The point was the grey vs black, to which they were captured accurately.
Why are the black borders cloudy? Looks weird.
The point was the grey vs black, to which they were captured accurately.
Why are the black borders cloudy? Looks weird.
I would have picked up a ZD9 myself last year if not for the average input lag and the absolutely horrible DSE. You can't find a 65" without it. I'll take the slight near black uniformity problems on OLED's over that any day.
Hot damn Panasonic did it. They made the best OLED this year. I had my doubts. Sucks for you US guys that they are not selling there.
So let me set my expectations appropriately. HDR on OLED, not hugely impactful?
I'd rather greyer blacks and actually have decent shadow detail, yes. The problem with dimming, is sometimes detail is dimmed when it shouldn't be, as your image shows. Personally, I prefer the way an OLED does it, even when considering the things it doesn't do as well, arguably with HDR being one of them.
If that makes me a fanboy, so be it.
Pricing though? I couldn't see anything with a quick search. If it is priced anything like the A1E having the best isn't a performance gain worth the price of admission over the LG sets. Either way I'm more than content with my B6 until hdmi2.1 etc sets are on the market.
How many zones?
So what 65 incher with HDR and low input lag can i get for sub $1000? I mostly watch and game late at night
Any thoughts on the Vizio E65-E1?
I think it was 128. I know that isn't a lot, but when I was buying I think the only FALD sets available were that, the Sony which was $5500 vs the $1800 I paid for my OLED. There was a Samsung I think, but curved.
Aside from being expensive and larger than I wanted, the Sony DSE reviews are not good.
Screw Panasonic for pulling out of our market.
So it was a Vizio? I thought their FALD algo was supposed to be one of the better ones, but maybe hockey is its weak point.
How can you even begin to tell what should or shouldn't be in those cell phone pics? And I think you're lying. Nobody actually wants grey blacks in 2017. Especially dirty ones, detailed or not.
Why post them then if they aren't representative of what he is seeing? You can think I'm lying for all I care, I couldn't give a toss. I'd rather have LCD blacks, without active dimming, and actually see details present in the source. Believe it or not, your choice. Its hardy a mind-blowing revelation though is it?
Hot damn Panasonic did it. They made the best OLED this year. I had my doubts. Sucks for you US guys that they are not selling there.
You have no solid proof that dimming actually kills detail on his TV, not from those 2 pics that is. He posted them to illustrate one point.
No need to be all passive aggressive and shit on the man's TV - "I don't know how anyone watches films on the TV pictured above". Your horse is getting too high, be careful riding.
Who reviewed it, link?
https://youtu.be/9mER9vGU5A8
Here you go, but its in German and i cant say they did it. Price and lack of DV is a no go for me. Picture is somewhat identical to LG and Sony.
B7 vs C7
https://youtu.be/3JIlhzhzYok
Will watch now.
The processor utilized is strong enough to get the software DV solution with a firmware update just like the Sony. It's just not announced yet because the set isn't really available on the market. They got a pre-production model with some menu bugs etc.
You have no solid proof that dimming actually kills detail on his TV, not from those 2 pics that is. He posted them to illustrate one point.
No need to be all passive aggressive and shit on the man's TV - "I don't know how anyone watches films on the TV pictured above". Your horse is getting too high, be careful riding.
Hot damn Panasonic did it. They made the best OLED this year.
Of course dimming kills detail. It does it even on a ZD9! Did you even check the link I posted and look at the impact on contrast there?
Shit on his TV? Lol TVs - serious business.
The stupid thing is that it's supposed to be floating in the middle of the screen with nothing around it lol.
The dimming off offers no new detail, just turns the blacks grey.
What makes it worse is that we find out he has an FALD LCD too, and you can bet your arse he uses the local dimming on it, and in his words it's not to the level of the 902.
Just gives his comments no standing whatsoever.
From what I've read, Pansonic does a good job at controlling and limiting blooming/haloing on the 902. That'd be my biggest gripe with a display like that so it's good to see Panasonic making it virtually a non-issue.
But FALD is not a perfect solution and has its drawbacks, at least on the 902 itself with over-aggressive local dimming in dark scenes and that's where OLED will work best.
Well yeah everyone knows that last part already. Nobody has been arguing that their TV is perfect in the last couple pages, just dispelling myths and bad info. DX902 is definitely in the league of current top TVs.
Feel free to post some quotes. Loss of contrast doesn't always mean loss of detail.
The article is largely in praise of the TV against the LG they tested against anyways in a bunch of aspects, so I don't think it's helping your overall point. Actually, I'm not even sure what it is, as he doesn't own a Z9D.
Well yeah everyone knows that last part already. Nobody has been arguing that their TV is perfect in the last couple pages, just dispelling myths and bad info. DX902 is definitely in the league of current top TVs.
Yeah I'll have to concede that it does a great job at delivering a premium picture quality.
too bad the OS sucks balls
It's not difficult. Dimming is not always accurate, and the less zones you have, the more chance there is of actual detail being dimmed instead of black space. That is why I posted the link as it shows this perfectly.
It wasn't a slight against any TV because, believe it or not, I don't get personal when it comes to TVs, and as I posted before, my list of owned sets is pretty diverse.
If you are not using a set top box and are relying on built in TV stuff you're doing it wrong.
If you are not using a set top box and are relying on built in TV stuff you're doing it wrong.
It's not difficult. Dimming is not always accurate, and the less zones you have, the more chance there is of actual detail being dimmed instead of black space. That is why I posted the link as it shows this perfectly.
It wasn't a slight against any TV because, believe it or not, I don't get personal when it comes to TVs, and as I posted before, my list of owned sets is pretty diverse.
If you are not using a set top box and are relying on built in TV stuff you're doing it wrong.
So are you saying the detail is dimmed or is it killed? Because you said the latter earlier, which implies black crush from dimming. Just post a quote from the article so everyone can understand you clearly because it's long. Or not, no big deal.
It's killed. It's not every scene, and when it works, then great, but it will never be accurate enough *for me*. And *no* I'm not saying OLED tech is perfect, far from it, but this is why I don't like TVs with active dimming. That is my own preference and not a slight against any poster here or their TV.
http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/kd65zd9-201610164372.htm
True, but if you aren't looking at a dark night sky with stars, but looking at bright sunny day with colorful flowers, that OLED will not get anywhere near as bright or highlight HDR details like the Z9D would especially if calibrated properly. Not to say HDR isn't phenomenal on each set, as OLED are rated differently and even rated for Dolby Vision.
That is why each technology has pros and cons. There is no one thing inherently better at EVERYTHING.
Just ordered Planet Earth 2 on 4k Blu-Ray can't wait for it to come in. I may have to pick my jaw off the floor when I watch it. It will definitely be demo material for my OLED.
So, what settings do you recommend? I haven't found much in the way of settings for HDR. I'm using cinema preset with standard settings and sharpening etc. turned off.
ISF preset should be the most accurate out of the box I think.
That photo is somewhat misleading.It's killed. It's not every scene, and when it works, then great, but it will never be accurate enough *for me*. And *no* I'm not saying OLED tech is perfect, far from it, but this is why I don't like TVs with active dimming. That is my own preference and not a slight against any poster here or their TV.
http://i.imgur.com/9LCNwxm.png
http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/kd65zd9-201610164372.htm
That photo is somewhat misleading.
With OLEDs being self-emissive displays, they will be pushing the brightness for point light sources higher than intended, which exaggerates the difference.
If you calibrate brightness to 100 nits for SDR using a standard window pattern, anything below about 15-20% APL will be brighter than 100 nits - while an LCD can sustain a fixed max brightness.
With a starfield, it's rare to have stars which are actually 100% white.
If the brightest star is only 75% white, you can increase the image brightness to 100% and dim the backlight by 25%.
So the resulting brightness is the same with no detail lost, but the black level drops.
Here's an example of a good local dimming implementation:The higher the native contrast ratio of the LCD panel is, the more effective local dimming will be.
It's far more effective on a 5000:1 native VA LCD than a 1000:1 IPS LCD for example.
OLED is certainly going to be better, but a lot of people seem to think that local dimming is just like the old global backlight dimming systems that LCDs had which was better left off. Full array local dimming is nearly always better left enabled.