O/T - 4k TV - LG OLED now or wait a couple of months?

[icu81b4]

Hi,
Having completed decorating the lounge I'm wondering if I should complete the refresh by replacing our aging (but still working) 40" Samsung HD TV with a sleeker/slimmer TV and have eyed up the 55" LG OLED55B6V and I have a few questions ...

1. Do any of you guys own one and do you like/dislike it?
2. I have a standard SKY HD box (with Sky Sports) and although you get SKY Q for a year with this model I wouldn't plan to keep Q after that, So is it really worth getting a 4K TV - I do also have NETFLIX though.
3. would this TV give a better picture than my existing TV watching 'normal' channels (not 4k/UHD)?

I understand that other manufacturers are now beginning to release OLED technology very soon, and am wondering if this might bring the price down in 2017!

TV seems to be getting more and more complicated these days, and definitely more expensive to watch.

I appreciate any helpful replies, thanks

UTC

[Sidney1st]

Re Sky Q - You'll probably find you're tied in for longer then a year.

Check the small print, you may need to change your broadband provider and internet router.
I've got Sky Q and as part of my upgrade Sky provided a new router.

Couple of issues - the Q boxes operate at a really warm/hot temperature and I got fed the 'place in a well ventilated area' waffle, but I'm seriously considering placing a desktop fan near mine it gets that warm, even in standby mode.
Mine also like to surprise me by either freezing or turning itself off at random times.......

Someone at Sky is going to have an interesting phone chat with me tomorrow.

Sky Sports can be shown in 4k, so I'd assume it would be a brilliant pic.

[Fretters]

I hear HDR (High Dynamic Range) is the new acronym on the block. Better than 4K on its own apparently. A 4K HDR TV might be worth looking into.

[Newty]

I've recently updated to a 4K tv, and I narrowed my options down to the Samsung UE55KS9000 at £1,699 or the LG OLED55CV6 for £2,299. The two flagship models for Samsung and LG. both are classed as SUHD Super Ultra HD, meaning they are 4K HDR (High Dynamic Range) and meet a industry standard for brightness of white, depth of black and range of colour which allow them to use the 'SUHD' tag.

I did a hell of a lot of research before thinking of parting with that sort of money and to simplify everything:

The Samsung is LED, the LG OLED, the difference being that LED has hit its technological peak and OLED is only at its beginning for large screen technology (OLED has been used for phone screens for a couple of years).

The technical difference between the two is that the LED with give brighter whites, the OLED with give darker blacks and wont suffer from LED "banding". Banding is where backs lose some of their 'black' when a bright white is on a jet black background. some of the light from the LED's 'leaks' into the surrounding black and makes it less...black.

I chose the Samsung in the end, saved myself £500 and got brighter whites and better colours, at the cost of less deep blacks and LED banding. However, the only time I have ever noticed 'banding' is when the PS4 starts up and the screen is the white PS4 symbol on a jet black background, and I wouldn't have even noticed it if nobody had explained what banding was (I have ruined it for you now, dear reader of this post). I don't miss the 3D from the LG as I'd never use it.

Both TV's are curved. It's a subtle difference but I'd never go back to a flat screen again!

This time I chose LED over OLED as this generation of OLED are no better than LED and have a higher risk of dulling over time. My next TV will definitely be a OLED as in a few years time the quality difference will be huge. Phones have moved from LED to OLED for a reason.

My advice would be to save yourself a few hundred quid and get a Samsung.

I watch 4K via netflix, so cant comment about Sky Q as I don't have it. Both TV's have 4k upscaling software, this does make ordinary and HD tv look better, but not as good as true 4k.

so sorry for such a long disjointed post but to answer your questions:
1) no but I have the rival of its curved equivalent. I'd recommend curved but you wont lose sleep over it, id recommend getting the Samsung to save hundreds of pounds for the same picture quality.
2) don't have sky so cant really comment. but read answer 3.
3) yes, standard TV and HD channels look better thanks to 4K upscaling. 4K Netflix looks awesome.

If you can wait a year or 2, the price of OLED SUHD 4K will have plummeted, the technology will have advanced and it will look better, and there will be loads more content to actually watch and make use of it.

[dsr]

4k TV? Spend it on a watch.

[icu81b4]

Excellent feedback, thanks a lot

[LoveCurryPies]

It still only shows Ant & Dec no matter what you've got!

[claretdj]

Icu, if you are going to spend that sort of money on a tv then I would just stump up & go for the more expensive 1. As its more expensive for a reason! Also I always got told a saying in my younger days - pay cheap n you pay twice! Utc...

[Paul Waine]

Anyone remember the 1980s (I think) American TV "Soap?" Bert was "beamed to black" for a few episodes. Reading above re "less deep blacks" reminded me of Bert.

How can you tell if it's offside if the TV is curved?

I've heard that curved TV screens are great if you are watching on your own, but no good for viewing from other angles. I think at least one of the manufactures has now withdrawn their curved range.

[Newty]

How can you tell if it's offside if the TV is curved?

This is exactly what I was told before I bought it. "Will the touch line not look bent when you're watching footy?"

No it doesn't haha. You can't actually tell it's curved, the point is it gives the image a sense of depth. When you watch anything it looks like a normal screen, the curve is very slight after all.

The point of a curved screen is that no matter where you focus your gaze on the screen you're always looking directly at it. With a flat screen, if you look at one side or the other, your actually looking at it from an angle, if that makes sense?

Older curved tv's were bad to watch from a bad angle because of the light glare, but the new ones all have an anti glare coating that sorts this, so it's no worse than a flat screen.

And I think you're thinking of 3D, Samsung has dropped it completely, all of the manufacturers are still doing curved as far as I know, as it's selling well.

I thought it was a gimmick until I compared the flagship Samsung flatscreen and the curved in currys. Wouldn't get a flatscreen now, the curve even makes it look more aesthetic when it's turned off!

[dushanbe]

Its all marketing ******** and the only winning move is not to play.

[Funkydrummer]

I treated myself to a Panasonic 40" 4K Ultra HD TV (40DX700B) and really like it.
Larger sizes are also available.

It's larger than my previous 32" Sony, which is only 5 years old, but the difference
in quality over that time is astonishing. I'm not a big fan of large TV's.

Bought it at a very competitive price from John Lewis.