The HZ65U9E has been out for a while (the Chinese variant) and there's been a few reviews on that.

The H65U9X, on the other hand, looks phenomenal, using QLED technology to provide 1500 nits of peak brightness with .00003 nits of minimal brightness, or in other words, a potential contrast ratio of 50,000,000.

To note, for people who do photography, the .00003 nits of minimal brightness is equivalent to EV -14.65 (note EV is log2x in form, so +1 EV is a doubling of light value). Astrophotography of the Milky Way Galactic Center is -9 to -11 EV, and photography under starlight only (no city lights or light pollution) is -6 EV.

Panel tech is rapidly improving. My LG OLED was a revelation, not only for the perfect black levels, but the color accuracy is incredible. The increased local contrast also gives the impression of much greater sharpness - I can see details that aren’t visible on my 5K iMac. Black levels on the iMac are a weak .5 nits, just a dull grey: while OLED blacks are below .0005 nits.

I ordered the Asus ProArt 32UCX as an HDR grading monitor - 55” is too large for me to work comfortably in a small room, so using the television as a monitor is out of the question, though high end studios use them.

The Asus has 1,152 local dimming zones and 1,400 nits brightness, 700 nits more than my television set! By way of comparison, your average movie theater screen is somewhere in the neighborhood of 50 nits. On an SDR display, sunlight glaring off of the hood of a waxed automobile is reproduced as exactly the same brightness as a white sheet of paper. When 10,000 nit televisions are commonplace, I imagine viewers will squint when seeing bright flashes of light in a darkened room.

A problem with these high brightness LEDs with FALD is they draw a ton of power: I believe mine uses as much as 220 watts; they require efficient cooling, which I’m assuming accounts for the noise. It isn’t just that the monitor is expensive: it requires a $1,000 i/o device to work with a Mac. At the same time, it was only a couple years ago that Mystery Box was recommending the $3,700 SmallHD P3X, a 17” HD monitor, as a ‘budget’ solution to HDR grading.

A couple of weeks ago, it was announced that Netflix is now requiring all productions be shot in HDR. As they already dictate only log or RAW for capture - which are already HDR - I’m guessing this pertains to production design and lighting (?), but not really sure, and I don’t understand how that could be regulated. The original Chef’s Table is one example of outstanding cinematography combined with HDR.

The end of 2019 is near, and I have yet to see any independent test of one of those "Hisense ULED XD" TVs announced for this year in July. Looks like not even samples have made it into the hands of journalists. Similar, no "Panasonic Megacon" samples showed up in any tester's hand.

Meanwhile, even Samsung has stated in public to jump on the OLED bandwagon, as did Xiaomi, recently. And my 2015 LG 4k OLED TV still runs perfectly fine, with no visible "burn-in".

Do you have a specific link to a product from Flanders Scientific using two LCDs? (I saw many different kinds of monitors on their web page, but no obvious hints to the use of two LCDs.)

Generally I'm not sold on the idea that "two LCDs" will outcompete OLEDs for consumer displays. I'm happily running a LG 4k OLED TV since 2015, both for movies and as a computer monitor, and "image retention" hasn't ever been a problem for me. The early model near-black uniformity issues have been sorted out in contemporary OLED TVs.

I'm curious to see a Hisense ULED XD tested e.g. at https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/hisense - until then, I remain skeptic about this approach.

"A contrast ratio of over 150,000, exceeding OLEDs" is clearly a marketing lie. If you do not account for reflections of ambient light at the display surface, then contrast ratios of OLEDs are infinite, because black is black with them. If you do account for reflections of ambient light at the display surface, then the achievable contrast ratio mainly depends on your surface coating/structure, and that is independent from the display technology behind it.

Also, I am still missing a plausible description of how they manage to combine the filtering effects of two LCDs in front of the light source. After all, LCDs are based on modulating polarization, and if you put two similar polarization filters in the path of your light, their effect does not simply add up (or better: multiply).

I think we need to wait for independent lab reviews before concluding that this is a real revolution :-)

@DrDave

Too thick, plus OLED is more energy efficient.