Who makes the best screens: SONY (JDI) or Sharp?

[Dari]

I'm really liking the Xperia Z but opinion after opinion says that the Sharp screen found in HTC's DNA/Butterfly is far superior. Has anyone else encountered either screen in person?

This Japanese website seems to rank the Sharp screen(s) far higher than JDI's. Seeing that Sharp has a 20% marketshare in Japan, this may not be so surprising.

link

This Russian review of the Xperia Z says the Sharp screen in the HTC is superior.

link

Anyone else have anything to say regarding this?

 

[Dari]

As per the Russian site, how come Anandtech does not do something similar? There are like 5 major display makers (Sharp, JDI, LG, Samsung, and AU Optronics) in the smartphone world and we get no review on the flagship panels they make. This is important because these panels are in many OEM devices...

 

[destrekor]

First: JDI isn't Sony. Sony has a small portion of JDI, and iirc all or at least a fair portion of Sony's LCD business is now under the joint venture of JDI, but Sony has but a small voice, equal to Hitachi and Toshiba... of which together still doesn't take away ownership/majority control from INCJ - which, to spice things up, is an organization Sharp invests in.


More importantly: I don't think it has ever been the case that one display panel manufacturer has the best product in every corner of the market. Every year, ever panel size/type/pixel density... each company has a hit and miss.

For dominant panel manufacturers: LG is a huge hitter, and so is Samsung (depending on panel in question).

To answer your question, as loaded yet as generic as it is: Sharp has had better quality panels, on average, through recent times (past decade?). That is more or less a guess, however, based on what I think I remember reading/comparing over that time.
I've had more LG displays than not in a majority of my products as of late, FWIW (IIRC).

 

[Dari]

First: JDI isn't Sony. Sony has a small portion of JDI, and iirc all or at least a fair portion of Sony's LCD business is now under the joint venture of JDI, but Sony has but a small voice, equal to Hitachi and Toshiba... of which together still doesn't take away ownership/majority control from INCJ - which, to spice things up, is an organization Sharp invests in.


More importantly: I don't think it has ever been the case that one display panel manufacturer has the best product in every corner of the market. Every year, ever panel size/type/pixel density... each company has a hit and miss.

For dominant panel manufacturers: LG is a huge hitter, and so is Samsung (depending on panel in question).

To answer your question, as loaded yet as generic as it is: Sharp has had better quality panels, on average, through recent times (past decade?). That is more or less a guess, however, based on what I think I remember reading/comparing over that time.
I've had more LG displays than not in a majority of my products as of late, FWIW (IIRC).

I'm talking about smartphones...

 

[destrekor]

I'm talking about smartphones...

Okay... that doesn't really change anything.

Every year, every new panel, is just that - a new product.

If Sharp makes a 4" panel last year with 275PPI, and this year has also made available a 4.5" panel with 330PPI - there is no guarantee that image quality (color gamut, accuracy, etc) won't take a nosedive - and they may have solved a huge hurdle and instead improved quality greatly.

And both panels might continue to be in the market for a few years, with mixed usage and, quite likely, even more new panels being introduced.


(the above were just fictitious examples, btw)

 

[Dari]

Okay... that doesn't really change anything.

Every year, every new panel, is just that - a new product.

If Sharp makes a 4" panel last year with 275PPI, and this year has also made available a 4.5" panel with 330PPI - there is no guarantee that image quality (color gamut, accuracy, etc) won't take a nosedive - and they may have solved a huge hurdle and instead improved quality greatly.

And both panels might continue to be in the market for a few years, with mixed usage and, quite likely, even more new panels being introduced.


(the above were just fictitious examples, btw)

Fine. Whatever. But, now, are there other opinions as to which is better? Similarily, why doesn't Anandtech do a panel review instead of just reviewing the iPhone and Galaxy phones (and their accessories)?

 

[podspi]

Fine. Whatever. But, now, are there other opinions as to which is better? Similarily, why doesn't Anandtech do a panel review instead of just reviewing the iPhone and Galaxy phones (and their accessories)?

Because people don't buy panels -- they buy products (which includes a panel).

Unless I am misunderstanding what you are asking?

 

[destrekor]

You can ask why they don't review a great deal of product categories.

I know around the time I joined this forum, Tom's Hardware had phenomenal desktop display reviews, really digging into the panel's details.

I feel like I've seen similar technical reviews here on Anandtech, and certainly on a few smartphones and tablets, but it has been hit and miss. They don't aim to review every single hot item out there, or... they don't have the ability to accomplish that.

 

[Dari]

Because people don't buy panels -- they buy products (which includes a panel).

Unless I am misunderstanding what you are asking?

You can ask why they don't review a great deal of product categories.

I know around the time I joined this forum, Tom's Hardware had phenomenal desktop display reviews, really digging into the panel's details.

I feel like I've seen similar technical reviews here on Anandtech, and certainly on a few smartphones and tablets, but it has been hit and miss. They don't aim to review every single hot item out there, or... they don't have the ability to accomplish that.

THe point is I used to see monitor shoot-outs here and they used to discuss the source panels, which may have led to qualitative similarities. I think something similar can happen with smartphones. With 1080P panels, these are flagships, so the OEMs and sources are far fewer. How hard would it be to do something like that?

 

[Oyeve]

A phone panel shootout is useless as its all subjective. Putting useless specs and NITS and crap doesnt make a display any better than another. Its a waste of time. IMO.

 

[Dari]

A phone panel shootout is useless as its all subjective. Putting useless specs and NITS and crap doesnt make a display any better than another. Its a waste of time. IMO.

