Originally Posted by Wizziwig
The reason Ken's opinions are meaningless is because a 940c (especially an uncalibrated one) has a lot of the same issues you find with OLEDs. So proclaiming it's as good as his Sony isn't really saying much.
Per HDTVtest review
"We also wished to see the return of [Smooth Gradation], a nice Sony-exclusive feature that worked effectively to smooth out contouring in compromised sources. As it stood, the KD75X9405C manifested a touch more posterisation
in select scenes from less-than-pristine Blu-rays compared with the Samsung UE78JS9500, though both displays were a good deal cleaner than the LG EG960 which had a tendency to exaggerate film grain and digital noise."
Like all FALD sets, gamma is constantly manipulated to make the most out of the limited LCD native contrast. Gamma will fluctuate depending on what content is in each zone in order to keep highlights at the same brightness level. HDTVTest measured an average 2.5 uncalibrated with windowed test patterns. Even assuming it was stable at 2.5, this will still crush some shadow detail similar to what people complain about with OLED.
You either need to have the sets calibrated to a common standard or preferably have a reference display on hand to determine which one comes closest to displaying the source content correctly.
My opinions are not meaningless at all, because:
* I own both sets and know very well how they both compare. Somehow my owning both displays and you owning neither, qualifies you to claim my comments are 'meaningless' and somehow yours, owning neither, are insightful. Fantastic.
* Anyone actually owning both displays knows how foolish a statement like 'a 940c has a lot of the same issues you find with OLEDs'. That's truly one of the more clueless statements I've seen regarding a comparison of these two different techs. In fact they have their own unique issues that are not shared: viewing angles, near black issues, uniformity, blooming, shadow detail etc. In fact it's not easy finding an issue they do share.
* You cherrypick an outlier review that mentions posterization that no other review does. Even when pointing out the display's negatives, other reviews have not mentioned a greater degree of 940c posterization than other displays. In fact they don't mention it at all. Of course even in the review you cite, you don't call attention to the review's posterization modifiers 'a touch more in select scenes'
when comparing it to the Samsung. From that descriptive, I suspect the differences are quite minor, even to that reviewer.
* It must be just a coincidence that both these displays, the OLED and the 940c, have precisely the same amount of posterization in precisely the same areas of the frame with precisely the same content. Couldn't be solely a content issue, could it? And, it's nothing but an unfounded assumption that these displays, if fully calibrated, would show any difference in the area of posterization.
To be honest, since you own neither display, I find your opinions in this post rather meaningless. Are you seriously considering buying an OLED or do you have some other intention here, posting in an owner's thread?