AVS Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
41 - 60 of 190 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,493 Posts
Discussion Starter #41
4k content aside when I buy a new hdrv in the next year I want something at least reasonably future proof with the best PQ I can afford. A 4k OLED with hdmi 2.0 and hdcp 2.2 wold fit that bill fairly well it would a shame if they priced themself out of buyers like me.


I love the way OLED looks but I'm not going to buy a 1080P version as my next major TV purchase.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
From a Danish site


•55" 4K flat EF9500 - 30,000kr ($4,800 USD)
•65" 4K flat EF9500 - 51,500kr ($8,200 USD)
•55" 4K curved EG9600 - 31,675kr ($5,000 USD)
•65" 4K curved EG9600 - 55,500kr ($8,900 USD)
•77" flexible EG9900 - 317,000kr ($50,000 USD)

Source: oled-info. com/danish-site-publishes-lgs-2015-oled-tv-price-list
(I can't post links yet so there is a space in the url above)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,493 Posts
Discussion Starter #43
From a Danish site


•55" 4K flat EF9500 - 30,000kr ($4,800 USD)
•65" 4K flat EF9500 - 51,500kr ($8,200 USD)
•55" 4K curved EG9600 - 31,675kr ($5,000 USD)
•65" 4K curved EG9600 - 55,500kr ($8,900 USD)
•77" flexible EG9900 - 317,000kr ($50,000 USD)

Source: oled-info. com/danish-site-publishes-lgs-2015-oled-tv-price-list
(I can't post links yet so there is a space in the url above)

Yea if that holds up for US retail they are 2 years away from hitting mainstream prices for the Size of the TV's and OLED may not have taken off enough by then to stick around.

Sucks a shame as I like OLED but could not currently justify paying almost $5K for the 55 inch OLED when an LCD 55 inch 4k HDTV could be had for under $2K
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,293 Posts
Yea if that holds up for US retail they are 2 years away from hitting mainstream prices for the Size of the TV's and OLED may not have taken off enough by then to stick around.

Sucks a shame as I like OLED but could not currently justify paying almost $5K for the 55 inch OLED when an LCD 55 inch 4k HDTV could be had for under $2K
Hmmm... $4800 is pretty close to my max ($5k) for the 55"... but I'd only do it if it was full blown 18Gbps HDMI 2.0 and HDCP 2.2.


Yeah, its hard to justify when you can get an even 60" LCD for like $2k. I dunno, to me, LCD just doesn't work right... black levels, motion, bright / dark room issues, etc.


I'd probably have to think more about dropping $2k on an LCD then $5k on an OLED LOL.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,009 Posts
Guys you need to understand some basic truths:
The amount of data in a single raw 4k frame is about 50 Megabytes.
The average home internet cable connection is about 20mbp/sec. Do the math.
The limiting factor is bandwidth and compression technology. There is no magic bullet here. You can't get a gallon of water a second through a drinking straw.
To stream 4k over the internet, the compression used will have to be so lossy as to make 4k resolution pretty much pointless. Until we get internet bandwidth on the scale of Gigabytes/sec we are inherently limited to not even DVD quality in what we get over the internet. So in real terms it literally can't be any better than what you currently see streaming to a 1080p TV. Even the resolution of a 1080p TV is not being fully utilized.

If your intention is to buy a 4k TV just to get all your 4k content from streaming, you're literally wasting your money.

The ONLY real source of 4K where you have a chance of seeing extra detail for at least the next year or two will be either 4k BLU-RAY or OTA. Nothing else can even come close to using the full 4k resolution. Actually even those are compressed, but they have a much higher bandwidth than cable internet, so the compression need not be so aggressively lossy.
You're information and conclusions are incorrect and seem unfamiliar with how advanced video compression has become.

FWIW, a raw 4k resolution image is ~15MB not 50.



Sent via Tapatalk on the Oneplus One
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,493 Posts
Discussion Starter #46
Hmmm... $4800 is pretty close to my max ($5k) for the 55"... but I'd only do it if it was full blown 18Gbps HDMI 2.0 and HDCP 2.2.


Yeah, its hard to justify when you can get an even 60" LCD for like $2k. I dunno, to me, LCD just doesn't work right... black levels, motion, bright / dark room issues, etc.


I'd probably have to think more about dropping $2k on an LCD then $5k on an OLED LOL.
For me LCD works good enough however I see the obvious upgrade and improvement of OLED I'd just never be able to justify to the wife and son spending 2X more on OLED vs LCD. It sucks I do not want to buy a stop gap LCD 4K HDTV but it is looking more likely I'll have to if I don't want to spend 2X as much.

I could take a 500$ OLED tax so to say but not 2X the price.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,293 Posts
For me LCD works good enough however I see the obvious upgrade and improvement of OLED I'd just never be able to justify to the wife and son spending 2X more on OLED vs LCD. It sucks I do not want to buy a stop gap LCD 4K HDTV but it is looking more likely I'll have to if I don't want to spend 2X as much.

I could take a 500$ OLED tax so to say but not 2X the price.
Yeah, I dunno... to me, a 50" - 60" TV is very difficult to get rid of (as opposed to a smaller item), so I buy TVs for the longer term. Smaller, easier to sell devices like AVRs, bluray players, those I *might* get the half assed version as a stop gap, but generally I don't like to buy half assed versions of stuff.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,493 Posts
Discussion Starter #48
Yeah, I dunno... to me, a 50" - 60" TV is very difficult to get rid of (as opposed to a smaller item), so I buy TVs for the longer term. Smaller, easier to sell devices like AVRs, bluray players, those I *might* get the half assed version as a stop gap, but generally I don't like to buy half assed versions of stuff.

Yea I don't want a half assed version either and I don't want to wait 2+ years for OLED price to come down to reality "IF" OLED is even a viable option in two years.

The whole situation kind of sucks, OLED becoming viable but still to pricey at the exact same time 4K HDTV is becoming really attainable and cheap, then add in the pending doom of HDMI 2.0 and HDCP 2.2 for Gen 1 4k HDTV's.

Their is just no way on earth I'm going to buy a $5K 55 inch HDTV without prepping my divorce papers first.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,600 Posts
For me LCD works good enough however I see the obvious upgrade and improvement of OLED I'd just never be able to justify to the wife and son spending 2X more on OLED vs LCD. It sucks I do not want to buy a stop gap LCD 4K HDTV but it is looking more likely I'll have to if I don't want to spend 2X as much.

I could take a 500$ OLED tax so to say but not 2X the price.
That's what you get for having a wife and son. :D

It's a matter of priorities… a loving family or good picture quality. :D:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,708 Posts
Yea I don't want a half assed version either and I don't want to wait 2+ years for OLED price to come down to reality "IF" OLED is even a viable option in two years.

The whole situation kind of sucks, OLED becoming viable but still to pricey at the exact same time 4K HDTV is becoming really attainable and cheap, then add in the pending doom of HDMI 2.0 and HDCP 2.2 for Gen 1 4k HDTV's.

Their is just no way on earth I'm going to buy a $5K 55 inch HDTV without prepping my divorce papers first.
Then wait. 😉
 
  • Like
Reactions: buzzard767

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,384 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,493 Posts
Discussion Starter #55
Guys, at size of 55" and if you want to save some money, the regular HD OLED is a very good choice. I will say better than any 4K LED side by side. Just saying. :cool:
Buying another 1080P hdtv right now would be a stop gap as 4K is about to hit big and they finally are going to put out 4k blu ray players in the next year.


The ideal scenario is having a 4K OLED about 500$ more than the LCD version.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,901 Posts
I would prefer a 1080p OLED to a 4K QD display, at under 2K, however the OLED would need to support 10-bit and HDR, and probably Freesync then I would consider it. Thankfully LG is making 21:9 monitors although that aren't OLED (or HDR, AFAIK).

I would pick up a 55 inch (-ish) 21:9 OLED 1080p (or 2560 x 1080) if it supported 10-bit HDR, and was flat.

At 55 inches the 4K doesn't matter all that much, and as people are so apt to mention, most of the video content you get will be streamed so you are MUCH better off getting higher bitrate and color depth and dynamic range 1080p data, than you are to cut corners with an equivalent 4K image. Why? Because HEVC can be used for 1080p video as well, meaning the bandwidth savings can benefit everyone all the way down the line.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,293 Posts
Just offer me a 60" OLED with the kinks worked out for $5k or less and i am in. I don't care anything about 4k as that will never come anyways. We still don't even have 1080p with OTA- HD and i sure as heck don't see 4k ever being broadcast.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,708 Posts
If LG really prices the 55" @ $5K, there's a pretty good chance OLED won't be around much longer.


The 55" curved 1080P OLED is $3500, so a $1500 premium for the 4K flat is kinda pushing it IMO.
I think your fears will be unfounded.

If PDP was pronounced DOA in the 1960's and 1970's because prices were prohibitively high, then we wouldn't have had them to enjoy.

Take it easy. It will be okay. :)

OLED - like any new display tech - has to work its way down in price.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,293 Posts
I think your fears will be unfounded.

If PDP was pronounced DOA in the 1960's and 1970's because prices were prohibitively high, then we wouldn't have had them to enjoy.

Take it easy. It will be okay. :)

OLED - like any new display tech - has to work its way down in price.
You know Plasma is dead, right? :). It was a better technology then LCD/LED.


There is only one mfg making OLED and that's LG. I'd love for them to price the 55" flat 4K @ $2K, but I'm pretty sure that isn't going to happen.


When mfgs see everybody is going direction X, they aren't going to go direction Y unless they're stupid and want to go out of business.


Don't get me wrong, I prefer OLED and *I* might be willing to pay $5K for a 55" set because I want a crazy good pic, but when you can get a 65" LED for like $1500, well... most people are going to go that route.


You might be able to get away with a niche market in other stuff, but I don't think you can do that with TVs.


Oh well, we'll see. At this point we're all arguing about non existent vaporware :).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,773 Posts
I would prefer a 1080p OLED to a 4K QD display, at under 2K, however the OLED would need to support 10-bit and HDR, and probably Freesync then I would consider it. Thankfully LG is making 21:9 monitors although that aren't OLED (or HDR, AFAIK).

I would pick up a 55 inch (-ish) 21:9 OLED 1080p (or 2560 x 1080) if it supported 10-bit HDR, and was flat.

At 55 inches the 4K doesn't matter all that much, and as people are so apt to mention, most of the video content you get will be streamed so you are MUCH better off getting higher bitrate and color depth and dynamic range 1080p data, than you are to cut corners with an equivalent 4K image. Why? Because HEVC can be used for 1080p video as well, meaning the bandwidth savings can benefit everyone all the way down the line.
You forget the low fillrate that LG OLED panels have.
 
41 - 60 of 190 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top