In which case, I would definite look at an OLED. Other than the very best LCD's (which ironically cost almost as much as an OLED), you'll be extremely disappointed with the black levels and contrast....
Type: Posts; User: robcat
In which case, I would definite look at an OLED. Other than the very best LCD's (which ironically cost almost as much as an OLED), you'll be extremely disappointed with the black levels and contrast....
I'm no expert, but I did quite a bit of legwork and reading up when I changed my TVs last year (both about 5/6 years old), so I feel I've got a decent handle on the market (2017 models excepted).
...
This is what I meant about most manufacturers chasing the wrong tech. Backlit LCD is inherently inferior technology - they have to come up with massively complex (expensive) lighting arrays to work...
If you're not close enough to perceive the higher resolution, then it's more down to the other factors like contrast, colour rendition and motion processing. All should be better than an old TV in...
The point is, these charts are (by some measures) out by a significant margin - a lot of people can see much finer detail than 1" of arc (subject to other factors), so they are likely to...
Just take those charts with a large pinch of salt though. (Ironically, the link on that page points to a more accurate discussion of visual acuity, that shows that you can potentially see the...
It will be interesting to see. The irony is that backlit LCD is inherently flawed in terms of producing decent blacks and shadow, so advancements seem to involve making the panels brighter (which...
The move to larger screens just highlights the inadequacies of LCD screen technology.
When you look at a larger screen, you see that the lack of effective black and shadow detail is far more...
Last year I changed our bedroom TV, and agree there is a lack of quality "small" i.e. under 49" TVs. (I didn't want an insanely large TV dominating the bedroom, but since we watch at lot in there, I...