backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 27 comment(s) - last by Gooberslot.. on Sep 9 at 12:17 PM
New LED TVs promise better color, longer life, and higher refresh rates

Samsung has officially introduced its first LCD TV based on long lasting LED backlighting technology. The new TV leaves traditional fluorescence lighting behind not only for the longevity of LED lighting, but also for lighting uniformity -- which has traditionally been a problem on large LCD panels.

The new TV, called the LE40M91, boasts some impressive new features. Samsung claims that the new LED based TV can last two times longer than traditional LCD TV panels and deliver higher contrast and a wider color gamut. Official specifications are:
  • Resolution: 1366x768
  • Screen ratio: 16:9
  • Color gamut: 146% (traditionally 127%)
  • Contrast radio: 10,000:1
  • Brightness: 450 cd/m2
Resolution is not as high as other HD LCD TV sets and so the LE40M91 is unable to display 1080p broadcasts at full resolution; the image is instead scaled to fit. According to Samsung:

The LED LCD TV also brings a new level to the clarity of moving images, based on Samsung's exclusive LCD 100 Hz video quality enhancement technology. A TV screen displays about 50 frames per second, which can create drag in fast-moving videos. Samsung's LCD 100 Hz inserts a frame between each two frames, considerably reducing motion blur. The inserted frame maintains the detailed motion characteristic of the video, and goes through motion estimation and compensation processing.

DailyTech previously reported that Asustek announced that it would start using LEDs to power displays for notebook computers starting with a 12.1-inch notebook. Sony's VAIO VGN-TX650P notebook is one of the first to feature LED backlighting.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Looks great
By psychobriggsy on 9/6/2006 12:35:01 PM , Rating: 2
Samsung appear to have some very good designers in house, that TV looks pretty hot.

The specifications are great as well, apart from the resolution. Wonderful contrast ratio - do the LEDs dim in dark areas of the image?

I've noticed other TVs have this 1366x768 resolution. What is up with that? It isn't the native resolution of any of the HD specifications!

If it was 1280x720 I'd understand, and it would match a HD specification. Hell, if it was 960x540 it would be understandable (half of 1080P in both directions), although at 40" they'd be chunky pixels.

But at this funky resolution every image is scaled in some non-integer manner. I'm sure it wouldn't be that noticable in general though.




RE: Looks great
By michal1980 on 9/6/2006 12:41:22 PM , Rating: 2
the funky resolution is mainly due to marketing, then engineering.

Marketing wants a tv of size XX.

engineering knows that if the went a standard 720p resolution, at that size the pixels would be huge, and there manufacture does not have a panel that size.

So they just cut a 40 inch panel out of whatever glass comes out.

(so pixel size in effect determines resolution).

If you bump up the resolution you can get a smaller panel still look good.

i.e. Sonys bravia or whatver 1080p lcds at 40, and 46 inches.

both have the same amount of pixels, the bigger panel has bigger pixels.


RE: Looks great
By gramboh on 9/6/2006 1:23:44 PM , Rating: 2
But why would you spend the money on this? If I was buying a new TV it would have to be 1080p native resolution. Doesn't make sense especially if you plan on viewing any 1080i/p content the scaling would piss me off so much.


RE: Looks great
By TheDoc9 on 9/6/2006 1:42:24 PM , Rating: 2
you'd buy it because of color reproduction.


RE: Looks great
By Lakku on 9/6/2006 1:49:56 PM , Rating: 2
Well not everyone wants to spend money on 1080p and most people won't be using Blu-Ray or HD-DVD anytime soon, so a lot of people buy HDTVs to watch HD broadcasts. No broadcast will be in 1080p for awhile, and 720p actually performs better where I live. This is due to Time Warners excessive compression on 1080i and all HD feeds in fact. 720p doesn't look much worse when they compress 1080i so much and for sports, 720p is a lot better. So that's why people don't buy 1080p TVs, as to most people, it's useless.


RE: Looks great
By 05SilverGT on 9/6/2006 2:20:17 PM , Rating: 2
People don't by 1080P TV's because they haven't been out as long, aren't as many models to choose from, and most importantly they cost more. It has nothing to do with 720P or 1080i content for most because half the people don't even have their HDTV hooked up right. lol


Pretty cool tech
By 05SilverGT on 9/6/2006 11:56:16 AM , Rating: 2
I think LED backlighting would be great on my Westy 47w1. The only problem I have with it is some very light vertical banding. LED backlighting would make that an non-issue. I'm sure though it comes at a pretty penny.




RE: Pretty cool tech
By GoatMonkey on 9/6/2006 12:46:09 PM , Rating: 2
I've had my eye on that Westinghouse for a while now. There have been pretty good prices on the 42" model, but the 47" model seems to sit at $2500 just about everywhere. If they can get that down to $2000, I'm in. I'm glad to hear that you actually like it.



RE: Pretty cool tech
By 05SilverGT on 9/6/2006 1:24:18 PM , Rating: 2
I decided that even at $2500 it is a great value compared to the Sony and Samsung Models. It does 1:1 at 1080p and has just about every input you can imagine. I couldn't see myself paying $4000+ for the 46 inch Sony. The 46 inch Samsung can't do 1:1 and only does PC input through RGB so it's a no go for me. Sure the Sony and Samsung have slightly better pictures out of the box but with some tweaking the 47w1 still looks great and I have money to spend elsewhere.


RE: Pretty cool tech
By Swaid on 9/6/2006 11:25:00 PM , Rating: 2
42" Westy is a very nice screen. I have had mine for just about a month. I just recently was able to finally mount it on the wall (along with my 20" Dell 2005FPW) and it makes a great PC monitor!


So it will be out in a year? Maybe more.
By Staples on 9/6/2006 11:59:13 AM , Rating: 2
Because their LED DLP still is not out as far as I know and they announced that like a year ago. It was supposed to be out in March and it is still nowhere to be seen.




RE: So it will be out in a year? Maybe more.
By michal1980 on 9/6/2006 12:34:09 PM , Rating: 2
people already own the 46 samsung led.

the 1st showings were in spring. and they are out in the market now.

I would call this hi-def, but not like full hd-def. because at best its a 720p tv. where as the top hdtv spec calls for 1080p



By deeznuts on 9/6/2006 2:34:58 PM , Rating: 2
Full Hi-Def is 720P, 1080i. 1080P goes above and beyond that, but not to call the others full hi-def I think is wrong.


By whymeintrouble on 9/6/2006 7:54:41 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Because their LED DLP still is not out as far as I know and they announced that like a year ago. It was supposed to be out in March and it is still nowhere to be seen.


Best Buy in my area has them in stock(at warehouse). due to display them in the next week or so


waste of time
By Gooberslot on 9/6/2006 10:15:54 PM , Rating: 2
All this effort to get inferior tech to do what CRTs have been doing forever. Where's SED when you need it.




RE: waste of time
By kmmatney on 9/7/2006 3:21:28 AM , Rating: 2
I agree. CRTs are way better than LCDs. Just because a newer technology comes out doesn't mean its better.

Regards,

The Ball Mouse


RE: waste of time
By jtesoro on 9/7/2006 9:31:20 PM , Rating: 2
Hi-def signal + hi-def LCD TV > CRT


RE: waste of time
By Gooberslot on 9/9/2006 12:17:10 PM , Rating: 2
Not really. CRT's generally have higher resolution than LCD's for the same size. Show me a 20" LCD than can do 2048x1536.


Contrast Ratio and Response
By vgermax on 9/6/2006 11:50:33 AM , Rating: 4
It will be interesting to see the contrast ratio claim substantiated. Black performance has been a major shortcoming in the fixed pixel displays with LCDs lagging behind the latest generation of plasmas in that respect. The 100 Hz refresh is also an interesting spin. It equates to a 10 ms pixel absolute response. How that compares with the more typical rising/falling, GTG, or on/off response is unclear.




Dang thats some resolution
By Sea Shadow on 9/6/2006 11:53:01 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Resolution is not as high as other HD LCD TV sets

If 1366x7688 isn't a high resolution then I don't know what is. *hint* might want to fix that typo */hint*

Still it is nice to see the LED backlit LCDs becoming a reality.




By Tuan Nguyen on 9/6/2006 12:09:05 PM , Rating: 2
Fixed. Thanks.


1366x768
By headbox on 9/6/2006 2:43:30 PM , Rating: 2
1366x768 = no thanks




RE: 1366x768
By NainoKami on 9/6/2006 4:37:54 PM , Rating: 1
Yeah... I've always found these non-standard resolutions to be BS. I'd much rather not have to scale the pixels - Be it up or down.


Lower power consumption?
By Doormat on 9/6/2006 1:38:25 PM , Rating: 2
Do these new models consume less power than traditional LCDs? If so, they be really good for laptops by increasing battery life.




I'd still hit it
By vtohthree on 9/6/2006 5:40:20 PM , Rating: 2
blah blah blah, it's still the first(unless I'm mistaken) mainstream/consumer-market LED LCD. Give it a little time to mature here and there but it's still a good move into a better direction.

Good job samsung, though not perfect, I still give them a thumbs up.




By FXi on 9/6/2006 9:43:37 PM , Rating: 2
Honestly the light itself can't be any more expensive done on a 30" lcd monitor. The panel cost would be about the same, smaller glass, higher resolution, roughly balancing out.

If they made the equivalent of the 3007 with close to these specs and a led backlight, they'd be backordered for months.

:)




By Roy2001 on 9/7/2006 7:00:30 PM , Rating: 2
60,000 hours is long enough to last before most of us upgrade, I believe.




"I modded down, down, down, and the flames went higher." -- Sven Olsen











botimage
Copyright 2010 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki