No HDR?!

One for the toilet or guest room only, methinks.

No HDR?!

One for the toilet or guest room only, methinks.

Sure pal - buy a HDR 4K 55 hisense for 679

Hisense or no-sense
Compared to a lg oled !

Typical, we bought this model a week ago elsewhere for £100 more :disappointed:

Lol that was my point to hedgy. Some people get lost in tech talk with out understanding it. HD makes up the significant chuck of current transmission, the TV above is one of the best for it.

posted a few days ago

There are OLED HDR TVs. The quality can be amazing, stunning even (and unlike estate agents, I don't use the term lightly).

I didn't say there aren't HDR OLED, it's just not as heavily promoted or needed on an OLED..

This TV is stunning (yes I would say that wouldn't I). I have one and paid £200 more than this price. Worth it. Great find OP.

This is not an HDR model OLED

I'd be a bit careful in future proofing just yet. There's two competing HDR formats at the moment and devices like the Xbox One S only support one of them (in the XboxOne S case its HDR-10)

Whoever bought this, put your hands up because I want to laugh at you.

Only a mug would buy this first gen LG OLED effort (at any price)

I'd laugh more that those people buying TVs without 4K. You don't pay a premium for 4K anymore.
Besides, there are plenty of 4K sources coming online. Most stuff in 4K is amazing. So stop laughing and go grab a Kleenex to wipe your tears. :smirk:

So where can I get 4k for free? good for you believing all the marketing hype and paying extra for 4k sources; well done - at least you are helping the economy..
remember poor picture = poor picture even if its 4k, 8k, 16k, 32k, 64k, 128k etc

Awww, poor you. We could have a whip-round for you if you like?
Come out of the dark ages and get yourself a non-sky digital source with 1080p output..... you'll never regret it :smiley:

Thank you for confirming my point; for many people its not worth the money and can lead to a poorer picture on SD sources.

When I am in the market for a 65" TV I will look for an OLED hdr one. 4K the new 3D?

In your case, I agree that you should definitely hang on till at least the year 2050, hopefully by then all your SD sources will have converted to 4K and it will be worth your while watching the "Dave Channel" in glorious 4K :laughing:

If I was spending this much money on a tv it would be one without the horrible motion judder you get on these.

Nah 4k will have long gone by then (apart from adverts for it on Dave) ; it will be some other pointless feature - anything to avoid having to develop a great picture...:smirk:

HDR is the biggest improvement in image quality since colour TV. The difference compared to normal 8-bit images is much more obvious than SD vs HD.

So many contradictions in your statement.

It's highly unlikely you would be able to purchase anything other than 4k HDR panels now, never mind in the future.

Simply because the panel can display 4k resolution doesn't mean it isn't capable of scaling the source input to produce a good image.

There's not a massive amount of 4k material out there, but what is there isn't necessarily expensive. For example, to get Netflix 4k, it's £2 per month more than HD and you get more profiles. YouTube 4k is free.

Upscaling Blu-ray players are very competent at displaying 4k images from standard Blu-ray, which many people already own, prices start at around £50.

HDR could well be the standard that continues rather than 4k. To scale an sd signal well to 4k requires a good 4k tv; the cheaper ones don't scale that well.

Netflix has limited content. Personally I would be much more interested in watching 4k bluray films but I would much prefer oled and hdr than 4k and hdr; blacks rendered as dark grey are still dark grey regardless of whether it's 4k, 8k, 16k, 64k, 128k..

I have'nt seen HDR in the flesh but my gut feel is that it requires a better panel to get a good improvement in the picture; I can't see cheaper TVs being trully HDR compliant (Ultra HD Premium). I don't know if HDR inherently displays blacks better than normal LCD and whether or not OLED, would still has the advantage over HDR, in this area. HDR does seem though that it could be here to stay.

There two HDR TV standards, one for LCD and one for OLED,

'But how can OLED, with its brightness issues, qualify for HDR compatibility which demands much higher brightness levels than standard TVs? Well, the UHD Alliance has got around the problem by introducing two standards:

STANDARD 1: More than 1,000 nits peak brightness and less than 0.05nits black level.

STANDARD 2: More than 540 nits brightness and less than 0.0005 nits black level.

While standard one demands higher brightness and tolerates a higher black level, standard two tolerates a lower brightness and demands a lower black level. This means manufacturers looking to make LED HDR TVs, which most are, will abide by standard one, while OLED TVs will be able to gain the Ultra HD Premium label by conforming to standard two.

And that’s it. In the grand scheme of things, it won’t matter which type of TV you have as to whether it will be HDR compatible or not. But if you want to get technical, LED TVs will give you an HDR image with better peak brightness but less deep blacks, whiled OLED TVs will give you an HDR image with lower peak brightness but deeper blacks.


Read more at http://www.trustedreviews.com/opinions/hdr-tv-high-dynamic-television-explained#TCX8CbD1XTO3mLyk.99'

There's nothing really wrong with oled 4k HDR, all will remain and set the standard for all TVs to come, whether or not they become affordable is the big question.

http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/oled55e6-201604274285.htm

Call or email them, I got refunded within a few days. :smile: