Originally Posted by Mike98
So after reading this owners thread I went and purchased a oled 65E6 and I also purchased a samsung ks9800. I have read a few people ripping samsung led but I will speak the truth. I kept the samsung ks9800 and returned the OLED. The Oled had slightly better blacks but the sammy blacks were black enough. After that the ks9800 was superior. The ks9800 blew away the oled whwn watching HDR content I could see so much more detail. Also I noticed the ks9800 up converted cable and all content much cleaner which would make sense since samsung is known to make that great 8500 4k player. Arc worked perfect and viewing angle was really good unless at 70 degrees who watches tv at that angle lol. I returned the Oled because arc did not work, hdr detail was clipped big time because of oled being to dim for hdr and the operating system to me is not refined. Consumer report scored the oled higher bit it gained those points from viewing angle points. Hate to say this OLED is good but overrated. Oh yeah and I didn't want to worry about burn in.
Actually, Mike98, the test technicians for Consumer Reports did not say that OLED's superior viewing angle is the reason that they rate LG's OLED models above any LCD/LED backlit panels.
But in the September 2016 issue of Consumer Reports this question was specifically posed: "Is An OLED TV Worth The High Price?"
And Consumer Reports gave this unequivocal answer to that question: "Yes, if you want the best picture quality available and have the budget to indulge your fine taste."
BTW, the testers for CR typically evaluate about 200 different TV models each year, so those folks certainly seem to make more direct picture quality comparisons of different TV models than TV reviewers do at Sound & Vision, WIDESCREEN REVIEW, C-NET, or at about any other testing entity that any of us could name.
And because Consumer Reports accepts no advertising from TV manufacturers, (or from makers of any other kind of products) a giant corporation, like a Samsung, that does huge amounts of advertising in other venues, has no special advantage in the treatment that its products get in the pages of Consumer Reports. But, IMO, that cannot be said for how companies like Samsung and Sony are often treated in places where they do a lot of advertising.