Thanks for your useless opinion. I'm sure you feel the same way about monitors and televisions

 

[tedrodai]

That's rich...your opinion that someone else's opinion is useless. I wouldn't mind reviews such as you're suggesting, but at least part of the answer as to why AT hasn't done so is because of how many people are asking for them.

 

[poofyhairguy]

Anyone else have anything to say regarding this?

I am addicted to the contrast of SAMOLED displays so it seems like its Samsung or bust for me.

 

[s44]

I am addicted to the contrast of SAMOLED displays so it seems like its Samsung or bust for me.

Well, yeah, but if you know the OP's posting history you'll realize that he started this thread to knock Samsung and promote Sony.

 

[Puddle Jumper]

I am addicted to the contrast of SAMOLED displays so it seems like its Samsung or bust for me.

+1. If a phone doesn't have a Super AMOLED display I'm not interested.

 

[Dari]

That's rich...your opinion that someone else's opinion is useless. I wouldn't mind reviews such as you're suggesting, but at least part of the answer as to why AT hasn't done so is because of how many people are asking for them.

I didn't realize Anandtech was a democracy. I thought they did them because it was SOP in the tech industry...

+1. If a phone doesn't have a Super AMOLED display I'm not interested.

That could definitely be included.

I am addicted to the contrast of SAMOLED displays so it seems like its Samsung or bust for me.

AMOLED may excel at contrast, black and saturation but it utterly fails in color reproduction, brightness and efficiency. THe Samsung OLEDs in particular seem to have a bluish bias.

Well, yeah, but if you know the OP's posting history you'll realize that he started this thread to knock Samsung and promote Sony.

Even Apple's CEO has joined in the "bashing" when it comes to OLED color accuracy. It's just an inferior display in many ways as it is superior in other ways. I have an OLED screen and I love it but I could never touch a Samsung screen seeing as to how bluish it is. AFAIK, Samsung does not make the OLED screen in my phone...

 

[you2]

While my last two phones have had oled displays; I would take an lcd display like the one used in the one x and dna but anything short of a top notch lcd display and rahter have an oled display.

 

[poofyhairguy]

AMOLED may excel at contrast, black and saturation but it utterly fails in color reproduction, brightness and efficiency. THe Samsung OLEDs in particular seem to have a bluish bias.

See that is the thing. I DON'T want accurate colors. I want blown out, over saturated colors that make the pictures on my phone seem better than real life. I want "my plasma TV on dynamic contrast" level of colors.

If I ever do photoshop on my phone maybe that will change, but for now what I am addicted to is the oversaturation. Its like high pixel density- once you get used to it you can't go back. Everything else just looks so dull.

 

[Puddle Jumper]

I didn't realize Anandtech was a democracy. I thought they did them because it was SOP in the tech industry...



That could definitely be included.



AMOLED may excel at contrast, black and saturation but it utterly fails in color reproduction, brightness and efficiency. THe Samsung OLEDs in particular seem to have a bluish bias.




Even Apple's CEO has joined in the "bashing" when it comes to OLED color accuracy. It's just an inferior display in many ways as it is superior in other ways. I have an OLED screen and I love it but I could never touch a Samsung screen seeing as to how bluish it is. AFAIK, Samsung does not make the OLED screen in my phone...

The One S is universally referred to as having a Super Amoled display, the Super part of the name being a Samsung specific term. Besides as Amoled screens go it isn't even a very good one.

 

[dagamer34]

Even if phones used the same panel, the fact that phone OEMs seem to be terrible at calibration makes comparing different panel OEMs almost pointless. Plus other technologies like polarizing filters and the type of glass used will affect the final appearance.

Regardless, people don't buy displays, they buy phones. And even if the Samsung Galaxy S III had horrendous oversaturated colors, that didn't stop it from selling 30 million units.

 

[Dari]

See that is the thing. I DON'T want accurate colors. I want blown out, over saturated colors that make the pictures on my phone seem better than real life. I want "my plasma TV on dynamic contrast" level of colors.

If I ever do photoshop on my phone maybe that will change, but for now what I am addicted to is the oversaturation. Its like high pixel density- once you get used to it you can't go back. Everything else just looks so dull.

Fair enough. There are better OLEDs out there, FWIW...

The One S is universally referred to as having a Super Amoled display, the Super part of the name being a Samsung specific term. Besides as Amoled screens go it isn't even a very good one.

You must be equating Samsung's SAMOLED with AMOLED. It's easy to do that when Samsung is the dominant OLED makers for small displays but that does not change the reality that AU Optronics makes the panel in HTC's One S...

link

 

[poofyhairguy]

Fair enough. There are better OLEDs out there, FWIW...

Who makes a better one than say the one in the Note 2? LG? I know many of the Samsung ones suck (I won't even look at a pentile AMOLED let alone use one), but it seems the full RGB ones are the best I have seen.

 

[Riceninja]

why does anyone bother posting in this guy's thread? y'all know this is just a roundabout way of broaching his favourite topic: how much samsung sucks.

 

[Dari]

Who makes a better one than say the one in the Note 2? LG? I know many of the Samsung ones suck (I won't even look at a pentile AMOLED let alone use one), but it seems the full RGB ones are the best I have seen.

IMHO, the one in the One S is better. It is everything you said you want in a screen (minus the bluish tint) found in the Note 2. But the resolution is lower and it is pentile. With the exception of the screen, the Galaxy Note 2 is a hell of a phone.

 

[zebrax2]

Note 2 doesn't use pentile
http://www.oled-info.com/galaxy-note-2-uses-non-pentile-oled-display-267-ppi