about that.

4K UHD TV interest causing an OLED rethink


http://www.whathifi.com/news/4k-uhd-tv-interest-causing-an-oled-rethink

Sony is the smartest one of them all. At 2013CES they announced that they will only release OLED in UHD
post #58 of 67
Not sure we need UHD on 55" OLEDTVs, especially if it increases the price any higher than OLED is now. Regarding the lifespan, LG claims 30,000 hrs. and hopefully Samsung or any premium TV manufacturer would not bring to market a TV that won't last less than 30,000 hrs.

Let's see how the products perform once more are available for stores and customers start to get these UHD and OLED TVs and of course, reviewers like yourself will give us reliable guidance on the performance of these emerging technologies.
post #59 of 67
When Sony released their tiny OLED, their claim of lifespan was only 10,000 hours (due to the blue OLED wear -- with no voltage control). I'm pretty sure (almost) 10 years later, manufacturers can have at least 20,000 hours (using the voltage control) or more. The question is now how well the voltage control compensates the blue OLED elements. I'm curious to know myself.
post #60 of 67
PS: based on my personal experience with 55", 65", 84" and home 4K projector, I agree that UHD at 55" is on the edge of being pointless unless you sit (again, based on my personal experience) 6ft away from the TV.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Latest Industry News
AVS › AVS Forum › News Forum › Latest Industry News › LG LA9700 55" & 65" UHDTVs Now Available for Purchase