[eBay Plus] LG 65" NANO86 4K TV $1690 | LG 65" NANO91 $2090 Delivered @ Appliance Central eBay
Last edited 01/09/2020 - 11:17 by 1 other user
Related Stores
closed Comments
Pretty sure it's just a fancy name for IPS.
So ok viewing angles.
Poor brightness
Poor colour accuracy.
Terrible blacks/shadows.It's a fancy name for a material they've covered the IPS panel with.
there is a comparison on C9 and CX models in rtings
https://www.rtings.com/tv/tools/compare
See LG tv deal and get excited.
Get disappointed when I realize it's not for an OLED model.
$2090 is an alright price for the full array dimming 91 model.
Hi, I purchased a LG Tv on a ebay plus promotion and now its 60$ cheaper ( only 2 weeks ago) Do ebay refund the diff, I remember seeing something like this in DEC last year but can't remember the details
FYI, Won't ship to ACT
whats the difference in the 91 95 99 number models??
95 has 100 Trumotion refresh and 99 has 200. Both actually have four HDMI ports (whereas LG site says the 95 has 3).
The only other difference is the sound output (40Mhz on 95 versus 60 on 99)…with a $1000 price difference, the 95 wins out.Also, I am pretty sure the 91 model is 4K and the 95 and 99 are 8K
I can confirm that the colour is richer on the LG Nano when compared to LG Oled.
I just had the OLED replaced due to screen burn (low usage) so wanted to go with a technology option that had longer than 2 years in it…(I had the option of either going with OLED again, or choosing Nanocell)
Watching on the nano (8k model) makes me realise how 'unrealistic' the OLED colours were - think of an Insta filter on everything….
While the depth of the blacks won't reach the same level as the OLED, I feel the trade off (no screen burn) was the right choice and there are times when I notice a vast improvement over OLED in some regards. The Nano is not worse than OLED, which is great.IPS panels typically burn out long before VA and OLED TVs.
Nothing about IPS technology would be making colours richer either. If anything, they would be oversaturated using this technique, while having crappy contrast.
I am very particular about my TV's and I can tell you, the colours are better than either of the two OLEDs…and both OLEDs had issues and a very short shelf life.
The Oled oversaturated, the Nano has more realistic colours.
Just my opinion having owned both and believe me, I am being very picky with my comparisons too…because there was a lot to love about the LG OLED…so, I am comparing both with a fine tooth comb. there were things about the OLED that beat the Nano easily, but for an overall performer - NANO edges the Oled out (for LG TVs at any rate).
When you add together, realistic colour, 8k versus 4K (not too different)…similar sound output, although the Nano beats OLED because it is not as thin and the TV sound is better (I use a bar anyway so that's moot)…and, the constant worry of having to see ugly burn in (its there and you just don't notice it until a certain colour highlights it)…Nano wins…for me.Perhaps you may have not had your OLED setup correctly, the colours are way more natural vs other panels i’ve seen such as Samsung QLED.
Strange?
But in the end, whatever works for you and if the Nano looks better to you that’s all that counts
@dlcx: Just giving an unbiased opinion from someone who has owned both and proactively cycled through all the settings and set up choices to compare. Before the problems with the OLEDs I'd have sung their praises too… I get that people want to see the best in their own technology choice. So that's the reason I posted, having had both I can compare my experience.
@Grover: Yeah you are entitled to your share your experience/opinions for sure! Glad it worked out for you in the end, i’m sure the burn in would have been stressful.
FML
Your wife?
I have the 86 and I have an LG OLED.
OLED is superior but the 86 is actually pretty damn good for the money.
Never heard of this NanoCell tech. Can anyone ELI5/TL;DR vs OLED and vs the CX models?