Sony's 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio 27-inch OLED HDTV

Some people need bigger and better LCDs, but we're just fine with the 27-inch prototype Sony mentioned during its press conference yesterday. With a contrast ratio of greater than 1,000,000:1 (not a misprint) to go with its 1080p resolution, and >100% NTSC color reproduction, we'll take this Organic LED great looks in a small package any day. We promised to hunt it down on the show floor and so we did, finding it hiding amongst a rookery of 11-inch displays. Take a look at the gallery for a few more shots of this HDTV and hope it hits shelves someday.

Sony's OLED prototype 1080p HDTV

[LittleJoe @ Jan 8th 2007 11:13PM]

Wow, thats an incredibly nice picture. I'm on the same train... 27" is just fine by me.

[Rawnchie14 @ Jan 8th 2007 11:16PM]

Holy crap, razor sharp colors in that image. Wonder ho much it'll cost though hahaha... out the ass that's what.

[Michael @ Jan 8th 2007 11:14PM]

Wow! That looks damn good.

[distantbody @ Jan 8th 2007 11:22PM]

Fuck SED, OLED 4TW!!!!

[crzyjamaican46 @ Jan 8th 2007 11:33PM]

Holy Shit. 100% color reproduction. Ultra thin! Full HD. No Ghosting whatsoever or refresh issue. Fantastic Contrast. Very Low Power Consumption. Gentlemen this is the future. I want this in that Asus laptop with a SSD and ultra low voltage core duo right now. Make it a tablet and I just might cry. If they make this a little larger, then plasma, SED, DLP and LCD will all be extinct. This is coming from someone who sell hdtv's all day everyday

[Jypson @ Jan 8th 2007 11:39PM]

So we went from 10,000:1 to over 1,000,000:1 ? Interesting...

[nicleT @ Jan 8th 2007 11:49PM]

Any ideas about the price of these gems?

[Matt @ Jan 8th 2007 11:53PM]

What's the point of taking pictures of the screen? Isn't it limited by the monitor we're using to view this site?

[Arthur Nonamiss @ Jan 8th 2007 11:54PM]

You all realize you're saying "dang, that's a good picture" when looking at a picture of the display on your existing monitor. You can't really judge a display based upon looking at pictures of it on your display. Anyone saying that this picture is the best ever is just a Sony fanboy. I'm not saying the picture sucks, but unless you're at CES, you have no idea whatsoever.

[crzyjamaican46 @ Jan 9th 2007 12:01AM]

Just for the record I was wowed by the specs presented and facts that most of us geeks at engadget already know about oled's. Ken does bring up a good point though. Has Sony finally solved the blue oled lifespan issue that has been holding back this display technology. Prediction on sizes for next year anyone or prices? Engadget we need a responce and an update on this post. How did the display look in person. Was it really that great or do i hav a hard on for no reason at all.

[codywatson @ Jan 9th 2007 12:59AM]

I hope you aren't saying that the picture is worse than in the photos. Just in case: How are our monitors increasing the quality of the image? That defies all logic, as our monitors could only degrade the quality.

Oh yes, and I do agree that the photos are pretty well useless, as they are limited by our current monitors. However, the specs should give *some* idea of what a sweet display this is. (and is likely fuelling the swoon)

[Deluxe @ Jan 9th 2007 12:33AM]

What people are saying "Damn that's awesome!" to is the comparison in the images they're seeing to the other objects. You can't say "Damn that's a huge pyramid!" without actually being NEXT to the pyramid? I'd say a camel standing next to the base of the pyramid is justification enough.

But, I would still like to see it in person ;).

[Richard Lawler @ Jan 9th 2007 12:02AM]

It's awesome.

[Harib @ Jan 9th 2007 12:02AM]

Holy shit dude, I think I crapped my pants :-)

[Mr. B @ Jan 9th 2007 12:03AM]

I'd love to know the price... as I just bought an 26 inch HDTV.

[James Olomo @ Jan 9th 2007 12:16AM]

holy shit, that is what am talking about. GIVE ME OLED OR GIVE ME DEATH....Preferably in a 15.4 macbook pro esque laptop running a vista ultimate, embedded 15 megapixel carl zeis camera, 500gb ssd hd, hd-dvd/bluray combo drive, biometrics(tomprint) scanner,wireless hdmi-hdcp, uwb, wi-fi a/b/g/n, 10gbs wimax connection, hsdpa, umts, edge for does underdeveloped areas, ati r600 directx 10 card,cool implementation of a sideshow screen, lithium ion size fuel cell,1920*1200, all mobile digital tv formats, dts-hd, dolby truehd, xvcolour, deep colour..frankly i don't think heart could bear the excitement...i wont be able to stand and behold such beautifull technology of celestial hue.

[Keaton @ Jan 9th 2007 12:34AM]

Wow thats pretty... Does it come in 19 or 20 inch? Like computer monitor? That would be awesome! Under $400 for a 19" and I'd be sold!

@Arthur above... I'm sure it looks better than it does in the picture.... You don't have to be so negative and cynical...
@Ken... Hmmm good point... Whats the point if in a month your picture looks like crap? I hope they did figure it out...

Whats the problem with blue stuff now-a-days... Its all in such short supply... I mean how hard can it be, the sky is blue right? :-P

[trev @ Jan 9th 2007 12:39AM]

Well, while you can't judge picture quality directly from reproduction, most screens look like crap when reproduced via photos like this. These look good.

If good looks like crap then I'd venture that great looks good when reproduced like this. The logic is awfully simple, but it's better than nothing.

[Phil @ Jan 9th 2007 12:57AM]

I WANTS!!!!!! I gives 4k right now for this tv fuck all these other HDTV's
1080p, OLED HDTV, 100& color reproduction, 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio!!!

VERY NICE HOW MUCH!?

[Tony Rayo @ Jan 9th 2007 2:08AM]

Fry: "But this is HDTV, it's has better resolution than the real world!" - heh I might be off by a word or two in that quote, but man, once they get this in a 42" model and the price comes down, it shall be mine! I'm willing to wait a couple years...

- Tony R.

[Carbonize @ Jan 9th 2007 7:28AM]

No mention of the response times though. I do think it's getting to the point where the image produced by the screens is of far better quality than the human eye can actually see. I mean would stop seeing a difference after a certain point.

[Paul Kerton @ Jan 9th 2007 7:49AM]

100% NTSC Color Reproduction? How so, NTSC is famously short for "Never Twice the Same Color"

[TrafficGeek @ Jan 9th 2007 11:22AM]

Yeah, and it only accepts inputs from a Memory Stick....Duo!

[Harib @ Jan 9th 2007 8:58PM]

Holy shit dude, I think I crapped my pants :-)

[bob @ Jan 9th 2007 10:26PM]

anyone notice it says the 11 inch displays are only 8 bit color? That is only 256 colors, and the larger display is only 10 bit (1024 colors). I wouldnt want to use a display with a color depth less than 24 bit (16.7 million) unless it would just be for the outer display on a flip phone.

[hemmy @ Jan 10th 2007 10:32AM]

@bob
"anyone notice it says the 11 inch displays are only 8 bit color? That is only 256 colors, and the larger display is only 10 bit (1024 colors). I wouldnt want to use a display with a color depth less than 24 bit (16.7 million) unless it would just be for the outer display on a flip phone."

It's 8bit color, per color component (RGB:24bits total, 16.7mill colors). 10bit color, also per component (RGB:30bits total). You are capable of the math, and the realization of the amount of colors ;)

[Tobias @ Jan 12th 2007 5:45AM]

WOW it looks great, but it is a little small. The picture only covers about half of the screen of the monitor I have now.
I measured it with a ruler ;)

[Tobias @ Jan 12th 2007 5:52AM]

Picture probably made with this technique or some other fake-way:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_dynamic_range_imaging

[Ken @ Feb 24th 2007 12:45PM]

keep your peeners in your pants children. There still is no word on if they have been able to solve the lifespan issues with blue OLED's.

[Jessica @ Jan 10th 2007 11:08AM]

Actually the lifespan of the blue OLEDs has greatly improved. And it is actually not nearly as expensive to produce as you might think...

[omoc @ Feb 25th 2007 11:56AM]

Just one question--why does everyone keep saying contrast ratio? Contrast is a ratio-light to dark. Isn't that sort of redundant?

[omoc @ Feb 25th 2007 12:05PM]

Oh, by the way, thanks to those who pointed out the futility of trying to judge the image quality of a display by looking at pictures of it on another display, unless, of course, the display you're using is of known higher quality than the display you're judging so that you could discern any shortcomings in it.

[james @ Mar 15th 2007 9:26PM]

no no, the picture is really limited by the camera used to *take* the photo. Its next limited by the size used to present it. Its then represented by the monitor on which you see it. None of these *increase* the perceived quality unless the image was edited prior to posting. Looking for real the only real test, but i've seen pictures of tv's before and they do *not* look that nice. Ever. Unless its a CGI rendering of what it *might* look like....

[sam staggs @ Mar 24th 2007 8:04AM]

I WAITED A LONG TIME TO BUY A HD TV - NOW MY FUTURE IS HERE - CAN'T WAIT TO BUY ONE!

[sam staggs @ Mar 24th 2007 8:05AM]

I WAITED A LONG TIM TO BUY A HD TV NOW - I KNEW THIS ONE WOULD SHOW UP - MY FUTURE IS HERE!

[sam staggs @ Mar 24th 2007 8:05AM]

I DIDN'T WANT TO BUY A HD TV YET - I KNEW THIS ONE WOULD SHOW UP - CAN'T WAIT TO BUY ONE!