Upgrading to OLED...

[ADWyatt]

There may well be a few people here who are like me. In June 2015 I decided to buy into 4k with an economical TV, knowing that OLED wasn't yet as refined as I would like, and just too expensive. The TV I purchased, a 65" Sony xbr-x850c for $2,600 was a decent edge-lit model (or at least it was after I exchanged it three times), and for what it is it performs well. But there are downsides, of course. The HDR, if that's what you want to call it, was thrown in as an update gimmick and is extremely bad, there is occasionally very noticeable edge-light bleeding, and the overall black levels, contrast and color saturation make the Sony pale in comparison with an LG OLED TV. Then again, when I bought the 850c it cost less than half as much as an OLED.

Barring some unforeseen emergency, I'm going to upgrade to OLED in June 2017, selling off the Sony or using it in a gaming room. I want to pay no more than $5,000 USD, which bars me from the highest-end OLED, but I'm concerned on whether or not potential OLED issues will affect the 2017 models, or whether those issues will be ironed out.

First is the judder issue, which I often read complaints of. There is little judder on my LED TV, but this seems to be a big problem for OLED. Any comments on that would be appreciated. (By the way, if you want to see really bad judder, just go to your local cinema. Nobody comments on it, but the judder in theater movies is really bad.)

The second issue is brightness, which affects HDR output of course. But I have to wonder if I'm making too big an issue with this. A Sony demonstrator showed a side-by-side comparison of a new Sony with an LG OLED, and bragged about how much brighter the Sony LED was. True enough, but I also noticed how washed out the colors were on the Sony, and how much white blooming there was. I don't think I'd want that.

Finally, there is competition. Sony's answer to OLED is to make a high-end LED TV that is so expensive that it would make a dent in the U.S. economy, so that isn't a buying option. Likewise, Samsung is devoted to making an LED with its nano-crystal technology that it claims will be extremely close to OLED, minus the cost. Maybe, but Samsung is known for over-exaggerating the quality of their TVs.

And so I'm left to ask if buying into OLED in 2017 would be a wise move. I think it is, but if anyone would like to comment, please feel free to share your feelings.

Thanks for all opinions and advice.

[bferr1972]

From what I understand, Panasonic and Philips are about to enter the OLED market, so you may have more of a variety to consider.

[ADWyatt]

Originally Posted by bferr1972

From what I understand, Panasonic and Philips are about to enter the OLED market, so you may have more of a variety to consider.

That's an excellent point, and thanks for that info. The Phillips will be using LG technology and adding the ambient light feature, which I definitely don't want, and so Phillips won't be under consideration for me.

As for Panasonic, that company makes superb products. Their plasmas (of which I owned one) were top-rate, and although they didn't have the absolute best LED models for a while, I understand that they've kicked that up a few notches. I have absolutely no doubt that they will enter the OLED market with a super-quality OLED, pushing LG to make further refinements on their already-great OLED TVs. But there are two problems with Panasonic. The first is cost. You pay for what you get, and I'm not sure if Panasonic is going to make an OLED in my price range, as their products can be quite expensive. We'll just have to see. The second is availability. In my little Midwest USA town of 100,000 there are no stores stocking Panasonic products, and I'm not comfortable buying an expensive TV without first viewing it. (Although judging a TV in a store setting is totally unreliable.)

And so it looks like LG for 2017 may be what I'm looking at. I'm just curious about what improvements they may make in their 2017 models.