Samsung Super OLED 55-inch TV Preview

[admin]

OLED is here... well, almost here. Samsung and LG have both released new OLED televisions. Of course, since LG released OLED, Samsung has released/announced "Super OLED". That's super better than plain-old OLED, we suppose. The OLED TV will be produced from a single pane of glass and uses Samsung’s Super OLED technology to deliver the ultimate in picture quality and thinness. And it is super thin - just around 1/4" thin at it's smallest point. In all seriousness, there is an element to the "Super" designation in Super OLED. Samsung's version has apparently eliminated the need for a color filter as the OLED pixel unit comprises self-emitting RGB sub-pixels laid directly on the display panel.

Discuss "Samsung Super OLED 55-inch TV Preview" here. Read the article.

 

[j_garcia]

$5K for a non-3D display? Maybe next year the price will come down. I didn't *really* want a 3D TV when I just recently bought mine, but I have to be honest I am impressed with what can be done so far. Is 3D still kind of a gimmick? Yes, so I would definitely have been interested in one that had all the capabilities of what I bought without 3D like this particular new OLED, just not at $5K

 

[son-yah-tive]

I'm not into 3D myself. But if our Sony XBR-1 ever craps out, I have a feeling every set will be 3D by then. But, yeah 5 Grand is too much to spend on a TV, regardless of what it does. Our 5 year old Sony still rivals the expensive ones out there, in picture and sound.

 

[swspiers]

$5000 for a new technology, at that size, is amazingly cheap. So cheap, I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around it.

Anyone ever shop for a 65-inch rear-pro in 1996? Heck, an 80-inch Mitsubishi was close to 9 grand back then, and using technology that was almost 20 years old.

Anyone remember the price of a 50-inch plasma in 1999? Or an LCD around 2001?

Myabe I'm the only one, but $5000 for something like this, assuming the estimate is anywhere close, means they're serious about this long-term.

 

[j_garcia]

Yes, compared to older technologies, it isn't as high, but electronics manufacturing was a lot different then vs. now. They have the ability to do something like this more easily. It is a different process for creating them, but they can use existing factories to do it.

 

[STRONGBADF1]

Ok I'm dumb on OLED's... In quicky layman's terms how will they be vs. high end plasmas & LCDs as far as picture quality only? what are they good at and what are the compromises? I could care less about how thin it is.

 

[j_garcia]

OLED is supposed to be capable of CRT level blacks, meaning as good as it gets, and they have comparable brightness to anything else out there with superior color. In other words, the technology is intended to replace Plasma and LCD/LED. Cost is the drawback right now, but as they ramp up production, cost should come down quickly.

 

[STRONGBADF1]

OLED is supposed to be capable of CRT level blacks, meaning as good as it gets, and they have comparable brightness to anything else out there with superior color. In other words, the technology is intended to replace Plasma and LCD/LED. Cost is the drawback right now, but as they ramp up production, cost should come down quickly.

Is motion as good or better than plasmas also? (It's looks to be...)

 

[psbfan9]

I bought my LG 47LD650 because of the matte screen and I have been happy with it. I don't know why more manufacturers have not listened and still make 'mirrors'.

I remember seeing a 12 or 15 inch, (okay, maybe I don't remember, but the screen was small), Sony OLED in a Hammer & Schlemmlericher catalogue a few years ago and it was like $3000.00 then. So prices are starting to come down a little.
I think this OLED technology will be much better than current plasma/LCD/LED sets made now.

 

[lsiberian]

This is crazy. I always thought OLED to be a pipe dream.

 

[j_garcia]

I bought my LG 47LD650 because of the matte screen and I have been happy with it. I don't know why more manufacturers have not listened and still make 'mirrors'.

Mirrors weren't the problem, bulbs were. Rear projection type sets, regardless of the tech used, relied on that bulb and bulbs tended to burn out too easily. They are also physically larger footprint wise because of the whole projection aspect.

 

[wiyosaya]

Are there any details from Samsung about the lifetime of the display?

 

[psbfan9]

Mirrors weren't the problem, bulbs were. Rear projection type sets, regardless of the tech used, relied on that bulb and bulbs tended to burn out too easily. They are also physically larger footprint wise because of the whole projection aspect.

Just to clarify, I meant how reflective the screens were. IMO, the screens were so reflective it was like looking in to a mirror. I could see myself, and everything else, in the screen of most of the sets I looked at.
That's why I got the matte screen.

 

[j_garcia]

Just to clarify, I meant how reflective the screens were. IMO, the screens were so reflective it was like looking in to a mirror. I could see myself, and everything else, in the screen of most of the sets I looked at.
That's why I got the matte screen.

Sorry, misread that. I prefer matte screens as well. My current one is relatively reflective with what is apparently an anti-reflective coating on it. Seems to work, but when it is brighter during the day, it is a bit too reflective with dark scenes.