Television technology - where are we?

dawgbyte,

+1 for LG OLED.
     The Samsung QLED 4K  hdtvs are very good but, when seen side by side with an LG OLED, it'll be obvious to you that the OLED is clearly superior.  The Samsungs are Transmissive, meaning they use a backlight shining through a grid of tiny red, blue, yellow and red sections of Samsung patented crystals to represent the color in each of the 4K pixels.  OLED (Organic Light Emitting Diode) technology is Emmissive, meaning that it uses no powerful back lighting or tiny crystals and light is emitted directly from each individual pixel.  Each of the 4K pixels contains an organic carbon based material that emits its own light individually from each pixel in the color directed.  Each individual OLED pixel can also be turned off for excellent black levels and contrast ratios.  The Samsungs and other LED hdtvs do not have the capacity to turn off individual pixels and therefore cannot match OLED hdtvs black levels and contrast ratios.

     Prior to 4K, Panasonic and Samsung plasma 1080P hdtvs were considered the best hdtvs.  They were considered superior to other LCD  (Liquid Crystal Display) hdtvs because of similar differences in technology. The LCD hdtvs used a powerful backlight shining through a grid of 1,080 tiny red, blue, yellow and red liquid crystals to represent the color in each pixel.  Plasma used no powerful backlighting or tiny liquid crystals.  Instead, each of the 1,080 pixels contains neon and xenon gas that emits its own light individually from each pixel in the color directed. Each individual plasma pixel can also be turned off for excellent black levels and contrast ratios.  The LCD hdtvs do not have the capacity to turn off individual pixels and therefore could not and cannot match plasma hdtvs black levels and contrast ratios.

     The main point is that QLED is closer to regular old LCD than it is to OLED, which most experts consider a distinctly different type of television, much like plasma was before it.  
    Here's a CNET article that does a good job of explaining in more detail the differences between QLED and OLED.

https://www.cnet.com/news/qled-vs-oled-samsung-tv-and-lg-tv-2019-comparison/

Tim

A point to bear in mind during all of this “4K” insanity is that IPTV and streaming services like Netflix et al are restricted by the bottleneck that is your Internet connection. True uncompressed 4K uses 6gb/s of bandwidth for 2SI and square division. There is plenty of opportunity to employ compression methods like J2K, to reduce the necessary bandwidth for true compressed 4K to 800mb/s, but even this exceeds most homeowner Internet service available bandwidth by a factor of 8 to 32. 

OLEDs (all the panels come from LG) are very nice looking--deep blacks, color that is superior to other types of panels, and wide viewing angles.  I sometimes see blotchiness in what is suppose to be a wide expanse of solid surface, and there are some motion artifacts, but picture-wise, they look really good.  The better LED/LCD sets with multiple locally dimming LEDs as light source are also quite good, although they don't have as wide a viewing angle and the colors are not quite as "right" as one can get with a properly adjusted OLED.  I know someone who deals the top models of these kinds of sets and the thing that disturbs me a bit about the OLED sets is that he reports more dead pixel and other issues with OLED than with the other kinds of sets.  

I went with the top of the line Sony LED/LCD set, and so far, I am quite happy with it.  Price wise, when you get up to the really big panels, the LED/LCD sets are cheaper than the top of the line OLED sets.

     I bought a Panasonic VT60 series 65" plasma 1080P hdtv in 2014 knowing Panasonic was exiting the plasma hdtv market due to manufacturing costs of producing plasma 4K hdtvs likely causing them to be priced out of the market.
     I'm so glad I did and, knock on wood, this plasma has been awesome and is still going strong with no issues at all.  Of course, I'm restricted from moving to 4K but, at my 12-14' viewing distance, I don't think I'm missing too much except possibly the HDR.
     However, I realize it won't last forever.  Currently my plan is to purchase a 65" or larger OLED hdtv when my plasma kicks the bucket.  I've seen the latest 65" LG 4K models and they're the first hdtv I've seen that beats my plasma, even brighter and with awesome black levels and contrast levels.  They remind me a lot of what I imagine a 4K Panasonic plasma might have looked like. 
       If I get real lucky, maybe my plasma will hold out until even better technology emerges and becomes affordable.
      But for dawgbyte, I'd suggest he take a look at someplace like BestBuy where he might be able to view the Samsung QLED and the LG or Sony OLEDs in close proximity and judge for himself.  There's also the enjoyment factor that comes with shear size, especially with sports and given very good motion performance.  I know a 70" plus OLED might be prohibitively expensive but I don't think a Samsung QLED would be.
       Actually, I find the whole experience of purchasing a new tv very exciting and pleasurable except, of course paying for it.  It's an extended pleasure, too, since you get a thrill every day you turn it on for the first time and begin watching.

Enjoy,
 Tim

8k is already here. So you can upscale the native 4k sources. Where the native 4k souce is sometimes a lie, being scale up itself, from a 2k master.


this is done so they can sell you an upgraded 4k copy later. Eg,...IIRC, all Marvel Universe 4k ultra HD discs are scanned from a 2k master and scaled. So you never get the 4k scan. You are not getting what the box label says.

4k scans tend to be releases of older films, like the recent 4k ’Alien' disc set and...er.. Die hard, Predator, etc. Bladerunner.. pretty sure that one is a 4k scan.

Where they have to bring quality to the table to get you to buy.