Sony X90K or Hisense U8K

[EJC]

Hi all some feed back/suggestions would be appreciated… currently have a 55” LG C1 Oled, loving it but looking to expand to a 75inch but the Oleds are so damn expensive here … as mentioned above these would be the two TV’s I’m looking at, at the moment…
The Sony has that mighty XR processor along with the Bravia core app which I’m not sure if it works in SA
and
the Hisense has the Mini-led panel…

Room is reasonably dark (blackout curtains etc.) and most of the content watched is HDR content


Or any other suggestions?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tankini]

Check out this site if you haven't already. (RTINGS.COM.) There are other sites that run test on 4K tv's though. Hisense tv's are known to be "buggy" plus I've read that their CS isn't great. Good tv's if you hit one that doesn't have issues, Plus China's, Republic Communist Party owns Hisense. Sony 4K tv's are a much better overall performing TV.
I'm looking into Sony's 65" X93L. l would love an OLED, don't want to worry about burn-in. Even with the new ones out now they still can suffer from burn in. Sony's X90L (2023) Improved performance and better ratings, that model replaced the X90K.

 

[panteragstk]

Check out this site if you haven't already. (RTINGS.COM.) There are other sites that run test on 4K tv's though. Hisense tv's are known to be "buggy" plus I've read that their CS isn't great. Good tv's if you hit one that doesn't have issues, Plus China's, Republic Communist Party owns Hisense. Sony 4K tv's are a much better overall performing TV.
I'm looking into Sony's 65" X93L. l would a love an OLED, don't want to worry about burn-in. Even with the new ones out now they still can suffer from burn in. Sony's X90L (2023) Improved performance and better ratings, that model replaced the X90K.

I agree with most everything you said, burn in isn't a concern I'd have. The main TVs I watch or game on are a plasma and an OLED. Neither have ever gotten any sort of burn in, despite the possibility of it happening. The plasma is 12+ years old and has a silly amount of hours on it.

Having said that, I'm not one to have constant images on my screen. Always a screensaver or something playing, preferably without a ticker, and that's served me well.

As far as whether or not to buy a Hisense TV, I wouldn't. I got a TV from a lower tier brand and it lasted the least amount of time for any display I've ever purchased. The panel lottery is real.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

For TV, I can see Sony vs LG vs Samsung. But Sony vs Hisense?

It’s gonna be Sony 100% all day all long.

 

[TLS Guy]

Check out this site if you haven't already. (RTINGS.COM.) There are other sites that run test on 4K tv's though. Hisense tv's are known to be "buggy" plus I've read that their CS isn't great. Good tv's if you hit one that doesn't have issues, Plus China's, Republic Communist Party owns Hisense. Sony 4K tv's are a much better overall performing TV.
I'm looking into Sony's 65" X93L. l would love an OLED, don't want to worry about burn-in. Even with the new ones out now they still can suffer from burn in. Sony's X90L (2023) Improved performance and better ratings, that model replaced the X90K.

I have had an LG OLED for four years and there has been ZERO burn in. i don't know anyone who has had burn in from an OLED TV. I'm pretty certain fears of burn in should not steer you away from an OLED TVs. OLED TVs I think are the best available at this time.

 

[Tankini]

I agree with most everything you said, burn in isn't a concern I'd have. The main TVs I watch or game on are a plasma and an OLED. Neither have ever gotten any sort of burn in, despite the possibility of it happening. The plasma is 12+ years old and has a silly amount of hours on it.

Having said that, I'm not one to have constant images on my screen. Always a screensaver or something playing, preferably without a ticker, and that's served me well.

As far as whether or not to buy a Hisense TV, I wouldn't. I got a TV from a lower tier brand and it lasted the least amount of time for any display I've ever purchased. The panel lottery is real.

Agree, nothing can beat an OLED as far as, No blooming perfect blacks fantastic HDR Picture. I should have stated that the burn-in tests run by those ratings companies that test those TV 's. Them guys will leave an OLED on with say a CNN logo, or a gamer that left the TV on pause for very long extended time. Which anyone who owns an OLED that's a big no. But I do agree don't do any of those things and an OLED
should last a long time.

 

[TLS Guy]

Agree, nothing can beat an OLED as far as, No blooming perfect blacks fantastic HDR Picture. I should have stated that the burn-in tests run by those ratings companies that test those TV 's. Them guys will leave an OLED on with say a CNN logo, or a gamer that left the TV on pause for very long extended time. Which anyone who owns an OLED that's a big no. But I do agree don't do any of those things and an OLED
should last a long time.

But you can't do that with an LG OLED, it won't let you. With a static picture, the TV soon mutes it quickly to a low level. I do not think this burn in issue should discourage anyone from buying an OLED TV.

 

[Wardog555]

Sit closer for a 65 inch if you unwilling to justify the cost of a 77 inch.

5 to 8 feet is the range. Closer towards 5 feet for viewing immersion.

 

[Tankini]

Real-Life OLED Burn-In Test On 6 TVs - RTINGS.com
Found this on OLED burn-in.

 

[TLS Guy]

Real-Life OLED Burn-In Test On 6 TVs - RTINGS.com
Found this on OLED burn-in.

That is a stupid test and not representative of the real world. Somehow they defeated the auto dimming of the TVs. That is a junk study and you should pay zero attention to it.

 

[panteragstk]

That is a stupid test and not representative of the real world. Somehow they defeated the auto dimming of the TVs. That is a junk study and you should pay zero attention to it.

To be fair, it's an extreme test to see what the OLED panels can really take as far as punishment goes. It's not meant to be real world usage.

The only real world example of a TV being used this way is if it was in a bar/restaurant tuned into sports and the like for 12+ hrs a day for it's lifespan. Granted, any place that uses a TV that way should be using LED anyway as they're brighter TVs and won't have these issues, but they have their own as well.

 

[Tankini]

That is a stupid test and not representative of the real world. Somehow they defeated the auto dimming of the TVs. That is a junk study and you should pay zero attention to it.

Right! No one in their right mind should do that with any tv much less an OLED. I want a TV, with No blooming, perfect blacks, and really good contrast, I haven't found any LCD/LED that can match an OLED.

Some of the mini-Q-LED/LCD come close but the technology is not quite there yet close.
I watch a lot of 4K movies once you notice blooming or that Ungodly halo effect there's no unnoticing.
Thank you for chiming in Sir.

 

[cpp]

I've had so many TV's that "supposed" to be impacted by burn in. Never in all my years have I had a TV "burn in". From my old Panny Plasma to my current Sony OLED's. No hint of burn in. And these TV's get used a lot.

 

[BMXTRIX]

That is a stupid test and not representative of the real world. Somehow they defeated the auto dimming of the TVs. That is a junk study and you should pay zero attention to it.

I would say all artificial tests are somewhat crazy, but they are better than nothing, by a mile.

Their conclusion of a variety of content really being the best thing to do, and showing how modern games aren't likely to inflict the most damage to the setup is really important. It also highlights how having a TV cranked to maximum brightness can mess things up far more than a TV dialed down a bit. I for one never use dynamic brightness as that always looks horrible to me, and I think that's a fair way to do things.

Their new testing they are doing will continue the trend of just trying to improve on the process. And I applaud any site for at least running some different tests. Not like LG would run such a test and then publish the results whether good or bad. I think the test is FAR from stupid as it does a mix of content and is doing a head to head comparison of the same model with the different content in play and providing some solid analysis of the results.

Is it perfect? Of course not! Is it representative of the real world? Pick one of those TVs and it may very well be. For some others, it would not be at all. I like their new testing procedures on the updated testing. But, this testing is nothing to simply pay zero attention to. For most, it's GREAT information as it would represent varied watching and no real burn in on most displays after what may be 7 or 8 years of usage (or more!) for a typical viewer of varied content.

