News: displays and their technologies

[Robert Zohn]

Here's an excellent video presentation of Sony's new flagship Z9K 8K TV filmed in our store and our new Broadcast Studio.

Ep 11: The Brightest TV EVER! Sony 75" Z9K 8K Mini LED TV - YouTube

[Panson]

^^^^^^^
Early Z9K 75" impressions: Above 1000 nits blown out; X95K 75" may be a better buy, $3800 vs $7000.

[batman2000]

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

Probably because for people that prefer contrast to brightness there's OLED technology

LCDs are now used to push brightness because it's much easier than implementing a perfect local dimming algorithm (with good viewing angles on top of that)

If you want BOTH perfect contrast and super peak brightness, then you will have to wait for Micro-LED probably...

Call me when micro led will be below either $2,000 or $1,000 other wise I’ll wait

[lgans316]

https://www.flatpanelshd.com/review....&id=1655879889

[Panson]

^^^^^^^^^
"The fact that Sony X95K uses the same SoC as last year's models also explains why it is running Android 10 rather than Android 11 or 12."

" It is a little baffling how relatively cheap media boxes like Apple TV can come bundled with a sleek and premium aluminum remote control while much more expensive TVs come bundled with cheap plastic remotes. In our opinion it is not a good place to cut costs as the remote control is how you interact with the TV on a daily basis."

"We are not fans of Sony's X-Wide Angle system as it makes the VA LCD panel (medium-high contrast, narrow viewing angles) look more like an IPS LCD panel (low contrast, wide viewing angles)."

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

....it is far, far more difficult to shoot and deliver HDR content for live linear workflows than it is for file-based post produced approaches, e.g. movies.

That’s ^ not to say that continuing education directed to creators and refinement of file-based post produced content capture practices has stalled. For example, from just last week at the Clubhouse in Hollywood – https://imago.org/event/internationa...y-summit-2022/

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Given that HLG is a relative luminance system whereby the end display already has the responsibility of applying the OOTF, instead of PQ’s absolute assumption of OOTF, then what does the DV metadata that’s present in 8.4 do that the HLG rendering does not?

Geoff, at least theoretically and broadly speaking, the DV metadata should take advantage of the sophisticated display mapping present in Dolby Vision supported devices so as to ensure that the content is optimally mapped for the current display conditions, suggesting that Dolby feels it may be superior to simply the HLG base layer by itself.

For this to be proven beyond doubt to consumers, you would have to set up something like a blind (to observers) independent shootout of the two (full profile 8.4 utilization vs. HLG base layer only, so to speak) from the live sporting event under various ambient lighting conditions, i.e. one way being a Sony or other Dolby Vision capable TV placed next to a Samsung TV showing the streamed content. I was hoping that somewhere in DaBa’s French speaking forum that a member there, out of curiosity, had done something like that, but in my quick translation of the discussion, from my understanding it seems the only comparisons made were between the 4K non-HDR vs. the HDR (full profile 8.4 utilization) content,

All that said, regardless of what is best or how advantageous the DV metadata mapping actually is as additive to the HLG layer with regards to the best dynamic range and color fidelity of the picture in various lighting conditions as opposed to just having the HLG by itself (vis-à-vis Dolby Vision Profile 8.4 for non-Dolby Vision supported devices) 8.4 is a significant plus, not to mention given the history of competition between absolute (PQ) vs. relative (HLG) HDR systems - https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...y#post12671964 <- As you can see, Richard’s linked pdf from back in the day is no longer available as the two HDR approaches are now friends .

P.S.
That’s not to say there has been some behind the scenes (perhaps unaware to consumers) animosity between display manufacturers and Dolby, for instance - https://dockets.justia.com/docket/ne...cv00042/572718

IMO, fortunately , the case ^ was dismissed with prejudice - https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/with...20that%20court

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Geoff, at least theoretically and broadly speaking, the DV metadata should take advantage of the sophisticated display mapping present in Dolby Vision supported devices so as to ensure that the content is optimally mapped for the current display conditions, suggesting that Dolby feels it may be superior to simply the HLG base layer by itself.

For this to be proven beyond doubt to consumers, you would have to set up something like a blind (to observers) independent shootout of the two (full profile 8.4 utilization vs. HLG base layer only, so to speak) from the live sporting event under various ambient lighting conditions, i.e. one way being a Sony or other Dolby Vision capable TV placed next to a Samsung TV showing the streamed content. I was hoping that somewhere in DaBa’s French speaking forum that a member there, out of curiosity, had done something like that, but in my quick translation of the discussion, from my understanding it seems the only comparisons made were between the 4K non-HDR vs. the HDR (full profile 8.4 utilization) content,

All that said, regardless of what is best or how advantageous the DV metadata mapping actually is as additive to the HLG layer with regards to the best dynamic range and color fidelity of the picture in various lighting conditions as opposed to just having the HLG by itself (vis-à-vis Dolby Vision Profile 8.4 for non-Dolby Vision supported devices) 8.4 is a significant plus, not to mention given the history of competition between absolute (PQ) vs. relative (HLG) HDR systems - https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...y#post12671964 <- As you can see, Richard’s linked pdf from back in the day is no longer available as the two HDR approaches are now friends .

P.S.
That’s not to say there has been some behind the scenes (perhaps unaware to consumers) animosity between display manufacturers and Dolby, for instance - https://dockets.justia.com/docket/ne...cv00042/572718

IMO, fortunately , the case ^ was dismissed with prejudice - https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/with...20that%20court

Speaking purely for my own limited experience of DV vs HLG, using the Montage on Spears & Munsil UHD Benchmark and bearing in mind the hobbled DV performance of the ZD9, the HLG was by far the best representation of a very challenging source. A better comparison would of coursh be a TV-led DV option without the player inducing odd clipping but even so, would it just draw it level with the HLG? I hope to find out at some point but it's looking like I'm gonna have to wait until the ZD9 literally dies on me.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Speaking purely for my own limited experience of DV vs HLG, using the Montage on Spears & Munsil UHD Benchmark and bearing in mind the hobbled DV performance of the ZD9, the HLG was by far the best representation of a very challenging source. A better comparison would of coursh be a TV-led DV option without the player inducing odd clipping but even so, would it just draw it level with the HLG? I hope to find out at some point but it's looking like I'm gonna have to wait until the ZD9 literally dies on me.

That may be a while, as some Sonys, e.g. - https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...p#post20216084 can take a long time to die –

[Brian81]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Speaking purely for my own limited experience of DV vs HLG, using the Montage on Spears & Munsil UHD Benchmark and bearing in mind the hobbled DV performance of the ZD9, the HLG was by far the best representation of a very challenging source. A better comparison would of coursh be a TV-led DV option without the player inducing odd clipping but even so, would it just draw it level with the HLG? I hope to find out at some point but it's looking like I'm gonna have to wait until the ZD9 literally dies on me.

What problem are you having with the ZD9?

[RalphoR]

I was hoping that the Z9K would be a true successor to the Z9D. No? Then I might be looking into the A95K as my next evolutionary TV until Micro-LED (revolutionary?).

[lgans316]

Originally Posted by RalphoR

I was hoping that the Z9K would be a true successor to the Z9D. No? Then I might be looking into the A95K as my next evolutionary TV until Micro-LED (revolutionary?).

I will refer you to few folks at AVS who upgrade TVs like phones every year and keep heaping praise about how bright these TVs can get and anything negative you say will eventually end up with a tiny group of proud owners ganging up on you.

[Panson]

Originally Posted by lgans316

I will refer you to few folks at AVS who upgrade TVs like phones every year and keep heaping praise about how bright these TVs can get and anything negative you say will eventually end up with a tiny group of proud owners ganging up on you.

That said, and pro calibration aside, I think with a fair amount of tinkering one can achieve a very pleasing picture from all these Sony big babies.

[Noremac Mij]

Funny how the marketing departments are constantly making up nonsense, i.e. LED, QLED, NanoCell, miniLED, etc. Just call all of this junk for what it is, LCD.

[danny24]

Originally Posted by Noremac Mij

Funny how the marketing departments are constantly making up nonsense, i.e. LED, QLED, NanoCell, miniLED, etc. Just call all of this junk for what it is, LCD.

They are all improved versions of LCD pretty much but yeah it all stems from LCD. TV's today though look better than ever thanks in large part to improvements in processing power on the mainboards and the displays themselves.

[lgans316]

Originally Posted by Noremac Mij

Funny how the marketing departments are constantly making up nonsense, i.e. LED, QLED, NanoCell, miniLED, etc. Just call all of this junk for what it is, LCD.

I don't understand why you hate LCDs so much. I mean some of them are really good despite shortcomings.

I personally think jf this X-Wide layer is removed the contrast will dramatically improve and perceived Contrast can make it look close to OLED

[nick4Knight]

Fair enough. If X-Wide was removed I would consider a BMD Sony LED and use the B8 for certain movies in the study as second display. Question is, will they ever prefer PQ over lifestyle factors of folk wanting to sit wherever? Its not the way the winds are blowing...

I am now locked into being in the market for a TV. Previously I was hopeful and planning on budgeting to make it work. "Willing it". But now it's assured money is gonna be there for it! Though I still want it to be a 5+ year display so the one after that is more likely to be MicroLED and if that's still not there yet, an actually good MiniLED to bridge the gap; w/existing display at that time going to second duties in study.

That's why I'm leaning QD-OLED, still. With the heatsinks. And with 99.7% of DCI P3 gamut coverage or possibility of reaching 100% on the second gen? And above 80% colour volume? Here's hoping. Do it, Sony.

An early year 2024 sale price of the 2023 model is my guess for when to pull the trigger.

[Noremac Mij]

Originally Posted by lgans316

I don't understand why you hate LCDs so much. I mean some of them are really good despite shortcomings.

I personally think jf this X-Wide layer is removed the contrast will dramatically improve and perceived Contrast can make it look close to OLED

Simply because to my eyes, they look like absolute junk. Cannot, will not ever get used to that hideous washed out look. I’ve used top of the line CRT, Plasma, and OLED TV’s my entire life so maybe that’s why. It’s like walking into a vintage game arcade and seeing all these ridiculously beautiful bright vivid screens and colours and then there are a few more modern arcades with LCD screens that jump out with washed out unnatural colours and you just want to turn around and leave.

[Farerb]

Originally Posted by Noremac Mij

Simply because to my eyes, they look like absolute junk. Cannot, will not ever get used to that hideous washed out look. I’ve used top of the line CRT, Plasma, and OLED TV’s my entire life so maybe that’s why. It’s like walking into a vintage game arcade and seeing all these ridiculously beautiful bright vivid screens and colours and then there are a few more modern arcades with LCD screens that jump out with washed out unnatural colours and you just want to turn around and leave.

So the colors pop more on OLED than LCD?

[Noremac Mij]

Originally Posted by Farerb

So the colors pop more on OLED than LCD?

Not only pop more, but look more correct. And OLED has actual blacks, which gives it a nice contrast. Walk into any Best Buy and glance at the wall of TV’s. You’ll know which ones are OLED in less than a micro second. They’re the ones that look good.