TV Upgrade from LG BX.

willz

Active Member
Hi,

I currently have an LG BX, however HDR/DV is unimpressive possibly due to low brightness, the highlights just don't pop.

I'm considering upgrading, budget of £1k currently have a 55", would if possible be looking at going 65".

Posssibly LCD/QLED? No OLED is going to get bright enough to not be dissapointed with highlights?

Using it to watching tv (lot of SDR/HD via Virgin media) and netflix, amazon and gaming (PC - 3080ti - 4k 120Hz needed)

Cheers.
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
The BX is circa 600 nits peak if I remember right, whereas the mean brightness now of the mid range OLED TVs like the C1 is closer to 800.

There are also now TVs like the Sony A90J that can almost reach 1000, which should certainly be a big upgrade with spectacular highlights.

With a limited budget though you're going to need to look at LCD TVs instead. You don't really want to move on to anything less than the Samsung QN9xA models (excluding QN90A), Sony X95J or TCL C825 really, to not sacrifice to much quality compared to OLED.
 

willz

Active Member
X90J similar to X95J? The price is steep for the X95J
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
No, the X90J is not a true HDR TV, maxes out around 800 nits peak brightness. Going for that model would be similar to going for the BX over CX from 2020 lines.

If you're looking to spend as little money as possible, you're probably buying at the wrong time of year. Best instead to look at 2021 stock when they are in clearance between spring and summer next year.

Right now there may even be some 2020 models, higher tier selling in clearance. Like this:

Last year's flagship 4k Samsung.
 

Kris Dee

Active Member
No, the X90J is not a true HDR TV, maxes out around 800 nits peak brightness. Going for that model would be similar to going for the BX over CX from 2020 lines.

If you're looking to spend as little money as possible, you're probably buying at the wrong time of year. Best instead to look at 2021 stock when they are in clearance between spring and summer next year.

Right now there may even be some 2020 models, higher tier selling in clearance. Like this:

Last year's flagship 4k Samsung.
Dodgexander I finally put my hands on X90j. Friend of mine bought 55 inch version. I tested that TV for few hours, and I have to say I'm very impressed by picture quality. Yes my XH95 is brighter, but X90J has much higher native contrast 5600:1 almost double compared to XH95. For HDR in dark room 830nits is ok, and you have less blooming thanks to improved FALD algorithm and lower black level.

Also I wouldn't buy X95J. Looks like this TV have even lower native contrast 2290:1! This is a joke really, and 60 dimming zones (65") is not enough to fix this problem.
 

Sloppy Bob

Distinguished Member
Going from an OLED with 600Nits to an LCD with 800 isn't really any of an improvement as the OLED has far better blacks and contrast.

It might be marginally better in a bright room but close the blinds or curtains and the OLED is going to be better for HDR.
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
Dodgexander I finally put my hands on X90j. Friend of mine bought 55 inch version. I tested that TV for few hours, and I have to say I'm very impressed by picture quality. Yes my XH95 is brighter, but X90J has much higher native contrast 5600:1 almost double compared to XH95. For HDR in dark room 830nits is ok, and you have less blooming thanks to improved FALD algorithm and lower black level.

Also I wouldn't buy X95J. Looks like this TV have even lower native contrast 2290:1! This is a joke really, and 60 dimming zones (65") is not enough to fix this problem.
I'm aware of the X90J which is why I recommend it in my new guide here (in progress):

Its shortfall is still with HDR being too dark, and its local dimming is a stripped down 32x zone system too. In a dark room you will be okay with some titles, but in others the picture will be dark, and lack punch coming across quite flat. Not just this, but light control is more basic than the X95J, with less dimming zones.

The contrast ratio being higher is down to the poorer viewing angles (lacking the wide viewing angle filter). You can view that as a positive, or negative thing depending on which way you look at it...pardon the pun!

There's been a big mix up in the market this year, the X95J looks like it can't get as bright as its predecessor, but I'm not worried about the native contrast ratio since it gets a lot higher with local dimming turned on.

If you are wanting a TV without a viewing angle filter, but with impressive HDR performance the TCL C825 looks like the model to beat this year in sheer value for money.
 

Kris Dee

Active Member
I'm aware of the X90J which is why I recommend it in my new guide here (in progress):

Its shortfall is still with HDR being too dark, and its local dimming is a stripped down 32x zone system too. In a dark room you will be okay with some titles, but in others the picture will be dark, and lack punch coming across quite flat. Not just this, but light control is more basic than the X95J, with less dimming zones.

The contrast ratio being higher is down to the poorer viewing angles (lacking the wide viewing angle filter). You can view that as a positive, or negative thing depending on which way you look at it...pardon the pun!

There's been a big mix up in the market this year, the X95J looks like it can't get as bright as its predecessor, but I'm not worried about the native contrast ratio since it gets a lot higher with local dimming turned on.

If you are wanting a TV without a viewing angle filter, but with impressive HDR performance the TCL C825 looks like the model to beat this year in sheer value for money.
It's not just the viewing angle filter difference. X950G didn't have filter but was the same panel ans still only had 4400:1.
Native contrast is equally important to local diming, and with just 60 zones you can improve it, but not in every scene. For example starfield will look miles better on X90J.
Seriously with 2300:1 we are getting to close to IPS territory, and those panels look bad even with thousands mini LED zones.
 

willz

Active Member
C825 looks good but the name TCL, I feel a bit caution going with a lesser known name.
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
It's not just the viewing angle filter difference. X950G didn't have filter but was the same panel ans still only had 4400:1.
Native contrast is equally important to local diming, and with just 60 zones you can improve it, but not in every scene. For example starfield will look miles better on X90J.
Seriously with 2300:1 we are getting to close to IPS territory, and those panels look bad even with thousands mini LED zones.
Native contrast plays a part, but I don't think there will be any point where you turn the local dimming off.
They have to make a compromise between viewing angles and black levels, together with bright highlights.

Contrast ratio measurements are also only taken in SDR mode, with a calibrated brightness of 100nits. They have next to no consequence in HDR mode, where the X95J will be a lot better than the X90J.

In a dim room yes, you can get away with the X90J, but it's still just a starter HDR TV because it just can't get bright enough. Sadly, in a dim room you also have to deal with the blooming and poorer light control due to less zones..so I'm really not sure why you'd go for this TV anyway in those conditions compared to an OLED.
 

Kris Dee

Active Member
Contrast ratio measurements are also only taken in SDR mode, with a calibrated brightness of 100nits. They have next to no consequence in HDR mode, where the X95J will be a lot better than the X90J.
Definitely have consequences in HDR. Forget X95J for a moment, and i will show you ridiculous blooming on my 55HX95 with 48 fald zones(8x6).
IMG_20211129_220558~2.jpg

Zones are just to big, and when you have small, bright 1200nits highlights, black level in that area is to high.
The same scene on X90J looks much better.
That TV only have 24 FALD zones(6x4), so they are even bigger, highlights are 800nits, but black level is 3 times lower in that top/left corner.
My point is that 48-60 zones it's not enough for low contrast, 1000-1500nits LCD.
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
Definitely have consequences in HDR. Forget X95J for a moment, and i will show you ridiculous blooming on my 55HX95 with 48 fald zones(8x6).
View attachment 1611139
Zones are just to big, and when you have small, bright 1200nits highlights, black level in that area is to high.
The same scene on X90J looks much better.
That TV only have 24 FALD zones(6x4), so they are even bigger, highlights are 800nits, but black level is 3 times lower in that top/left corner.
My point is that 48-60 zones it's not enough for low contrast, 1000-1500nits LCD.
Your logic seems odd to me. It's disappointing to see Sony have poorer light control but I fail to see why the answer is to recommend a LCD TV instead that has lower brightness. You may as well go OLED.

Sony have never been strong with local dimming compared to others, but at the same time they do not crush blacks or lose shadow detail like other brands. The X95J is no different to the XH95 in this respect, and the X95J remains a much better TV than the X90J because it's able to reproduce highlights with HDR that the X90J cannot.

We're not talking small differences either, rtings.com showed the X95J is able to sustain twice as much brightness in a 25% window compared to the X90J. Blooming remains a poor side effect on the X95J which makes it a worse choice compared to Samsung's higher end QN9xA models, but it's not a worse TV than the X90J.

You can see from this post that screen uniformity on the XH95 screenshot he posted is also nowhere near as bad as the X95J:
 
Last edited:

Kris Dee

Active Member
Your logic seems odd to me. It's disappointing to see Sony have poorer light control but I fail to see why the answer is to recommend a LCD TV instead that has lower brightness. You may as well go OLED.

Sony have never been strong with local dimming compared to others, but at the same time they do not crush blacks or lose shadow detail like other brands. The X95J is no different to the XH95 in this respect, and the X95J remains a much better TV than the X90J because it's able to reproduce highlights with HDR that the X90J cannot.

We're not talking small differences either, rtings.com showed the X95J is able to sustain twice as much brightness in a 25% window compared to the X90J. Blooming remains a poor side effect on the X95J which makes it a worse choice compared to Samsung's higher end QN9xA models, but it's not a worse TV than the X90J.
Never mind. I just wanted to share my opinion on X90J vs XH95 and brightest is not everything.
OLED obviously smokes all LCDs, but not everyone can take a risk of burn in.
 
Last edited:

Dodgexander

Moderator
Never mind. I just wanted to share my opinion on X90J vs XH95 and brightest is not everything.
OLED obviously smokes all LCDs, but not everyone can take a risk of burn in.
No, you're welcome to your own opinion and I'm glad you shared it. I was just confused. Brightness isn't everything, but what separates the best and worse TVs today is exactly that; brightness.

In my opinion, the X95J should not have such a low contrast ratio, it should be more like last year's XH95. Not sure.

They are trying to plug the gap in the market that exists between TVs that use IPS panels and those using VA by having these wide viewing angle filters that push contrast ratios down, but it shouldn't be as bad as the X95J. Luckily spending time with the TV you don't really notice it, and blacks remain black. Perhaps something has changed in the firmware since some of the reviews?

I know the XG95 got a lot better with blooming when the firmware for the XH95 was installed, yet despite lacking the filter the XG95 was regarded as a worse TV for light control compared to the newer XH95.
 

Kris Dee

Active Member
No, you're welcome to your own opinion and I'm glad you shared it. I was just confused. Brightness isn't everything, but what separates the best and worse TVs today is exactly that; brightness.

In my opinion, the X95J should not have such a low contrast ratio, it should be more like last year's XH95. Not sure.

They are trying to plug the gap in the market that exists between TVs that use IPS panels and those using VA by having these wide viewing angle filters that push contrast ratios down, but it shouldn't be as bad as the X95J. Luckily spending time with the TV you don't really notice it, and blacks remain black. Perhaps something has changed in the firmware since some of the reviews?

I know the XG95 got a lot better with blooming when the firmware for the XH95 was installed, yet despite lacking the filter the XG95 was regarded as a worse TV for light control compared to the newer XH95.
With X95J I think they use more agresive wide viewing angle filter, and this lowered contrast even more.
Filter on XH95 is actually nothing special. Gamma shift is almost identical to my old RU8000.
And Samsung's Qled filters are much better
Screenshot_20211130-013857~2.png
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
With X95J I think they use more agresive wide viewing angle filter, and this lowered contrast even more.
Filter on XH95 is actually nothing special. Gamma shift is almost identical to my old RU8000.
And Samsung's Qled filters are much better
View attachment 1611180
Yes, Samsung's filter is a lot better. Do you notice rainbow effect on your XH95?
 

Kris Dee

Active Member
Yes, Samsung's filter is a lot better. Do you notice rainbow effect on your XH95?
Can be very nasty with this coating, but thankfully my TV is in the middle off the living room, above fireplace, so I don't have any direct light sources.
For indirect reflection it's very good. The screen looks darker daytime, or even evening with lights on.
Screenshot_20211119-165352.png

Screenshot_20211119-165338.png

Samsung Q80T on the left
 

The latest video from AVForums

Panasonic LZ2000, LZ1500 & LZ980 Hands-on Launch Event | No QD-OLED for 2022, new 77-inch for LZ2000
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom