Samsung 75-inch ES9000 smart TV on sale in South Korea for $17,424 By Sam Byford on July 5, 2012 03:31 am
Samsung may be spinning off its LCD division to concentrate on OLED, but that doesn't mean you won't see flagship LCD sets from the company going forward.
Take the 75-inch ES9000, for example, which was launched in South Korea this week. It has a tiny 7.9mm bezel, and what little of the frame you can see is finished in "rose gold." Of course, it's also laden with all the smart TV features we saw at CES, including gesture-based interaction and the Smart Evolution upgrade capability. You'll be paying for the privilege, though — the ES9000 will sell for ₩19.8 million in Korea, or about $17,424.
With Samsung recently enforcing minimum pricing on its TVs, don't expect it to go for much cheaper if it ever gets a worldwide release.
The question is. If you were very rich, would you buy it?
I would. I mean, a 75 inch TV is just amazing. I've never ever seen a TV that big.
Guys get off your cloud this tv will never be less than $1000 ever. Maybe one day it will be less than $10.000 and i even doubt that.
No i would never buy this, what kind of living room one must have to fit this TV seriously ?? I can see it being use in the lobby of a classy building tho.
Edit : about the price i think i just got trolled T.T
"If you had the money"? Not sure what that means... I have the money to buy it but that doesn't mean I can afford it. If you are rich? Well then why not?
On July 06 2012 16:11 Marou wrote: Guys get off your cloud this tv will never be less than $1000 ever. Maybe one day it will be less than $10.000 and i even doubt that.
No i would never buy this, what kind of living room one must have to fit this TV seriously ?? I can see it being use in the lobby of a classy building tho.
Edit : about the price i think i just got trolled T.T
We bought a 72" DLP when they first came out for $7500~. You can get the same size DLP now for ~$600
This tv will no be worth it. Black levels will be absolute shit on this thing, which is the most important aspect of picture quaility. That alone is a deal breaker
And as for OLED tvs , they won't really be viable for a few years until they work out its problems. Also, the Samsung and LG OLED being released this year have a targer msrp of around 10k, and that is unacceptable for a a mear 55" screen, and considering they are pretty unreliable in longevity, it will be a waste for this 1st gen. Until they work it out, the discontinued 2008/9 Pioneer KURO 9G will still remain the king of televisions.
On July 06 2012 17:45 Wrecken wrote: This tv will no be worth it. Black levels will be absolute shit on this thing, which is the most important aspect of picture quaility. That alone is a deal breaker
And as for OLED tvs , they won't really be viable for a few years until they work out its problems. Also, the Samsung and LG OLED being released this year have a targer msrp of around 10k, and that is unacceptable for a a mear 55" screen, and considering they are pretty unreliable in longevity, it will be a waste for this 1st gen. Until they work it out, the discontinued 2008/9 Pioneer KURO 9G will still remain the king of televisions.
Your lack of knowledge about TV displays makes me cringe.
On July 06 2012 16:00 kaisen wrote: Does it come with Stork?
Fixed.
Also, when you can get a ~60 inch for like $2K, I don't know if this is really worth it...
The difference is that this TV does local dimming (according to cnet anyway, if this TV doesn't do local dimming then well...). The real question is: are the thin bezels worth paying $10,000 over the Sharp Elite 70" TV? Probably not but if you're in this market, you probably don't care how much money you spend as long you get the best.
To a poster above, it'll match plasmas when it comes to black depth. If you want to game, you still probably want a plasma TV for the low input lag, though.
On July 06 2012 18:39 yeint wrote: I wouldn't buy anything that big if it's only 1080p. Wait 5-10 years until 4320p is the norm.
For HDTVs what I'd buy depends on the size of the room and the viewing distance. 42-55 would be perfectly fine for most rooms.
I would hope it's that fast, because we sure have a lot of slow adopters with our dinosaur media. DVDs look like crap, and we still haven't phased those out, and I honestly don't see them going anywhere, sadly. We still have premiums on "HD" content, etc, and even then, it's primarily 720p source material. 5-10 years is still a long way, but honestly, we haven't really changed much since 2002, much less 2007.
Processing power? Definitely. Displays? hardly.
I could see 2160p being standard in that timeframe, hopefully. Then I would at least see myself getting a 40" display with that resolution. Anything below 100 pixels per inch is unacceptable in my mind.
On July 06 2012 17:32 Superouman wrote: Hah i read 17$ and 424 cents, i was like wait what?
Yeah the difference between Europe and US ^^
I honestly still wouldn't buy it, even if it came with the girl :/
Edit. It's kind of amusing with people going "nah I'd wait 5-10 years and get one that's much better"... You'll keep saying that all your life. There will always be a better TV in development.
On July 06 2012 20:14 Silentness wrote: Nah I'm good with my 42" TV. 75" imo is just straight up a waste unless you plan on hosting movie parties and shit with the whole neighborhood.
or you'll need a giant screen to plot your evil schemes and destroy this world.
Before anyone says that it's too expensive for a TV, this is not an OLED TV.
OH WELL I CAN'T SAY A BAD WORD ABOUT IT NOW! Lol, ridiculous expense for a person. I can imagine corporations being able to afford such a TV but otherwise, lolol k i'd rather pay for half of my college bills than buy a soon to be obsolete television.
I wouldn't buy it for that price....If such a thing gets to a production line it's price will drop by half in a year's time. Why would you spend that much unless that amount was literally a grain of sand on the beach to you?
On July 06 2012 17:45 Wrecken wrote: This tv will no be worth it. Black levels will be absolute shit on this thing, which is the most important aspect of picture quaility. That alone is a deal breaker
And as for OLED tvs , they won't really be viable for a few years until they work out its problems. Also, the Samsung and LG OLED being released this year have a targer msrp of around 10k, and that is unacceptable for a a mear 55" screen, and considering they are pretty unreliable in longevity, it will be a waste for this 1st gen. Until they work it out, the discontinued 2008/9 Pioneer KURO 9G will still remain the king of televisions.
Your lack of knowledge about TV displays makes me cringe.
Have you been living under a rock?
I actually am studying to become a professional tv calibrator and know quite a few famous people in the home theater business. The number one and most important aspect of picture quality is the black level of you tv. A deep inky black brings pop and realness to anything in the screen. The second most important aspect is color accuracy, followed by motion resolution. Hell I currently own the Sharp Elite, which cost 7500$ and is almost as good as the Pioneer 500krpm, but not quite. The only tvs I can even recomment today that can come close to the hailed Pioneer Kuro is the Panasonic vt50, for its .002 measured black level and 99% color accuracy, and then the Sharp Elite, which I own, because of its .0004 black level reading, superb black to white contrast and fairly accurate color accuracy. The only thing that will be better will be OLED since they can measure infinite black, which is unheard of right now.
Also, expect PDP and LED-LCD displays to have 4000 x 2000 resolution by next year, in order to combat OLED tvs. The 2nd generation of the Sharp Elite might have that resolution, as well as accurate color accuracy compared to last years models which tracked cyan wrong on low luminance levels. I am also crossing my fingers for an even lower MLL than .0004, which already seems invisible in the dark, but still has a faint glow to it.
The Verge doesn't actually say this but this TV uses local dimming so it'll be roughly as good as the Sony HX series and the Sharp Elite series when it comes to black levels. But neither the OP or the news statement mentions this.
The bigger question would be whether or not this is worth the price premium over the 70" Sharp Elite, as I mentioned before. What you get is 5 extra inches as well as much thinner bezels but you are paying $10,000 more. For $10,000 you can buy one mean home theater system as well as a HTPC/digital media receiver that will be better than any smart TV feature.
On July 06 2012 21:33 Womwomwom wrote: The Verge doesn't actually say this but this TV uses local dimming so it'll be roughly as good as the Sony HX series and the Sharp Elite series when it comes to black levels. But neither the OP or the news statement mentions this.
The bigger question would be whether or not this is worth the price premium over the 70" Sharp Elite, as I mentioned before. What you get is 5 extra inches as well as much thinner bezels but you are paying $10,000 more. For $10,000 you can buy one mean home theater system as well as a HTPC/digital media receiver that will be better than any smart TV feature.
This tv WILL NOT compare to the Sharp Elite, because the Elite has way way more local dimming zones than any other LED display, so its screen uniformity is perfect and its haloing is almost completely negligible.
Still though, even the Elite doesn't measure as black as a modded Pioneer 500krpm and Pioneer Elite 101fd, which measure below .0002 which is better than the Sharp Elite's .0004.
When all said and done, the Sharp Elite is the best LED LCD display by far and will be the best that LCD technology will ever achieve. Another plus side of it, is that it doesn't shut off when fed a full black screen, which a lot of other LED displays do, which cheat measurements.
On July 06 2012 21:44 Womwomwom wrote: Well that remains to be seen. This TV is $10,000 more than the current 70" Sharp Elite so I imagine there has to be something good in there.
The same could be said about the Sharp Elite, which has much worse color accuracy, motion resolution, and overall picture quality than a 65vt50 that is $3000 dollars cheaper.
I'm actually surprised plasma display technology is still alive considering the amount of fear people have of the technology. I think this situation is a little bit different.
On July 06 2012 21:48 Womwomwom wrote: I'm actually surprised plasma display technology is still alive considering the amount of fear people have of the technology. I think this situation is a little bit different.
There is no fear to be had from Plasmas these days. Also, they provide the best picture quality over anything that is not an OLED. The Pioneer Elite 9.5G Kuro has better black levels than the Sharp Elite and better color accuracy the Panasonic vt50 plasma.
If you honestly have a home where a 75 inch futuristic TV doesn't look out of place, the pricetag probably isn't a problem. That said, If I had a couple more last zeroes on my bank account I'd get this assuming it works and isn't shit like most "world firsts" of this kind are.
On July 06 2012 17:45 Wrecken wrote: This tv will no be worth it. Black levels will be absolute shit on this thing, which is the most important aspect of picture quaility. That alone is a deal breaker
And as for OLED tvs , they won't really be viable for a few years until they work out its problems. Also, the Samsung and LG OLED being released this year have a targer msrp of around 10k, and that is unacceptable for a a mear 55" screen, and considering they are pretty unreliable in longevity, it will be a waste for this 1st gen. Until they work it out, the discontinued 2008/9 Pioneer KURO 9G will still remain the king of televisions.
Your lack of knowledge about TV displays makes me cringe.
Have you been living under a rock?
I actually am studying to become a professional tv calibrator and know quite a few famous people in the home theater business. The number one and most important aspect of picture quality is the black level of you tv. A deep inky black brings pop and realness to anything in the screen. The second most important aspect is color accuracy, followed by motion resolution. Hell I currently own the Sharp Elite, which cost 7500$ and is almost as good as the Pioneer 500krpm, but not quite. The only tvs I can even recomment today that can come close to the hailed Pioneer Kuro is the Panasonic vt50, for its .002 measured black level and 99% color accuracy, and then the Sharp Elite, which I own, because of its .0004 black level reading, superb black to white contrast and fairly accurate color accuracy. The only thing that will be better will be OLED since they can measure infinite black, which is unheard of right now.
Do you have any understanding of this new Samsung TV? It has much better color quality than those TVs you mentioned because it's $17,000. Come on, it's $17K for a reason.
On July 06 2012 17:45 Wrecken wrote: This tv will no be worth it. Black levels will be absolute shit on this thing, which is the most important aspect of picture quaility. That alone is a deal breaker
And as for OLED tvs , they won't really be viable for a few years until they work out its problems. Also, the Samsung and LG OLED being released this year have a targer msrp of around 10k, and that is unacceptable for a a mear 55" screen, and considering they are pretty unreliable in longevity, it will be a waste for this 1st gen. Until they work it out, the discontinued 2008/9 Pioneer KURO 9G will still remain the king of televisions.
Your lack of knowledge about TV displays makes me cringe.
Have you been living under a rock?
I actually am studying to become a professional tv calibrator and know quite a few famous people in the home theater business. The number one and most important aspect of picture quality is the black level of you tv. A deep inky black brings pop and realness to anything in the screen. The second most important aspect is color accuracy, followed by motion resolution. Hell I currently own the Sharp Elite, which cost 7500$ and is almost as good as the Pioneer 500krpm, but not quite. The only tvs I can even recomment today that can come close to the hailed Pioneer Kuro is the Panasonic vt50, for its .002 measured black level and 99% color accuracy, and then the Sharp Elite, which I own, because of its .0004 black level reading, superb black to white contrast and fairly accurate color accuracy. The only thing that will be better will be OLED since they can measure infinite black, which is unheard of right now.
Do you have any understanding of this new Samsung TV? It has much better color quality than those TVs you mentioned because it's $17,000. Come on, it's $17K for a reason.
Can you clarify what you mean by "better colour quality"? Because I'm not seeing how this will be a major leap over the TVs he has mentioned.
Edit: - If you mean colour accuracy, perhaps but I doubt it'll be significantly noticeable. You will still calibrate such an expensive screen yourself. At most, I imagine it will track blues and greens better than the current Sharp Elites. - If you mean colour space coverage, perhaps but this is still a LCD TV at the end of the day. This is not an OLED TV. You don't want wide gamut anyway. - If you mean black depth, it'll roughly match the TVs he's mentioned. They're all plasma or using local dimming. You won't achieve pure black because it is an LCD TV and not an OLED screen.
On July 06 2012 17:45 Wrecken wrote: This tv will no be worth it. Black levels will be absolute shit on this thing, which is the most important aspect of picture quaility. That alone is a deal breaker
And as for OLED tvs , they won't really be viable for a few years until they work out its problems. Also, the Samsung and LG OLED being released this year have a targer msrp of around 10k, and that is unacceptable for a a mear 55" screen, and considering they are pretty unreliable in longevity, it will be a waste for this 1st gen. Until they work it out, the discontinued 2008/9 Pioneer KURO 9G will still remain the king of televisions.
Your lack of knowledge about TV displays makes me cringe.
Have you been living under a rock?
I actually am studying to become a professional tv calibrator and know quite a few famous people in the home theater business. The number one and most important aspect of picture quality is the black level of you tv. A deep inky black brings pop and realness to anything in the screen. The second most important aspect is color accuracy, followed by motion resolution. Hell I currently own the Sharp Elite, which cost 7500$ and is almost as good as the Pioneer 500krpm, but not quite. The only tvs I can even recomment today that can come close to the hailed Pioneer Kuro is the Panasonic vt50, for its .002 measured black level and 99% color accuracy, and then the Sharp Elite, which I own, because of its .0004 black level reading, superb black to white contrast and fairly accurate color accuracy. The only thing that will be better will be OLED since they can measure infinite black, which is unheard of right now.
Do you have any understanding of this new Samsung TV? It has much better color quality than those TVs you mentioned because it's $17,000. Come on, it's $17K for a reason.
Can you clarify what you mean by "better colour quality"? Because I'm not seeing how this will be a major leap over the TVs he has mentioned.
Edit: - If you mean colour accuracy, perhaps but I doubt it'll be significantly noticeable. You will still calibrate such an expensive screen yourself. At most, I imagine it will track blues and greens better than the current Sharp Elites. - If you mean colour space coverage, perhaps but this is still a LCD TV at the end of the day. This is not an OLED TV. You don't want wide gamut anyway. - If you mean black depth, it'll roughly match the TVs he's mentioned. They're all plasma or using local dimming. You won't achieve pure black because it is an LCD TV and not an OLED screen.
Agreed with your points.
The main attraction of this TV is the fact is that it's the thinnest 70 inch+ TV on the market. I would buy this over the Sharp Elites or Pioneer TV's any day.
So what you're saying is that the $10,000 premium offers no benefits besides the ultra thin bezels? Or am I missing something here? I really think there has to be another catch that they haven't said. To most people who know anything, I doubt they would really spend $17,000 on an LCD TV if the Samsung OLED display is only theoretically $9000.
To be quite honest, if that is the only reason then why not wait for those 50" OLED screens to be released? I don't know how you use your money but $10,000 for thinner bezels does not sound like a sound investment considering that can be put into things that actually improve the experience...like sound or a proper theater room. You can save even more money if you choose Samsung's and Panasonic's 65" plasma TVs which are extremely cheap and have incredible motion performance and black depth.
Edit: LG's 55" W-OLED TV is only around $8000 which will basically be better in every way but size and perhaps longevity. And you can still use the spare cash for something worthwhile like improving your home theater system or your theater room.
Well, quality wise my project set up won't be as nice (but it runs 1080p) and it fills my entire wall... So if I was rich? Maybe I would sub that in instead, but other than that my bigger (perhaps not as sharp) display is fine for me, with addition to the 55inch TV I have in my basement, I doubt though I'd need it.
On July 06 2012 17:45 Wrecken wrote: This tv will no be worth it. Black levels will be absolute shit on this thing, which is the most important aspect of picture quaility. That alone is a deal breaker
And as for OLED tvs , they won't really be viable for a few years until they work out its problems. Also, the Samsung and LG OLED being released this year have a targer msrp of around 10k, and that is unacceptable for a a mear 55" screen, and considering they are pretty unreliable in longevity, it will be a waste for this 1st gen. Until they work it out, the discontinued 2008/9 Pioneer KURO 9G will still remain the king of televisions.
Your lack of knowledge about TV displays makes me cringe.
Have you been living under a rock?
I actually am studying to become a professional tv calibrator and know quite a few famous people in the home theater business. The number one and most important aspect of picture quality is the black level of you tv. A deep inky black brings pop and realness to anything in the screen. The second most important aspect is color accuracy, followed by motion resolution. Hell I currently own the Sharp Elite, which cost 7500$ and is almost as good as the Pioneer 500krpm, but not quite. The only tvs I can even recomment today that can come close to the hailed Pioneer Kuro is the Panasonic vt50, for its .002 measured black level and 99% color accuracy, and then the Sharp Elite, which I own, because of its .0004 black level reading, superb black to white contrast and fairly accurate color accuracy. The only thing that will be better will be OLED since they can measure infinite black, which is unheard of right now.
Do you have any understanding of this new Samsung TV? It has much better color quality than those TVs you mentioned because it's $17,000. Come on, it's $17K for a reason.
This tv will not track color very well, HELL you could get the Panasonix professional studio tv that is over $20k and even that has worse color accuracy than the Panasonic vt50 which is $3k. You need to know what you are talking about when it comes to this tech. There is even a 2010 Sony LED that is till on sale for $27k and its black level, color accuracy, sreen uniformity, and overall pq is far inferior to my Sharp Elite and especially the vt50.
On July 06 2012 17:45 Wrecken wrote: This tv will no be worth it. Black levels will be absolute shit on this thing, which is the most important aspect of picture quaility. That alone is a deal breaker
And as for OLED tvs , they won't really be viable for a few years until they work out its problems. Also, the Samsung and LG OLED being released this year have a targer msrp of around 10k, and that is unacceptable for a a mear 55" screen, and considering they are pretty unreliable in longevity, it will be a waste for this 1st gen. Until they work it out, the discontinued 2008/9 Pioneer KURO 9G will still remain the king of televisions.
Your lack of knowledge about TV displays makes me cringe.
Have you been living under a rock?
I actually am studying to become a professional tv calibrator and know quite a few famous people in the home theater business. The number one and most important aspect of picture quality is the black level of you tv. A deep inky black brings pop and realness to anything in the screen. The second most important aspect is color accuracy, followed by motion resolution. Hell I currently own the Sharp Elite, which cost 7500$ and is almost as good as the Pioneer 500krpm, but not quite. The only tvs I can even recomment today that can come close to the hailed Pioneer Kuro is the Panasonic vt50, for its .002 measured black level and 99% color accuracy, and then the Sharp Elite, which I own, because of its .0004 black level reading, superb black to white contrast and fairly accurate color accuracy. The only thing that will be better will be OLED since they can measure infinite black, which is unheard of right now.
Yup, that is why I am very excited for OLEDs because they measure a true inifinite black level. The Samsung and LG ones coming out this year, rumored September, will not be very relaible though as they are the first of their kind. I am very worries about the Samsung using a blue OLED, which has such a short lifespan.
I think that the 2nd gen Sharp Elite will be the best in pq for 2013, that is if it can track cyan correctly. 4k resolution will be a bonus if it has it, but obviously there will be no content for it. The OLEDs from what I have seen, seem super over saturated in colors, which is clearly not an accurate picture and is more so overblown so people can say, "ohh look at the pretty colors." As for its inifinite black level, it will be impossible to tell it apart from the Sharp Elite, that is unless you have them side by side in a pitch black room, cus even with the Elite there is a slight glow to it. Do you have any understanding of this new Samsung TV? It has much better color quality than those TVs you mentioned because it's $17,000. Come on, it's $17K for a reason.
Can you clarify what you mean by "better colour quality"? Because I'm not seeing how this will be a major leap over the TVs he has mentioned.
Edit: - If you mean colour accuracy, perhaps but I doubt it'll be significantly noticeable. You will still calibrate such an expensive screen yourself. At most, I imagine it will track blues and greens better than the current Sharp Elites. - If you mean colour space coverage, perhaps but this is still a LCD TV at the end of the day. This is not an OLED TV. You don't want wide gamut anyway. - If you mean black depth, it'll roughly match the TVs he's mentioned. They're all plasma or using local dimming. You won't achieve pure black because it is an LCD TV and not an OLED screen.
The OLEDs seem way to oversaturated, which I am guessing is to just attract ignorant buyers. Its biggest and most astounding feature is true infinite black levels. However, even that won't look much different compared to the Sharp Elite. The only way you will see a difference will be a full field black screen in a 100% dark room, where the Elite will have a slight glow.
If the 2nd gen Elite corrects the cyan error as well as the pushed greens, then it will be the best tv, ever, until OLEDs become more common.
If I had the money, probably yes, however I even if I had the money I do not really care for the smart TV stuff, if a version existed that was only a regular TV then hell yes, all I care for is high resolution, take the "smart TV" away and lower the price a bit
We should create a rumour that they actually are including a girl with every tv as some crazy prostition thing, and see if any retard news stations would air it haha.
On July 07 2012 02:54 Rebornlife wrote: We should create a rumour that they actually are including a girl with every tv as some crazy prostition thing, and see if any retard news stations would air it haha.
Why not just spend the 17k on a nice home theater with a projector at that point? My gfs dad has a 70 inch tv and it's beautiful, but it's almost too big.
On July 07 2012 02:54 Rebornlife wrote: We should create a rumour that they actually are including a girl with every tv as some crazy prostition thing, and see if any retard news stations would air it haha.
Spread the word
FOX? Sorry sorry! I just couldn't help but take the obvious bait.
On July 06 2012 16:28 Boblhead wrote: when compared next to a 75" OLED tv i bet it looks like shit, and people who spent that money will want to get refunded.
Any TV bigger than like 60inches is a waste imo. Already saving up for my 60inch OLED for when it comes out!
Why are you saying bigger than 60 inches is a waste if you're gonna buy a 60 inch one. You wouldn't buy a 62 inch one then?
Looks pretty bad as computer screen so nope, wouldn't buy it even if I had unlimited money. Haven't watched TV for years, probably in like 5-6 years? Why would I, I can just get everything on computer, no adds, breaks whenever I want, no expenses, hell, even TV news are free at a website... I don't even understand how TVs still sell.
On July 07 2012 03:24 RezChi wrote: I'm getting it, in a millions years when it's worth less.
But then again in a "millions" years there'll be something 10000x better . Yeah I don't think anyone will buy this except the ultra-rich who decide to buy one just for fun for their daughter's 18th birthday (well okay I guess corporations might want a giant TV like this for promoting things...maybe)
If I had the money to spend on this TV, I would have a pretty fucking big house with a really nice sound system to go with it, a small bar on the side with choice alcohol and non-alcoholic ingredients for mixes inside the mini-fridge, nicely atmosphere'd living room with a pool out on the patio to give a calm glow to the window, and really nice sofas, which means I would NEED this TV for everything to fit properly.
In fact, when I do have the money to spend on this TV, everything else in the house would already be a couple times more expensive than it, since the TV is my last priority.
I dont watch TV....
In fact, even if I do buy it, I probably wont use it. I just cant imagine myself using it other than for it to fit the living room setting. When I do chill at the living room with no PC, I would have a nice cold glass, be relaxing on the sofa, no lights on with only the reflection from the pool shining into the house, and music flowing nicely around me.
Come to think of it....the Jacuzzi would probably come before the TV if I had my way... And the indoor slide.
On July 06 2012 16:07 plasmidghost wrote: That is seriously cool. I'll buy it when it's less than $1000 in a few years, though.
lmfao. You seriously think the price will drop from near $20K to under $1,000 within 'a few years'?? Dude, get real. Maybe if there is some kind of breakthrough technology rendering all current flat screens obsolete? Dream on
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.digitaltrends.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Samsung-ES9000.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://cdn2.ubergizmo.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/lg-hd-prototype.jpg)