 

[TLS Guy]

I would say all artificial tests are somewhat crazy, but they are better than nothing, by a mile.

Their conclusion of a variety of content really being the best thing to do, and showing how modern games aren't likely to inflict the most damage to the setup is really important. It also highlights how having a TV cranked to maximum brightness can mess things up far more than a TV dialed down a bit. I for one never use dynamic brightness as that always looks horrible to me, and I think that's a fair way to do things.

Their new testing they are doing will continue the trend of just trying to improve on the process. And I applaud any site for at least running some different tests. Not like LG would run such a test and then publish the results whether good or bad. I think the test is FAR from stupid as it does a mix of content and is doing a head to head comparison of the same model with the different content in play and providing some solid analysis of the results.

Is it perfect? Of course not! Is it representative of the real world? Pick one of those TVs and it may very well be. For some others, it would not be at all. I like their new testing procedures on the updated testing. But, this testing is nothing to simply pay zero attention to. For most, it's GREAT information as it would represent varied watching and no real burn in on most displays after what may be 7 or 8 years of usage (or more!) for a typical viewer of varied content.

I'm still using two Panny Plasmas, one 15 years old and the other 13 years old. My LG OLED is four years old. None of them have a lick of burn in. So I am tempted to regard it as a myth.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

I have a panny plasma. We watch football and game on it etc. it has not suffered any burn in, but it HAS encountered some image retention. What I mean is that if you turn it off in the dark, you can see ghost images of the last thing you were doing. But that’s right up on the display, and from the couch I’ve never seen any. I’m good with the screen savers and have used the built in eraser, but there’s never been anything that I thought wouldn’t go away with some regular content. Hopefully Oled will be out next display.

 

[BMXTRIX]

I'm still using two Panny Plasmas, one 15 years old and the other 13 years old. My LG OLED is four years old. None of them have a lick of burn in. So I am tempted to regard it as a myth.

If you use it for a variety of content, rather than a single program (like CNN) or a single game with static graphics, then your real world results match exactly what the website testing concluded...

we don't expect most people who watch varied content without static areas to experience burn-in issues with an OLED TV.

These also aren't the 'newest' OLED displays, which continue to be a bit better about avoiding burn-in issues.

The point is, that some people DO run OLED as their desktop PC monitor, and it's NOT a good thing for those people. They are just as 'real world' as your use of the TV to watch varied content.

I used my plasma for gaming at times, but it was a few hours here and there. So, I have always been in the 'variety of viewing' camp. But, there are definitely people out there who dig into gaming really hard. They play the same game for 50+ hours. So, those people absolutely must be aware of the potential issues.

But, there are extreme cases in use with the testing to show what a place which may playback CNN all day would end up with. Fortunately, most of those people use LCD displays, not OLED. So, not much chance of pixel retention with them.

I think the test was excellent because the results they stated were EXACTLY what you said the results should be with a variety of content. Anyone looking to prove burn-in is real can say "LOOK!" - but those would be some pretty ignorant people. Yet, as a commercial integrator, I would never recommend a OLED to a typical client who might very well throw CNN on the screen 24/7 at maximum brightness for a year or two... Then complain when the image got burned into the screen. I can use this to help them understand what WILL happen if they follow such a course of action.

In the home, it also helps to use something like this to emphasize the importance of just showing a variety of content, and not worrying about showing a few football games on the weekend, if you mix it up with some more normal viewing during the rest of the week.

 

[panteragstk]

I have a panny plasma. We watch football and game on it etc. it has not suffered any burn in, but it HAS encountered some image retention. What I mean is that if you turn it off in the dark, you can see ghost images of the last thing you were doing. But that’s right up on the display, and from the couch I’ve never seen any. I’m good with the screen savers and have used the built in eraser, but there’s never been anything that I thought wouldn’t go away with some regular content. Hopefully Oled will be out next display.

This happens on my old panny plasma too. If I leave an image for a few min it can be seen like a shadow for a min or two. This TV is old and has a TON of hours on it, so no surprise there.