Another what TV thread.
Discussion
About 18 months ago, we bought a Samsung UE50RU7470U TV - however we have never been happy with it.
Problems observed have been:
Poor motion / panning (apparently due to the use of a 60Hz panel)
VERY poor quality on SD broadcasts (small white text across the bottom of adverts is almost illegible)
Poor viewing angle - you really need to be sat almost square on to maintain contrast and clarity
So...
We want a new set - one that will be devoid of the above issues!
I realise the Samsung was a budget set at £400 - but there's usually a good budget set out there - but which one?
I'd be happy to pay up to £800.
I don't care about features - main concerns are good motion performance and reasonable performance on SD channels (of which there are still many!).
Problems observed have been:
Poor motion / panning (apparently due to the use of a 60Hz panel)
VERY poor quality on SD broadcasts (small white text across the bottom of adverts is almost illegible)
Poor viewing angle - you really need to be sat almost square on to maintain contrast and clarity
So...
We want a new set - one that will be devoid of the above issues!
I realise the Samsung was a budget set at £400 - but there's usually a good budget set out there - but which one?
I'd be happy to pay up to £800.
I don't care about features - main concerns are good motion performance and reasonable performance on SD channels (of which there are still many!).
Same size? If you want viewing angles you need an IPS panel or OLED. The Samsung has a VA panel which is better for contrast head on, but poor viewing angles.
The LG Nanocells are probably the best range to look at as you’re not gonna get an OLED at 65” and £800.
HiSense have VA panels too and most other manufacturers have a variety which makes it difficult to pick a specific model.
The LG Nanocells are probably the best range to look at as you’re not gonna get an OLED at 65” and £800.
HiSense have VA panels too and most other manufacturers have a variety which makes it difficult to pick a specific model.
TonyRPH said:
About 18 months ago, we bought a Samsung UE50RU7470U TV - however we have never been happy with it.
Problems observed have been:
Poor motion / panning (apparently due to the use of a 60Hz panel)
VERY poor quality on SD broadcasts (small white text across the bottom of adverts is almost illegible)
Poor viewing angle - you really need to be sat almost square on to maintain contrast and clarity
I don't rate the LG NanoCell sets. You're right that a lot of the problems with the Samsung are down to budget. Some of that stuff can be fixed - or at least helped - in software such as the scaling and to a lesser degree the motion processing. However, other stuff needs foundation-level hardware changes, and this is where the Nanocell sets fall woefully short, IMO. Problems observed have been:
Poor motion / panning (apparently due to the use of a 60Hz panel)
VERY poor quality on SD broadcasts (small white text across the bottom of adverts is almost illegible)
Poor viewing angle - you really need to be sat almost square on to maintain contrast and clarity
Before we get in to the detail though, I'll address your "I'm not bothered about features" comment.
I know where you're coming from. It would be great to have a TV that focussed on brilliant picture quality and left out all the smart / voice control / web browser rubbish. The problem here though is that such a TV doesn't exist in the mass market at a price equal to or lower than it's smart equivalent. As far as the mass market is concerned, it isn't interested in a TV that makes a good image. Sad, but true. You can't separate the two things. Smart is everywhere, and in everything.
Back to the TV features that make a difference. First, the panel. You already know about VA and IPS regarding viewing angle and black level. As far as LCD/LED sets are concerned, you can have one, or the other, but not the best of both together. Other panel stuff that makes a big difference:
- The native refresh rate: a set with a native 100/120Hz panel already has a huge advantage over a 50/60Hz set when it comes to handling motion
- The bit depth / colour depth of the panel: true 10-bit is better than 8+2 FRC
- backlighting: full array local dimming is better than edge lit local dimming which in turn is better than simple full array
- backlight brightness: this isn't quoted by manufacturers unless they have something worth shouting about. LG Nanocell sets have nothing to shout about. Reviews of previous Nanocell sets where the backlight levels have been measured reveal that the panels use mediocre lighting, and this results in a fairly dull SD/HD picture level. It's about on par with the £400 sets despite the Nanocell TVs being substantially more expensive. Second, there's very little increase in brightness available when displaying HDR material. This means the lighting is already running close to maximum just with SD/HD stuff, and that goes to explain the high failure rate of LG backlights
The 50" LG 50NANO806PA is £around £700 from the discounters. For that you get a 50Hz panel with 8+2FRC and edge lit local dimming. If the backlight power is the same as previous models, then you can expect around 400-460 nit.
Contrast that with the Sony KD49XH9505BU 49" set at £849; a 100Hz panel with full 10 bit colour and full array local dimming. Reviews have measured the backlight power at something approaching 700 nit for SD/HD, and well over 800 nit for HDR material.
It's true that this Sony uses a VA panel, so if you want this level of brightness and the better motion processing and higher contrast benefits of the full array local dimming then you should go see one of these in the flesh.
LG OLEDs have typically been 100/120Hz refresh rate panels with 10-bit colour. Because of the way OLED works, these panels are natively full array local dimming, and they do it on a pixel-by-pixel basis which is something that not even the best LED sets can match. What OLED can't do is to match the raw light power of a good LED set. However, that's not the whole story. Because of OLED's pixels being individual light sources, and it being possible to switch off one pixel whilst having its neighbour at full brightness, then the OLED screen can produce in scene contrast levels that knock spots off any LED TV. The picture might only be as bright as the Nanocell TVs, but if you can get the light levels down a bit in the room then the OLED's image will look the most spectacular.
The LG OLED55A16LA pointed to by @Quartzdad has nearly everything except the 100Hz native refresh rate. LG broke with tradition and developed a 50Hz panel in order to get the TV cost down. Once again then, you could do with seeing this in the flesh to just how it handles broadcast TV.
Edited by Lucid_AV on Thursday 19th August 04:20
Mazinbrum said:
Second hand plasma wont be beaten for SD content. I’ve got the latest Sony OLED and it’s poor on SD, nowhere near as good as my old plasma but it is great on HD.
I think this is the problem with HD / 4K sets.The manufacturers have aimed for super duper picture quality on HD and 4K to the detriment of SD, and yet it's seemingly impossible to buy a set that has a good SD picture.
I admit that large screens and SD don't really go hand in hand, however I'm sure it's not impossible to upscale an SD picture to be decent enough?
I've taken my 50" Samsung out of the lounge and replaced it with an older 37" Samsung (UE37C6540S) and the picture is so much better - colours are more vibrant and the general picture quality is better - it does in fact seem like a different class of TV.
Scrump said:
The stores will have plenty of HD sources, you may want to take some SD content to try.
^ What he said. It's hard to find stores that have a live TV aerial feed. Mostly they're running some kind of demo material, and usually native UHD, that has been shot and produced specifically to make the sets look good. It's not what we watch in real life.
I have a 50" Pana GX800. It's an LED TV. At the time I bought it had just come out. Sony hadn't launched the 9505 yet, so they didn't have a set with DolbyVision, and the set they did have (XE9005) was also way more money. For us it had to be LED because my wife uses subtitles on everything. As much as I would have liked OLED, I wasn't going to take the risk of wrecking the screen because of the constant barrage of white text.
The quality of the motion processing and scaling is very good for a 50Hz panel TV. SD from Freeview and SKy still looks reasonably tidy. However, it's kind of the equivalent spec to a Nanocell (50Hz, edge local dimming, 8+2FRC) except it has a VA panel. The viewing angles are poor. If I was buying today, and still with the subtitle concern in mind (YMMV), then I'd have the Sony 9505 in a heartbeat.
If subtitles weren't an issue then there'd be no contest. A 55" OLED with a 100Hz panel would be sitting in the living room.
Lucid_AV said:
I don't rate the LG NanoCell sets. You're right that a lot of the problems with the Samsung are down to budget. Some of that stuff can be fixed - or at least helped - in software such as the scaling and to a lesser degree the motion processing. However, other stuff needs foundation-level hardware changes, and this is where the Nanocell sets fall woefully short, IMO.
Before we get in to the detail though, I'll address your "I'm not bothered about features" comment.
I know where you're coming from. It would be great to have a TV that focussed on brilliant picture quality and left out all the smart / voice control / web browser rubbish. The problem here though is that such a TV doesn't exist in the mass market at a price equal to or lower than it's smart equivalent. As far as the mass market is concerned, it isn't interested in a TV that makes a good image. Sad, but true. You can't separate the two things. Smart is everywhere, and in everything.
Back to the TV features that make a difference. First, the panel. You already know about VA and IPS regarding viewing angle and black level. As far as LCD/LED sets are concerned, you can have one, or the other, but not the best of both together. Other panel stuff that makes a big difference:
- The native refresh rate: a set with a native 100/120Hz panel already has a huge advantage over a 50/60Hz set when it comes to handling motion
- The bit depth / colour depth of the panel: true 10-bit is better than 8+2 FRC
- backlighting: full array local dimming is better than edge lit local dimming which in turn is better than simple full array
- backlight brightness: this isn't quoted by manufacturers unless they have something worth shouting about. LG Nanocell sets have nothing to shout about. Reviews of previous Nanocell sets where the backlight levels have been measured reveal that the panels use mediocre lighting, and this results in a fairly dull SD/HD picture level. It's about on par with the £400 sets despite the Nanocell TVs being substantially more expensive. Second, there's very little increase in brightness available when displaying HDR material. This means the lighting is already running close to maximum just with SD/HD stuff, and that goes to explain the high failure rate of LG backlights
The 50" LG 50NANO806PA is £around £700 from the discounters. For that you get a 50Hz panel with 8+2FRC and edge lit local dimming. If the backlight power is the same as previous models, then you can expect around 400-460 nit.
Contrast that with the Sony KD49XH9505BU 49" set at £849; a 100Hz panel with full 10 bit colour and full array local dimming. Reviews have measured the backlight power at something approaching 700 nit for SD/HD, and well over 800 nit for HDR material.
It's true that this Sony uses a VA panel, so if you want this level of brightness and the better motion processing and higher contrast benefits of the full array local dimming then you should go see one of these in the flesh.
LG OLEDs have typically been 100/120Hz refresh rate panels with 10-bit colour. Because of the way OLED works, these panels are natively full array local dimming, and they do it on a pixel-by-pixel basis which is something that not even the best LED sets can match. What OLED can't do is to match the raw light power of a good LED set. However, that's not the whole story. Because of OLED's pixels being individual light sources, and it being possible to switch off one pixel whilst having its neighbour at full brightness, then the OLED screen can produce in scene contrast levels that knock spots off any LED TV. The picture might only be as bright as the Nanocell TVs, but if you can get the light levels down a bit in the room then the OLED's image will look the most spectacular.
The LG OLED55A16LA pointed to by @Quartzdad has nearly everything except the 100Hz native refresh rate. LG broke with tradition and developed a 50Hz panel in order to get the TV cost down. Once again then, you could do with seeing this in the flesh to just how it handles broadcast TV.
A lot of fair points - I don't know where I got the idea that 65" was needed! That changes it significantly. I would get a 55" as that is the sweet spot. The only TV that really fits the bill at 49" is the LG 49Nano86. At 55" you could look at the LG Nano86 but I would try and get the Sony 55XH9505. It's just over £800. At that level, the question is - do you get perhaps the best IPS LED or do you get a low end OLED which may cost a bit more again?Before we get in to the detail though, I'll address your "I'm not bothered about features" comment.
I know where you're coming from. It would be great to have a TV that focussed on brilliant picture quality and left out all the smart / voice control / web browser rubbish. The problem here though is that such a TV doesn't exist in the mass market at a price equal to or lower than it's smart equivalent. As far as the mass market is concerned, it isn't interested in a TV that makes a good image. Sad, but true. You can't separate the two things. Smart is everywhere, and in everything.
Back to the TV features that make a difference. First, the panel. You already know about VA and IPS regarding viewing angle and black level. As far as LCD/LED sets are concerned, you can have one, or the other, but not the best of both together. Other panel stuff that makes a big difference:
- The native refresh rate: a set with a native 100/120Hz panel already has a huge advantage over a 50/60Hz set when it comes to handling motion
- The bit depth / colour depth of the panel: true 10-bit is better than 8+2 FRC
- backlighting: full array local dimming is better than edge lit local dimming which in turn is better than simple full array
- backlight brightness: this isn't quoted by manufacturers unless they have something worth shouting about. LG Nanocell sets have nothing to shout about. Reviews of previous Nanocell sets where the backlight levels have been measured reveal that the panels use mediocre lighting, and this results in a fairly dull SD/HD picture level. It's about on par with the £400 sets despite the Nanocell TVs being substantially more expensive. Second, there's very little increase in brightness available when displaying HDR material. This means the lighting is already running close to maximum just with SD/HD stuff, and that goes to explain the high failure rate of LG backlights
The 50" LG 50NANO806PA is £around £700 from the discounters. For that you get a 50Hz panel with 8+2FRC and edge lit local dimming. If the backlight power is the same as previous models, then you can expect around 400-460 nit.
Contrast that with the Sony KD49XH9505BU 49" set at £849; a 100Hz panel with full 10 bit colour and full array local dimming. Reviews have measured the backlight power at something approaching 700 nit for SD/HD, and well over 800 nit for HDR material.
It's true that this Sony uses a VA panel, so if you want this level of brightness and the better motion processing and higher contrast benefits of the full array local dimming then you should go see one of these in the flesh.
LG OLEDs have typically been 100/120Hz refresh rate panels with 10-bit colour. Because of the way OLED works, these panels are natively full array local dimming, and they do it on a pixel-by-pixel basis which is something that not even the best LED sets can match. What OLED can't do is to match the raw light power of a good LED set. However, that's not the whole story. Because of OLED's pixels being individual light sources, and it being possible to switch off one pixel whilst having its neighbour at full brightness, then the OLED screen can produce in scene contrast levels that knock spots off any LED TV. The picture might only be as bright as the Nanocell TVs, but if you can get the light levels down a bit in the room then the OLED's image will look the most spectacular.
The LG OLED55A16LA pointed to by @Quartzdad has nearly everything except the 100Hz native refresh rate. LG broke with tradition and developed a 50Hz panel in order to get the TV cost down. Once again then, you could do with seeing this in the flesh to just how it handles broadcast TV.
Some people are more sensitive to others with the motion issues at 50/100hz. As long as all the motion smoothing is off, then it's usually ok with me on higher end 50hz sets like the Panasonic GX800's or the Samsung sub 55" QLEDS. This is the processor's grunt and refinement at work. Cheaper sets are still hit and miss.
TonyRPH said:
Mazinbrum said:
Second hand plasma wont be beaten for SD content. I’ve got the latest Sony OLED and it’s poor on SD, nowhere near as good as my old plasma but it is great on HD.
I think this is the problem with HD / 4K sets.The manufacturers have aimed for super duper picture quality on HD and 4K to the detriment of SD, and yet it's seemingly impossible to buy a set that has a good SD picture.
I admit that large screens and SD don't really go hand in hand, however I'm sure it's not impossible to upscale an SD picture to be decent enough?
I've taken my 50" Samsung out of the lounge and replaced it with an older 37" Samsung (UE37C6540S) and the picture is so much better - colours are more vibrant and the general picture quality is better - it does in fact seem like a different class of TV.
The legendary Pioneer Kuro plasmas come up semi-regularly on AVF for a good bit less than what your current TV cost, never mind potential replacement - they've often been professionally calibrated too, but shipping is an issue so you need to hope one pops up nearby or be prepared to travel, but they're excellent for SD/HD (a potential 16 hour round trip to get one wasn't worth the additional expense, hence buying the Pana for a similar cost - Forza 4 in 4K60-HDR is quite something though)
There's a "What TV should I buy?" thread on AVF that might give better insight on good SD quality sets.
Interesting comment about older sets.
I've just spotted a Philips for sale near me - £1k 8 years ago - £100 (probably worth less?)
Looks like a pretty decent set back then...!
https://www.philips.co.uk/c-p/52PFL8605H_12/8000-s...
I've just spotted a Philips for sale near me - £1k 8 years ago - £100 (probably worth less?)
Looks like a pretty decent set back then...!
https://www.philips.co.uk/c-p/52PFL8605H_12/8000-s...
One important point -
First thing you do when you pop in to the showroom & picked out a few sets is toask demand the remote control & immediately change the picture settings from (invariably set to) Dynamic & set to something like Cinema or the equivalent . . . admittedly the in-store lighting won't help but you have to work with what you have 
Also switch off all the image processing bits such as Sharpening etc
First thing you do when you pop in to the showroom & picked out a few sets is to
Also switch off all the image processing bits such as Sharpening etc
This chap has a couple of 42" Pioneer Kuro if you're anywhere near GU34 - one calibrated/unboxed for £50, the other boxed/barely used for £75 - I think these are 720p models which would be as close to ideal for SD content (if you can live with the bezels)
https://www.avforums.com/threads/2-x-pioneer-kuro-...
https://www.avforums.com/threads/2-x-pioneer-kuro-...
Gassing Station | Home Cinema & Hi-Fi | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff