Monday, February 21st 2011

Sony Intros 17-inch and 24-inch Trimaster EL OLED Monitors

Sony launched 17-inch and 24-inch Trimaster EL professional-grade monitors, which are based on the organic light-emitting diode (OLED) technology. OLED is not to be confused with LED-backlit LCD, which is merely LCD with LED illumination instead of CCFL. OLED is a kind of a flat-panel display technology in which electroluminescent organic compounds spread across a film generate images. Hence, OLED provides far greater picture clarity, and eliminates pixellation, a problem encountered with low pixel-density LCD displays. OLED-generated images are more CRT-like in terms of fidelity. Sony’s new Trimaster OLED monitors are targeted at the broadcasting industry and professional studios that seek bleeding-edge image quality.

Both Trimaster OLED monitors feature resolutions of 1920 x 1080 (full-HD), with 10-bit drivers, 100 cd/m² brightness, and 178° viewing angles. Display inputs include HDMI, DisplayPort, and SDI, which is used in professional development houses. Carrying the model numbers BVM-E250 and BVM-E170, they will cost $28,900 and $15,710, respectively.

Source: FlatPanels HD
Add your own comment

63 Comments on Sony Intros 17-inch and 24-inch Trimaster EL OLED Monitors

#1
wolf
Performance Enthusiast
Completely Bonkers said:
27", IPS, 3840x2160

Baby, want one of those. I'd even be happy with it's 21" little sister at 2560x2048. WAIT 5:4? Nice
now this excites me in terms of a great screen, i bet the prices are more sane too.
Posted on Reply
#2
jasper1605
LAN_deRf_HA said:
Did anyone else mistake those monitors for speakers?
They actually looked like ceramic space heaters to me haha.
Posted on Reply
#3
Wiselnvestor
Most OLED suffers fast aging and has a much shorter lifespan than LCD, Plasma.

Whats worst, there's a "differential aging," which causes blue, red, and green luminance to shrink unevenly.

I doubt we will be seeing OLED in our living rooms anytime soon.
Posted on Reply
#4
SvB4EvA
Did anyone else notice that these are professional monitors?
Posted on Reply
#5
pr0n Inspector
TurdFergasun said:
prol the same reason studios drop 5-10k on curret 1080p 24-26 ips panels used as confidence monitors. when they want multi feeds on the same 1080p monitor, they can do that with the video distribution amps they use. 4k is nowhere near broadcast now or in the mentionable future considering it's just becoming common in the theatres, let alone close to being aworthwhile broadcast standard, shit ppl barely have the notion of 1080p. this is overpriced for a 24 inch 1080p i'm not denying that, it isn't however for a budding new display technology. it's meant for a completely different demographic that do not share your same demands. if you can read between and on the lines, you'll see that.
Did you know that OLED displays have insane color gamut and massive banding(on 8-bit models)? Why would any self-respecting professional want an over-saturated display with ugly banding?
Posted on Reply
#6
BumbleBee
Wiselnvestor said:
Most OLED suffers fast aging and has a much shorter lifespan than LCD, Plasma.

Whats worst, there's a "differential aging," which causes blue, red, and green luminance to shrink unevenly.

I doubt we will be seeing OLED in our living rooms anytime soon.
fighting the future didn't work out for Mulder and Scully.
This year, LG is going to be bringing a 31 inch 3D capable OLED television in the US and Europe, and they're planning a 55 inch prototype for 2012. By 2013, they're hoping to be mass producing OLED televisions large enough to be welcome in living rooms.
Panasonic has announced it will start construction of a new LCD television factory in August this year that will more than double their production capacity. The new $3 billion factory will be located in Hyogo prefecture’s Himeji city and cover 480,000 square metres.

This factory would also produce OLED TVs, but only after the 2010 opening and once the LCD production lines are fully operational. The confirmation means Sony will have at least a two-year head start in OLED television sales by the time Panasonic gets their models to market.
here is a nice preview of the technology

http://www.flatpanelshd.com/review.php?subaction=showfull&id=1289487180
Posted on Reply
#7
[H]@RD5TUFF
newtekie1 said:

Good: Nothing good.
Bad: The prices...
Even Worse: Sony is back in the Monitor Business.
Fixed that for you.:D
Posted on Reply
#8
wahdangun
[H]@RD5TUFF said:
Fixed that for you.:D
did you know sony are top of the line display manufacture?

And for me sony is one the most inovative company out there
Posted on Reply
#9
pr0n Inspector
wahdangun said:
did you know sony are top of the line display manufacture?

And for me sony is one the most inovative company out there
What, did you think every Sony display is a Sony Artisan?

And did you know? Sony buy panels from Real Manufacturers like Sharp, Samsung and various Taiwanese OEMs.
Posted on Reply
#10
[H]@RD5TUFF
wahdangun said:
did you know sony are top of the line display manufacture?

And for me sony is one the most inovative company out there
Can i please have 2 of whatever your smoking ?

pr0n Inspector said:
What, did you think every Sony display is a Sony Artisan?

And did you know? Sony buy panels from Real Manufacturers like Sharp, Samsung and various Taiwanese OEMs.
^this
Posted on Reply
#12
Completely Bonkers
Nice link to examples of use of technology. Only downside, many of those photos are "concept-photos". Faked. And very obviously fake.
Posted on Reply
#13
ped
Bo$$ said:
yep, i did
QLED is still not fully mainstream yet, but give it some time :)
Give it several YEARS (likely 10) I hope you mean. The very first color prototype (4 inch) was just completed, and wad announced a few days ago (and looks horrible). OLED is 10 years ahead of QLED and already ramping massive production. Also, QLED uses toxic materials, unlike OLED which uses none.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=20073754
Most use toxic metals such as Cadmium, selenium, gallium, arsenic, etc. Basically any of the major semiconductor materials (CdS, CdSe, ZnS, GaAs, InP, etc.) are possible QDot emitters.
QLED prototype:

http://www.oled-display.net/first-picture-and-more-details-about-the-world-first-qled-display



Now compare that horrid thing with this OLED display (video inline with the webpage):

http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/03/lgs-31-inch-oled-spin-slices-its-way-into-our-cold-lcd-hearts/

Posted on Reply
#14
yogurt_21
btarunr said:
Sony launched 17-inch and 24-inch Trimaster EL professional-grade monitors, which are based on the organic light-emitting diode (OLED) technology. OLED is not to be confused with LED-backlit LCD, which is merely LCD with LED illumination instead of CCFL. OLED is a kind of a flat-panel display technology in which electroluminescent organic compounds spread across a film generate images. Hence, OLED provides far greater picture clarity, and eliminates pixellation, a problem encountered with low pixel-density LCD displays. OLED-generated images are more CRT-like in terms of fidelity. Sony’s new Trimaster OLED monitors are targeted at the broadcasting industry and professional studios that seek bleeding-edge image quality.

Both Trimaster OLED monitors feature resolutions of 1920 x 1080 (full-HD), with 10-bit drivers, 100 cd/m² brightness, and 178° viewing angles. Display inputs include HDMI, DisplayPort, and SDI, which is used in professional development houses. Carrying the model numbers BVM-E250 and BVM-E170, they will cost $28,900 and $15,710, respectively.

http://www.techpowerup.com/img/11-02-21/83a_thm.jpg

Source: FlatPanels HD
ok so why are they so small, id think most studios were using 27" on up.
Posted on Reply
#15
ped
Wiselnvestor said:
Most OLED suffers fast aging and has a much shorter lifespan than LCD, Plasma.

Whats worst, there's a "differential aging," which causes blue, red, and green luminance to shrink unevenly.

I doubt we will be seeing OLED in our living rooms anytime soon.
Wow I hope you didn't bet the farm on that prediction, since both Samsung and LG have invested Billions on OLED for HDTVs.

Samsung invests US $4.8 Billion in 2011 for gen 8 OLED plant to produce 55" and smaller HDTVs:

http://www.oled-info.com/samsung-invest-48-billion-oleds-2011
Posted on Reply
#16
ped
BumbleBee said:
fighting the future didn't work out for Mulder and Scully.
Hehe exactly. People like him that are trying to downplay OLED now will be the same ones defending it against the next-generation display 12 years from now.
Posted on Reply
#17
ped
Completely Bonkers said:
Nice link to examples of use of technology. Only downside, many of those photos are "concept-photos". Faked. And very obviously fake.
All of them are actual products except the transparent screens at the end (and those already exist as well - do a google for transparent OLED laptop). In fact the ones you likely think are "fake" (like the LG super-thin OLED HDTV showing Garfield) are in fact stills taken from the video of it in action, which is a link right there on the page above it (Engadget link).
Posted on Reply
#18
ped
Completely Bonkers said:
At those prices we should have seen 2560x1600 at 17" at a minimum, and finally have high pixel density displays just like we are seeing on mobile phone devices. But 1920x1080 is just laughable, esp. at those prices.
1. These OLED monitors are only 10% more expensive than the LCD ones they're better than and replacing.

2. 1920x1080 is the highest broadcast-quality signal for HDTV, and that's the purpose of these monitors, not to sit on your desktop and run Windows.
Posted on Reply
#19
ped
laszlo said:
oled is thinner than lcd
Yep - in fact there's no limit to how thin they can be - an OLED screen was produced several weeks ago that was thinner than a sheet of paper.
Posted on Reply
#20
devguy
Holy pen-tuple post BATMAN!

btarunr said:
Many Thanks to BumbleBee for the tip.
lol, I C What you did ThAr.

heh, Bumblebee's tip...
Posted on Reply
#21
pr0n Inspector
ped said:
1. These OLED monitors are only 10% more expensive than the LCD ones they're better than and replacing.

2. 1920x1080 is the highest broadcast-quality signal for HDTV, and that's the purpose of these monitors, not to sit on your desktop and run Windows.
And of course you didn't bothered to address the gaudy colors, obvious banding, broken gamma and white point. Stuff that are actually important for professionals.
Posted on Reply
#22
ped
pr0n Inspector said:
And of course you didn't bothered to address the gaudy colors, obvious banding, broken gamma and white point. Stuff that are actually important for professionals.
If you think any of that is true then make the case. All I heard in that video was people ooh'ing and ahh'ing over the quality of the OED displays.
Posted on Reply
#23
pr0n Inspector
ped said:
If you think any of that is true then make the case. All in heard in that video was people ooh'ing and ahh'ing over the quality of the OED displays.
What ooh and ahh? it's one man pointing out the obvious. What it doesn't tell you is that the supposedly mere 10% cheaper ones are RGB LED backlit LCDs, already twice as expensive as the CCFL counterparts. Or that the fact that all common video color gamut are very similar to sRGB, which means even w-ccfl is enough.
And, every single OLED device ever tested have inferior picture quality compared to their LCD competitors.
Posted on Reply
#24
Unregistered
pr0n Inspector said:

And, every single OLED device ever tested have inferior picture quality compared to their LCD competitors.
Surely you cannot be serious.
I really want to see the proof of that, honestly...
#25
pr0n Inspector
TAViX said:
Surely you cannot be serious.
I really want to see the proof of that, honestly...
There are more to displays than eye-poping colors. Accuracy, color gamut, bit depth for example. What is "nice" for ignorant consumers is disaster for pros and enthusiasts.

DisplayMate did some non-BS tests of smartphone displays, which still remains the only accessible source of OLED displays.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment