• expired

LG 55” B9 OLED TV (OLED55B9PTA) - $1492 + Delivery (Free Pick Up Eagle Farm, QLD) @ Video Pro eBay

1160
PEACHY20

It’s not the C9, but according to rtings there’s virtually no difference to PQ.

Original Coupon Deal

Related Stores

eBay Australia
eBay Australia
Marketplace
Videopro
Videopro

Comments

  • +14 votes

    This is the best short comparison for the differences between the B9 and C9. And yes there are differences between the two.

    https://youtu.be/MzmKsPwoe_w

  • +1 vote

    Cheapest I've ever seen.

  •  

    Does anyone with an OLED TV used primarily for gaming have any feedback on burn in? I don’t see it as being an issue with my usage, but I can see the OCD in me will cause me stop playing any game with a hud or static display every hour to run varied content on the TV. Had my heart set on a Sony X95 or Samsung Q75, but this is tempting.

    • -1 vote

      Check out https://www.rtings.com/tv/learn/real-life-oled-burn-in-test, their last report was at week 90 of a burn-in test.

      TL;DR: It probably isn't a problem in the real world, unless you run CNN 20 hours a day on maximum brightness.

      • +3 votes

        I think your TLDR is being generous. From the article you linked, emphasis mine:

        "Long periods of static content have resulted in some permanent burn-in (see the CNN TVs), however the other TVs with more varied content don't yet have noticeable uniformity issues on normal content. As a result, we don't expect most people who watch varied content without static areas to experience burn-in issues with an OLED TV. Those who display the same static content over long periods of time should consider the risk of burn-in though (such as those who watch lots of news, use the TV as a PC monitor, or play the same game with a bright static HUD)."

        I don't own an OLED and have no experience on burn in, but your summary of the article is off base, unless you think gaming or watching news or sport for long hours on high brightness is not a "real world" scenario.

        •  

          I've had a C6 for years, bought from HN when it came out.

          I was initially worried about burn in, so was sucked in with Product Care cover.

          We often leave ABC news 24 going on it for a couple of hours every few days, in addition to our normal use with movies and tv shows.

          Currently we don't have any noticeable burn in on the screen, but I would be concerned for example if I had been playing one game such as COD with the HUD for multiple hours a day every day over a long period.

    •  

      I managed to get burn in on my B7, I think it was from BL3 :( although im lucky its not that big of burn in it's like a tiny box.

      •  

        Oh bugger. Were you putting in some pretty long sessions?

        •  

          Would have to be putting in many hours most days of the week only playing a single game with no carrier watching.

          • +1 vote

            @onlinepred: Yeah I did for the first 2 weeks of launch, like I said in my other comment I did go AFK for sometimes hours at a time (which yeah I know I probably should have turned my xbox off but sometimes I didn't know if I'd be long)

        • +2 votes

          I was a bit stupid and did go afk with the game on still for sometimes a couple hours at a time, mostly my fault I still love the TV but it is a flaw you really shouldn't have to worry about leaving static images up (I do worry about it pretty often) with all that being said I don't know if I could even go back to LED so its a really tough spot for me haha.

          •  

            @Mooncakes: Does the screen auto sleep not work in games? I know playing movies it turns off and plays the firework animations on my one to protect from that issue

    •  

      i don't play games on it, but on b7, nine news once a night was enough to burn parts of that in after 2 years.
      The burn in is kind of different to plasma, changing the picture in-between i dont think really does much to prevent it. If you are consistently lighting up certain pixels, i dont think it matters if you do it all at once or just little bits every day.

      so in a way, it might be 'ok' for gaming, as long as you get done with the game and move onto a different one.

      • +1 vote

        If you are consistently lighting up certain pixels, i dont think it matters if you do it all at once or just little bits every day.

        That’s what concerns me - LG says burn in can result from cumulative static images, not just continuous (e.g. 1/2 hour per day is equivalent to 1 hour every 2 days).

        •  

          I played NFSMW back in the day on 360 over a couple week period, maybe 10-15 hours on a Panasonic plasma. Probably nothing else.

          Speedo was burnt in.

        • +1 vote

          You would have to be a full time gamer. It sucks having to manage it, but realistically if it's a lounge TV used for everything you won't have a problem. If all you do is game on it, or only watch skynews 24/7 then yes don't get an OLED.

      •  

        Another reason to hate and despise the logo on FTA TV.

    • +6 votes

      I have an lg oled b8, used everyday for 20 hours or so. I played xbox one x ps4 pro for along time and run the pixel refresh each night and haven't had any issues what so ever with the TV.

      I play games like gta 5 far cry 5 the witcher 3, the outer worlds and other types of games with various bright huds and minimap radars on screen for hours at a time. Horizon zero dawn remnant from the ashes and many many other games and watch uhd 4k HDR blieray movie and documentary series. An absolute fantastic TV and a steal at this price. Good luck mate

    • +2 votes

      Had a 55C7 for two years, no burn in.
      Had a 55C9 for the last 2-3 months, no issues there
      Just picked up a 65B9 which was delivered last week - too early to say but don't forsee any issues as long as you don't have static images for hours and hours at a time.

  • +5 votes

    C9 has real HDR with peak upto 850nits, this one is only 500 which is a huge difference if you want HDR. I recommend going with C9 because you will be missing out on Quality HDR.

    • +1 vote

      C9 does a better job displaying HDR, but the B9 does a good job by all measurements/reviews. Obviously the C9 is slightly higher spec’d, but it also costs more money.

    • +1 vote

      Pretty sure real HDR is 1000. But it's messy, obviously more is better though.

      • -1 vote

        Isn't it 10,000 though?

        •  

          10,000? My God my poor eyes….

        •  

          It should be 10,000 for it to be mastered in. I've got custom remastered movies in 6000 nits with object enhancement and comparing it to the actual 4K Blu-Ray it's literally day and night difference. Original Blu-Ray looks like it's a night scene compared to how bright the remastered copy is. Even though my TV is only around 2000 nits peak it really does make a huge difference. Makes me wonder how much we are all missing out on by watching these dim "HDR" Blu-Rays.

      • +1 vote

        You only need 1000 nits for non-OLEDs. OLEDs can have real HDR with only 500 nits due to their infinite contrast ratio.

  •  

    Tried to buy this but my 28 degrees declined my payment twice with a minute or two. FML.

    • +3 votes

      The B9 supports 2.1. According to every single review, it’s very much in the same league (assuming you’re referring to the C9, it’s not very clear).

  • Top