2019 Samsung TV

Saw that this morning.

Unfortunately, unlike the Q70R, Q80R, and Q90R series, the Q60R doesn't come with FALD. :(

The disdain for the 40-43" range continues, and so does my disappointment...
 
Another problem with many brands is the "premium panel" 40"-ish class TVs often don't come to north america, they only send us their 50"+ fancy models, ~40 is only seen with budget models. Samsung previously had some decent 43s that were only available in EU and SEA from their official distributors.

Someday the monitor and TV market will stop being so shit, but not today.
 
Historically, their 43 and 49 inchers haven't been 120HZ.


Which makes them less compelling.
 
Thats pretty sick. I loved my Samsung QLED. They do make the best QLED, IMO.
 
gan7114 said:
Saw that this morning.

Unfortunately, unlike the Q70R, Q80R, and Q90R series, the Q60R doesn't come with FALD. :(

The disdain for the 40-43" range continues, and so does my disappointment...
Click to expand...
And no mention of number of zones. Wouldn't be surprised if it's paltry on the Q70R series, like 20-40 zones.

Those prices are laughable, too. I walked out the door with a 55" C8 a couple weeks ago from Best Buy for $1,400. I thought TV prices were supposed to be getting cheaper?

CNET's reporting is crap, too. The 77" C8 goes for around $4,500, not $7,000 as the article states. And the 75" Q9F, the only model that gets close to touching an OLED, is going for around the same price right now.
 
Armenius said:
And no mention of number of zones. Wouldn't be surprised if it's paltry on the Q70R series, like 20-40 zones.

Those prices are laughable, too. I walked out the door with a 55" C8 a couple weeks ago from Best Buy for $1,400. I thought TV prices were supposed to be getting cheaper?

CNET's reporting is crap, too. The 77" C8 goes for around $4,500, not $7,000 as the article states. And the 75" Q9F, the only model that gets close to touching an OLED, is going for around the same price right now.
Click to expand...

It boggles my mind that they get away with commanding those kind of prices for what is still LCD-LED.

We're just in this really weird (and sadly annoying) period right now with screen panel tech -- especially with monitors. LCD-LED (by itself) is cheap but FALD makes it exorbitantly expensive. LCD-LED-FALD has better HDR peak nits and can usually achieve higher color volume than OLED, but OLED gives holy grail-esque black levels, better uniformity, better motion handling, and no haloing.

In most respects, OLED is superior to LCD-LED-FALD, but isn't yet ideal for general desktop use (although gaming is fine).

As if all that weren't already a finger in the eye, large OLED TVs are cheaper than smaller LCD FALD monitors to buy...

It sucks right now. :(
 
Last edited:
gan7114 said:
Also, congrats on your OLED! Welcome to the club. :)
Click to expand...
Thanks! Really blown away by the picture. I was debating whether or not to wait for the Q9F to come down in price, but when I saw the ad and I saw both sets in person the color quality of the OLED made much more of a difference than the brightness of the Q9F. It still gets bright enough for movie and game content, especially in a darker room. The per-pixel luminance actually rivals that of the FALD in my PG27UQ in practical usage, in my opinion.
 
Armenius said:
Thanks! Really blown away by the picture. I was debating whether or not to wait for the Q9F to come down in price, but when I saw the ad and I saw both sets in person the color quality of the OLED made much more of a difference than the brightness of the Q9F. It still gets bright enough for movie and game content, especially in a darker room. The per-pixel luminance actually rivals that of the FALD in my PG27UQ in practical usage, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

LG really does have great sales on its OLEDs. It's almost too good to be true in all honestly, and I'm sure they won't stop because it means less premium market for Samsung. I remember being blown away by my C7, but I got to experience it again firsthand this Christmas when my brother and I bought the B8 for my folks. My bro even picked one up for himself, haha.

I agree about luminance; I had to ratchet down the OLED Brightness to 35-40, otherwise the perceived luminance was too intense for me (as in, actually painful to view). Even at that low setting, the perceived contrast is still incredible because of the black levels.

Going OT slightly, I'm very curious what price point Dell is going to introduce its 55" OLED gaming monitor later this year.
 
masshole said:
Thats pretty sick. I loved my Samsung QLED. They do make the best QLED, IMO.
Click to expand...
Considering QLED is a Samsung trademark, and that only samsung markets things as QLED, that would make sense.


On the other hand they're introducing a 55 inch 8k set with the Q950R.
 
gan7114 said:
<snip> ..
I agree about luminance; I had to ratchet down the OLED Brightness to 35-40, otherwise the perceived luminance was too intense for me (as in, actually painful to view). Even at that low setting, the perceived contrast is still incredible because of the black levels.

Going OT slightly, I'm very curious what price point Dell is going to introduce its 55" OLED gaming monitor later this year.
Click to expand...

The color brightness of the Samsung QLED is for HDR color volume.
HDR is not like regular SDR brightness. It adds full color into a much higher range on light sources and bright highlights dynamically throughout a scene where the rest of the scene falls more in the SDR range. When a regular display reaches it's brightness limit, it clips to white at a peak luminance instead of showing that color through the higher brightness color range dynamically. So HDR color volume increases is nothing like turning the brightness up on a SDR monitor. In fact, true HDR uses absolute values which you don't change the brightness of manually at all while SDR uses relative values where you can move the entire contents of the narrow color brightness volume band up and down in the OSD.

SDR color gamut:
https://i.imgur.com/VR6gxX2.png

HDR color volume:
https://i.imgur.com/3r1M8aR.png

OLED are great but in order to avoid burning in they are locked down to lower color brightness levels in regard to HDR. An OLED can be calibrated at 400nit color, after that, their use of an added white subpixel (WRGB instead of just RGB), pollutes the color space "cheating" higher brightness readings using the white subpixels. In addition to that, OLEDs use ABL (auto brightness limiter) as a safety reflex to avoid burning in. ABL cuts the HDR color brightness down to 600nit. Since SDR is around 350nit before is clips to white at it's limit, that means an OLED showing HDR 1000, 4000, or 10,000 content will show something like a 350nit SDR range of a scene + 250nit of white polluted HDR color highlights and sources.

======

HDR not being ubiquitous right now I'd say OLED is a great picture for right now since most content, gaming content in particular, is still SDR. I just wouldn't get one expecting much of even fractional HDR 1000, 4000, or 10,000 color volume. This is because OLED is like 350nit SDR + 250 nit white pixel mixed color volume at 600nit ABL limits to avoid burn in.

So 600nit OLED is something like
350nit SDR color + 250 higher nit color* capability
(*white pixeled and varying - reflexively toned down from higher than 600 peak back to 600 via ABL)

1000nit is SDR +650 greater color volume capability

1800nit is SDR + 1450 greater color volume height capability

2900nit is SDR + 2550 greater color volume height capability

------------------------------------------

Some tvs like samsung Q9FN can do 1800 ~ 2000 nit color volume with a 480zone FALD array of backlights - but you get bloom/dim offset of FALD and while they are 19,000:1 contrast they aren't like oled esp concerning FALD offsets.

So you get either one of these trade-offs on a OLED or FALD display in regard to HDR:

https://imgur.com/NVsBTV1

----------------
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top