Target seems to have the 77" LG C3 OLED TV for $200 cheaper than anywhere else. When you add in 5% off you can get it for under $3,150. Lowest price I've seen so far
This collaborative space allows users to contribute additional information, tips, and insights to enhance the original deal post. Feel free to share your knowledge and help fellow shoppers make informed decisions.
Target seems to have the 77" LG C3 OLED TV for $200 cheaper than anywhere else. When you add in 5% off you can get it for under $3,150. Lowest price I've seen so far
Saw this @ Costco earlier today. 77" C3 sitting below a 65" C2.
There is a definite improvement in brightness with C3 > C2.
Else, other parts of the picture is nearly identical.
But is it worth $1K more? Not really.
Our community has rated this post as helpful. If you agree, why not thank
Quote
from F1Racer
:
Saw this @ Costco earlier today. 77" C3 sitting below a 65" C2.
There is a definite improvement in brightness with C3 > C2.
Else, other parts of the picture is nearly identical.
But is it worth $1K more? Not really.
Negative, what you are seeing is the size difference of a 77" screen vs a 65".
C2 HDR around 700-780 Nits, C3 750-800
Nits. Minimal difference if any and without a meter you'd never know.
Save your money and buy the C2 or G2 which is around 900-1000 Nits.
Negative, what you are seeing is the size difference of a 77" screen vs a 65".
C2 HDR around 700-780 Nits, C3 750-800
Nits. Minimal difference if any and without a meter you'd never know.
Save your money and buy the C2 or G2 which is around 900-1000 Nits.
Another benefit to the C3 that some may care about is the new processor which does a better job of upscaling poor quality content. But yes, the G3 is the one this year with the big improvements thanks to MLA
Like
Helpful
Funny
Not helpful
May 8, 2023 4:03 AM
1.2K Comments
Joined Dec 2011
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users.
QD-Oled is the superior technology, Samsung or Sony is your current option in USA.
MLA boost white sub pixel , so it's extremely bright. Problem is colors are still low , especially compared to QD-Oled.
Personally G3 is waste of money, save and get a G2, spend more and get a Samsung, or go Sony with A95K or their new tv released later this year A95L (very expensive)
I agree that QD-OLED is the more capable technology but you can't trust Samsung with their software and the A95L is going to be very expensive. The G3 looks almost identical to the S95C in most content so I still see it as a valid option over Samsung for the 5 year panel warranty and better firmware support. But to each their own. If only Sony made a cheaper QD-OLED
Saw this @ Costco earlier today. 77" C3 sitting below a 65" C2.
There is a definite improvement in brightness with C3 > C2.
Else, other parts of the picture is nearly identical.
But is it worth $1K more? Not really.
lol they probably purposefully set the c3 at full blast brightness and the c2 slightly dimmed. These stores have lots of tricks up their sleeves.
QD-OLEDs in both Samsung and Sony sets appear to be fundamentally worse than LGs tech regarding image retention.- in particular static white content seems much more likely to cause permenant burn in on QD-OLED vs LGs WOLED.
Further- they found Sony models (regardless of which OLED tech they use) have far worse image retention than LGs models. They originally though when comparing same-same for panel tech it's due to Sony running refresh cycles far less often because LG software runs cycles when you shut off the TV, while Sony won't do it unless it's off for 4 straight hours...so they manually reversed their schedules and found... the LG STILL had less image retention than the Sony...
tl;dr-- LG has been in this long enough burn in isn't really a concern anymore for their sets.
Sony and Samsung are trying hard to bring it back as one.
lol they probably purposefully set the c3 at full blast brightness and the c2 slightly dimmed. These stores have lots of tricks up their sleeves.
That is true.. Best Buy TVs ( electronics in general ) are set up and mostly maintained ( display models ) by said company reps, per agreement. That's all I can say
QD-OLEDs in both Samsung and Sony sets appear to be fundamentally worse than LGs tech regarding image retention.- in particular static white content seems much more likely to cause permenant burn in on QD-OLED vs LGs WOLED.
Further- they found Sony models (regardless of which OLED tech they use) have far worse image retention than LGs models. They originally though when comparing same-same for panel tech it's due to Sony running refresh cycles far less often because LG software runs cycles when you shut off the TV, while Sony won't do it unless it's off for 4 straight hours...so they manually reversed their schedules and found... the LG STILL had less image retention than the Sony...
tl;dr-- LG has been in this long enough burn in isn't really a concern anymore for their sets.
Sony and Samsung are trying hard to bring it back as one.
I concur 100%, but I've given up trying to get folks to see it.. So, I just don't bother replying to the ' QD-OLEDs are superior ' posts, especially when it comes to Samsung ( ugh )
Now I know very well that the C3 is better than the A2 which Costco just had the 77" for $1499. My comment is that I wonder if the C3 is worth $1800 more. I got the A2 and the picture is just amazing. I know the technical differences between the two. Brightness, 120 vs 60 and all of that but you have to admit that an additional $1800 is a bit on the steep side just for those additional features. ($3299 vs $1499)
Like
Helpful
Funny
Not helpful
Join The Conversation
Share your experience with the Slickdeals community
Share information with the community. Please follow our Community Guidelines and be kind!
Join The Conversation
Share your experience with the Slickdeals community
Share information with the community. Please follow our Community Guidelines and be kind!
27 Comments
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
There is a definite improvement in brightness with C3 > C2.
Else, other parts of the picture is nearly identical.
But is it worth $1K more? Not really.
Our community has rated this post as helpful. If you agree, why not thank
There is a definite improvement in brightness with C3 > C2.
Else, other parts of the picture is nearly identical.
But is it worth $1K more? Not really.
C2 HDR around 700-780 Nits, C3 750-800
Nits. Minimal difference if any and without a meter you'd never know.
Save your money and buy the C2 or G2 which is around 900-1000 Nits.
C2 HDR around 700-780 Nits, C3 750-800
Nits. Minimal difference if any and without a meter you'd never know.
Save your money and buy the C2 or G2 which is around 900-1000 Nits.
MLA boost white sub pixel , so it's extremely bright. Problem is colors are still low , especially compared to QD-Oled.
Personally G3 is waste of money, save and get a G2, spend more and get a Samsung, or go Sony with A95K or their new tv released later this year A95L (very expensive)
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
There is a definite improvement in brightness with C3 > C2.
Else, other parts of the picture is nearly identical.
But is it worth $1K more? Not really.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=my1lyUE
QD-OLEDs in both Samsung and Sony sets appear to be fundamentally worse than LGs tech regarding image retention.- in particular static white content seems much more likely to cause permenant burn in on QD-OLED vs LGs WOLED.
Further- they found Sony models (regardless of which OLED tech they use) have far worse image retention than LGs models. They originally though when comparing same-same for panel tech it's due to Sony running refresh cycles far less often because LG software runs cycles when you shut off the TV, while Sony won't do it unless it's off for 4 straight hours...so they manually reversed their schedules and found... the LG STILL had less image retention than the Sony...
tl;dr-- LG has been in this long enough burn in isn't really a concern anymore for their sets.
Sony and Samsung are trying hard to bring it back as one.
That is true.. Best Buy TVs ( electronics in general ) are set up and mostly maintained ( display models ) by said company reps, per agreement. That's all I can say
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=my1lyUE
QD-OLEDs in both Samsung and Sony sets appear to be fundamentally worse than LGs tech regarding image retention.- in particular static white content seems much more likely to cause permenant burn in on QD-OLED vs LGs WOLED.
Further- they found Sony models (regardless of which OLED tech they use) have far worse image retention than LGs models. They originally though when comparing same-same for panel tech it's due to Sony running refresh cycles far less often because LG software runs cycles when you shut off the TV, while Sony won't do it unless it's off for 4 straight hours...so they manually reversed their schedules and found... the LG STILL had less image retention than the Sony...
tl;dr-- LG has been in this long enough burn in isn't really a concern anymore for their sets.
Sony and Samsung are trying hard to bring it back as one.
I concur 100%, but I've given up trying to get folks to see it.. So, I just don't bother replying to the ' QD-OLEDs are superior ' posts, especially when it comes to Samsung ( ugh )
Link, if anyone is interested : https://www.nfm.com/berkshire/
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
Join The Conversation
Share your experience with the Slickdeals community
Share information with the community. Please follow our Community Guidelines and be kind!