OLED to QLED - who switched

evans88

Member
I've just bought a Samsung QLED. Whereas my previous TV was unwatchable in a very light room (all I could see was a dark screen with no images) the QLED is fantastic. While the technical reviews put OLED on top I would ignore that especially if you view the TV in a very light room. The picture is fantastic in all lights.
 

Fake Shempz

Active Member
My next TV will likely be a 55 OLED. Currently got a 50" Panasonic LED (EX750), and reckon I'll swap over in a couple of years - unless I sneak it past the missus without her noticing before then!
 

iwb100

Distinguished Member
Each to their own but I honestly cannot fathom anyone who owns an OLED wanting to go back to LCD. Even Samsung have now bought OLED panels.

I’ve looked and looked at QLEDs this week as my 5 and a half year old OLED is done for. But they just aren’t as good and cost more to get close to equivalence.
 

CoolDust

Active Member
I went from a LG C7 (2017) to a Samsung Q9FN (2018) and it was a great TV but plagued with uniformity issues and my dealings with Samsung means I will never purchase a product from them again.

I think I would have been happy with a QLED if I got a panel without glaring uniformity issues but I had 3 different panels with either tinting, banding, clouding or lines down the screen.

So I got rid of it and moved to the LG C8 and I really appreciated OLED all over again, the brightness was nice on the QLED but it just doesn't hit like OLED does for me. This was years ago though so I don't know the current state of QLED technology.
 

Snake79

Active Member
I've owned an LG C7 OLED for exactly 4 years now and I will buy another OLED when this one needs replacing. For me the image OLED produces is superb.

It's not been plain sailing mind you, there have been issues with the panel and the power block needed replacing but I can't see myself using any other type of display. My previous two TVs were rear projection and were not very bright towards the end of their life and despite having relatively good contrast at the time, were nowhere near what OLED is capable of.

For me general viewing during the day OLED is more than bright enough, it's only during the summer when we get a really bright day that I may need to pull the curtains to see the screen, especially on dark content when it becomes a black mirror but I watch mostly in the evening when it's less of an issue. Rear projection was terrible during the day, I was having to close the curtains a lot to see the screen as the image wasn't very bright.

There are some impressive LCD TVs out there but for me if there are black bars on screen or space being shown I want it to be black and not a grey where you can see the edge of the panel. Viewing angles are also an issue, I have two main seating areas, in front and to the right side of the screen. With LCD the right side would lose contrast and colour, which is another reason why OLED is my preferred choice.

I also prefer it for gaming, I recently bought a modded Dreamcast with HDMI output and the image I now get is excellent. Having all that contrast really makes the games pop. The difference is like running the Dreamcast through VGA on a CRT monitor back in the day.
 

iwb100

Distinguished Member
A friend of mine has just got the Q90a. He knows nowt about TVs and just bought it. He asked if I’d help him set it up which I did. And for about half an hour I was sitting then just marvelling at the retina burning brightness and how it’s amazing to set it to such a thing and leave it without being concerned about burn in or uneven pixel wear. And I was all set to go LCD again. But over time as I watched it I just realised it’s the usual thing of being overblown over saturated for the initial impact. When I dialled it all back it looked significantly inferior to my 5 year old OLED. To the point I’d be pretty unhappy. And I bought a heavily discounted CX instead. For half the price yet twice the picture.
 

MEGATAMA

Well-known Member
I went from B6 to B7 then to Q90R and now LG G1.
 

Greg Hook

Moderator & Reviewer
Same as others for me, my next tv will be an OLED too.
That’s not to say I haven’t had issues as I have, in fact LG are coming to replace the screen soon under warranty, but that isn’t down to any screen retention issues, just an odd fault in the centre of the screen.
 

Clearandcolour

Active Member
Same as others for me, my next tv will be an OLED too.
That’s not to say I haven’t had issues as I have, in fact LG are coming to replace the screen soon under warranty, but that isn’t down to any screen retention issues, just an odd fault in the centre of the screen.
The problem in th ecentre of the scren will be something from overheating in the middle I think.. So it's an oled thing.. You may hope that the new screen will have different set up. But if the heat is coming from behind the screen itself,. you will end up with the same problem in some years..
I thought lg has had to change oled panels from certain models and years a year ago... in asia !??
 

Greg Hook

Moderator & Reviewer
The problem in th ecentre of the scren will be something from overheating in the middle I think.. So it's an oled thing.. You may hope that the new screen will have different set up. But if the heat is coming from behind the screen itself,. you will end up with the same problem in some years..
I thought lg has had to change oled panels from certain models and years a year ago... in asia !??
Mine is 4 years old. I don’t believe the fault is there on later models.
 

Kotatsu Neko

Well-known Member
I can see the brightness argument, OLEDs are a little dim at times, but that aside they murder LCDs in every possible way. I say that as someone with a high end LCD PC display (1000nits, 512 zone FALD, 2ms response, GSync etc). LCDs are smeary, suffer from catastrophic haloing (or just an inability to render anything resembling black), and just aren't especially sharp or crisp looking. They're also big chunky things with noisy fans to cool the FALD. Oh and the actual pixel response time is way worse than the on the box ms timings, as their actual per pixel cool down decay time is comical.

If OLEDs can ever get to the 1000 nit mark, they'll be pretty much perfect. Perhaps micro LED will be a competitor, if it ever makes it to market.
 

iwb100

Distinguished Member
I can see the brightness argument, OLEDs are a little dim at times, but that aside they murder LCDs in every possible way. I say that as someone with a high end LCD PC display (1000nits, 512 zone FALD, 2ms response, GSync etc). LCDs are smeary, suffer from catastrophic haloing (or just an inability to render anything resembling black), and just aren't especially sharp or crisp looking. They're also big chunky things with noisy fans to cool the FALD. Oh and the actual pixel response time is way worse than the on the box ms timings, as their actual per pixel cool down decay time is comical.

If OLEDs can ever get to the 1000 nit mark, they'll be pretty much perfect. Perhaps micro LED will be a competitor, if it ever makes it to market.
Would the human eye even register the difference between 700 nits and 1000 nits peak brightness? Perhaps side by side but I doubt it makes much difference.

The QLEDs brightness advantage as I understand it is just general apl and generally that’s just from being able to crank up the backlight up. But you of course in a dark room end up with artefacts.

Most of the extra brightness doesn’t make the picture better at least if you stick to creative intent.

Whilst obviously the extra nits in HDR give you a better curve to play with and potentially a more impactful HDR image having seen a Q90 in HDR recently I’m very unconvinced it looks better given worse contrast.
 

MEGATAMA

Well-known Member
I can see the brightness argument, OLEDs are a little dim at times, but that aside they murder LCDs in every possible way. I say that as someone with a high end LCD PC display (1000nits, 512 zone FALD, 2ms response, GSync etc). LCDs are smeary, suffer from catastrophic haloing (or just an inability to render anything resembling black), and just aren't especially sharp or crisp looking. They're also big chunky things with noisy fans to cool the FALD. Oh and the actual pixel response time is way worse than the on the box ms timings, as their actual per pixel cool down decay time is comical.

If OLEDs can ever get to the 1000 nit mark, they'll be pretty much perfect. Perhaps micro LED will be a competitor, if it ever makes it to market.
This is 1000nits model.
 

Kotatsu Neko

Well-known Member
This is 1000nits model.
It's nice, but it has a couple of big issues. The lag is huge so you can't game on it, and it's also extremely expensive. Hopefully the higher peak brightness will filter down to the LGs next year.
 

Kotatsu Neko

Well-known Member
Would the human eye even register the difference between 700 nits and 1000 nits peak brightness? Perhaps side by side but I doubt it makes much difference.

The QLEDs brightness advantage as I understand it is just general apl and generally that’s just from being able to crank up the backlight up. But you of course in a dark room end up with artefacts.

Most of the extra brightness doesn’t make the picture better at least if you stick to creative intent.

Whilst obviously the extra nits in HDR give you a better curve to play with and potentially a more impactful HDR image having seen a Q90 in HDR recently I’m very unconvinced it looks better given worse contrast.
I can easily tell the difference between my 1000nit LCD and my 650nit OLED. Plus the LCD doesn't need the very aggressive ABL that OLEDs use.

That said though, the OLED still looks considerably better due to the much better blacks, better motion, and lack of haloing.
 

[email protected]

Novice Member
And they say OLED tv's is progress. My current TV is a Samsung 48" bought in 2014 and still going strong. Before that I had a B&O 21" cathode ray tv and that lasted 21 years, if fact CRT lasted a very long time but now we seem to require bigger and bigger screens. Are peoples eyesight getting worse?
 

iwb100

Distinguished Member
And they say OLED tv's is progress. My current TV is a Samsung 48" bought in 2014 and still going strong. Before that I had a B&O 21" cathode ray tv and that lasted 21 years, if fact CRT lasted a very long time but now we seem to require bigger and bigger screens. Are peoples eyesight getting worse?
Are you judging a TV’s quality by longevity? The reason for bigger screens is due to higher resolution content that shows off the details better and bigger screens work for that. Also the size and weight if TVs are vastly reduced now so it makes sense to have larger screens. It’s also lifestyle. People who buy good TVs now tend to do so to watch movies at movie grade experience (see introduction of filmmaker mode) and bigger screens are desirable for that.

If people investing in TVs were basically just watching countdown and neighbours as before then I doubt TV sizes would have increased as much.
 

PH61

Novice Member
I still have my LG 55" B6 OLED and would never change it for a QLED. I don't like the colours. Would go for LG again (or maybe Sony). No Samsung for me (at this moment). I have no burn-in problems and am very satified.
 

jdevil

Distinguished Member
And they say OLED tv's is progress. My current TV is a Samsung 48" bought in 2014 and still going strong. Before that I had a B&O 21" cathode ray tv and that lasted 21 years, if fact CRT lasted a very long time but now we seem to require bigger and bigger screens. Are peoples eyesight getting worse?
I'm guessing you also still have a Nokia 3310 with you?

We're now creating Home Cinema's at home for only £2-3k, quality that can match most locals theatre. Once you start viewing 4K content at home, the trip to the cinema starts becoming a very very average experience.
 

CliffordinWales

Active Member
And they say OLED tv's is progress. My current TV is a Samsung 48" bought in 2014 and still going strong. Before that I had a B&O 21" cathode ray tv and that lasted 21 years, if fact CRT lasted a very long time but now we seem to require bigger and bigger screens. Are peoples eyesight getting worse?

The thing is, when you upgraded your TV back in 2014 you went for something more than double the size of your old display, so presumably even you realised at the time that "a good big un will beat a good little un", as the old saying goes. A larger screen by definition offers a more immersive experience.

We all held onto our old CRTs for so long because frankly, between the introduction of colour in the 60s and HDTV, there wasn't a hell of a lot of progress in TV tech. But since the late 90s we've seen the advent of plasma, LCD, OLED, HD, 4K, HDR/WCG... and TVs have got cheaper, thinner, more energy efficient while growing in screen size. Only someone churlish could deny the benefits this technological progress has brought to consumers.
 

Kotatsu Neko

Well-known Member
And they say OLED tv's is progress. My current TV is a Samsung 48" bought in 2014 and still going strong. Before that I had a B&O 21" cathode ray tv and that lasted 21 years, if fact CRT lasted a very long time but now we seem to require bigger and bigger screens. Are peoples eyesight getting worse?

You know you're on an AV enthusiast website, don't you?

And bigger screens are about immersion, about creating a cinema experience at home. Surely you know this?

But if you're fine with an ancient LCD then more power to you. Bask in that sweet 1080p SDR LCD murk.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Maverick UK Premiere IMAX Review + Top Gun, Tom Cruise, Tony Scott and 4K + Movie/TV News
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Latest News

LG UltraGear Gaming Monitors get VESA certification
  • By Ian Collen
  • Published
Sony confirms UK pricing for A90K and A75K Bravia XR 4K OLED TVs
  • By Ian Collen
  • Published
LG announces new CineBeam HU915QE 4K laser projector
  • By Ian Collen
  • Published
Movies Podcast | Maverick IMAX Review, 4K Disc News and More
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom