Database Info

Had to return the S4 Active

Since I was an original proponent of the S4 Active's camera, I wanted to publicly admit that I was wrong. The camera on the S4 Active is, indeed, a deal breaker (at least for me).
It's not that it dropped from 13mp to 8mp...that, in and of itself, has no bearing on the performance, but the images produced by this camera are muddy and not pleasing at all. It is miles behind the original S4 or HTC One in the image department.
I went back to the original S4 which is fine, but I really miss the screen of the Active. It's just a choice each individual will have to decide for themselves, but I just can't understand why Samsung downgraded the camera so dramatically on the Active. It's a shame because, to me, everything else about the Active is awesome, most notably, the screen.

cardinalryan said:
Since I was an original proponent of the S4 Active's camera, I wanted to publicly admit that I was wrong. The camera on the S4 Active is, indeed, a deal breaker (at least for me).
It's not that it dropped from 13mp to 8mp...that, in and of itself, has no bearing on the performance, but the images produced by this camera are muddy and not pleasing at all. It is miles behind the original S4 or HTC One in the image department.
I went back to the original S4 which is fine, but I really miss the screen of the Active. It's just a choice each individual will have to decide for themselves, but I just can't understand why Samsung downgraded the camera so dramatically on the Active. It's a shame because, to me, everything else about the Active is awesome, most notably, the screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sad to see you go but IMO Screen > Camera
I think the camera will be fixed with an update or mods, screen you are stuck with forever. I know the camera on this thing can be better, just wait for them to get the bugs worked out. Enjoy the S4, it DOES have a great camera
My disclaimer is I rarely take photos with my phone. My wife does a good job snapping great photos I just use it to capture something funny or cool when I am not around family.

I liked the screen too but a lot of original gs4 features were calling me (including customization of the physical phone with cases and replacement parts and internal software)
Sent from my SGH-I337 using xda app-developers app

Camera seems great for me, a bit better than my Note 2. IMO a waterproof phone, better looking, better display, and more rugged is better than a slightly better camera on the regular S4.

I noticed a green tent sometimes. It must be a software issue.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using xda app-developers app

geoff5093 said:
Camera seems great for me, a bit better than my Note 2. IMO a waterproof phone, better looking, better display, and more rugged is better than a slightly better camera on the regular S4.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is certainly a fair comment. For me though, the camera was just too weak...but holy crap the Active screen is exponentially better than the SAMOLED S4 screen...not even close.

mattpayne92 said:
I liked the screen too but a lot of original gs4 features were calling me (including customization of the physical phone with cases and replacement parts and internal software)
Sent from my SGH-I337 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cases will not show up if people don't let the companies know that they are wanted

cardinalryan said:
Since I was an original proponent of the S4 Active's camera, I wanted to publicly admit that I was wrong. The camera on the S4 Active is, indeed, a deal breaker (at least for me).
It's not that it dropped from 13mp to 8mp...that, in and of itself, has no bearing on the performance, but the images produced by this camera are muddy and not pleasing at all. It is miles behind the original S4 or HTC One in the image department.
I went back to the original S4 which is fine, but I really miss the screen of the Active. It's just a choice each individual will have to decide for themselves, but I just can't understand why Samsung downgraded the camera so dramatically on the Active. It's a shame because, to me, everything else about the Active is awesome, most notably, the screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just wait to get the OBEX or Lifeproof case for your S4...as I will do...when I had both (The the S4A for a week before returning) I thought the screens were comparable with an edge to the S4.

planoman said:
Just wait to get the OBEX or Lifeproof case for your S4...as I will do...when I had both (The the S4A for a week before returning) I thought the screens were comparable with an edge to the S4.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Depends on the person
Some people like their screens over saturated with deep blacks, some people like their screens natural with normal whites.

joshuadjohnson22 said:
Depends on the person
Some people like their screens over saturated with deep blacks, some people like their screens natural with normal whites.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So true. I personally was sold on the S4A screen over the S4 screen when I was compairing them side by side, and it was ultimatly the reason I went with the S4A over the S4.

Kyuta Syuko said:
So true. I personally was sold on the S4A screen over the S4 screen when I was compairing them side by side, and it was ultimatly the reason I went with the S4A over the S4.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the s4 active has a more 'natural' screen but its tft and the color reproduction is horrible. At least in movie mode the regular S4 can seem much more accurate and not bland

To each their own. I purchased the Active because I get wet and my Note 2 was on borrowed time. The better camera and screen on the active are a bonus.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537

I feel like most of the people prefer the actives screen. I compared both side by side and I actually prefer the bolder colors. Its all personal opinion
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using xda app-developers app

Yeah I love the active screen but hate the angles and just hate tft. The active is better from the start but the amoled on the normal s4 has more potential. A wide color gamut. Movie mode Is almost perfect. And this is coming from professional display reviewers. And if we get perseus kernel onto the 9505 variant it'll be even better.
But to be honest I have it on auto screen mode for some reason I love the colors too
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 2

jetlitheone said:
Yeah I love the active screen but hate the angles and just hate tft. The active is better from the start but the amoled on the normal s4 has more potential. A wide color gamut. Movie mode Is almost perfect. And this is coming from professional display reviewers. And if we get perseus kernel onto the 9505 variant it'll be even better.
But to be honest I have it on auto screen mode for some reason I love the colors too
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree the SAMOLED screen has more potential and if the S4 ever got a mod like Voodoo Color the user could probably get the screen looking just as good or maybe even better than the S4A screen.

TwoStroker37 said:
To each their own. I purchased the Active because I get wet and my Note 2 was on borrowed time. The better camera and screen on the active are a bonus.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In no way does the Active have a better camera than the original S4. I would venture to say that the camera on the Active is among the worst on a high end smartphone. It is plumb terrible.

cardinalryan said:
In no way does the Active have a better camera than the original S4. I would venture to say that the camera on the Active is among the worst on a high end smartphone. It is plumb terrible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mine has taken great photos and mine has taken horrible photos.
The truth is they do need to update the camera to fix the bugs... after that I think it will be great... Of course not as good as the S4 but close

cardinalryan said:
Since I was an original proponent of the S4 Active's camera, I wanted to publicly admit that I was wrong. The camera on the S4 Active is, indeed, a deal breaker (at least for me).
It's not that it dropped from 13mp to 8mp...that, in and of itself, has no bearing on the performance, but the images produced by this camera are muddy and not pleasing at all. It is miles behind the original S4 or HTC One in the image department.
I went back to the original S4 which is fine, but I really miss the screen of the Active. It's just a choice each individual will have to decide for themselves, but I just can't understand why Samsung downgraded the camera so dramatically on the Active. It's a shame because, to me, everything else about the Active is awesome, most notably, the screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I used the S4 Active in store and the display seems to be a lot more accurate than the S4 (since it uses the TFT display). How was it's outdoor visibility?

Southernboyj said:
I used the S4 Active in store and the display seems to be a lot more accurate than the S4 (since it uses the TFT display). How was it's outdoor visibility?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The display isn't more accurate its just not exaggerated colors. But you can fix that in the regular s4
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 2

jetlitheone said:
Yeah I love the active screen but hate the angles and just hate tft. The active is better from the start but the amoled on the normal s4 has more potential. A wide color gamut. Movie mode Is almost perfect. And this is coming from professional display reviewers. And if we get perseus kernel onto the 9505 variant it'll be even better.
But to be honest I have it on auto screen mode for some reason I love the colors too
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
its about 97% accurate to sRGB (which is industry standard) in Movie mode, versus 91% on iPhone 5, 83% on S4 Active, and 85% on HTC One. The AMOLED screen actually has a wider gamut than sRGB but it is not calibrated correctly. At its most vivid, it is capable of about 102% sRGB gamut, though it does suffer from some slight gamma issues as well due to AMOLED being totally off when displaying 'true' blacks.
I tested them all with a friend and his colorimetry gear with some standard calibration images, with Pantone, sRGB, and Rec709 standard materials as well as gray plates and focusing scales (attached). Feel free to compare to your HDTV/monitor of choice.
However, a 3% variation is negligible at best; most males (60-something percent) are partially colorblind anyways and really cant see the difference until its about 18% off. Women its closer to 1% have color issues, and with females comprising the majority of the population and about 1/3 of the S4 buyers, that means that roughly 75% of you could not tell the difference between a perfectly calibrates S4 and one that is 3%, 5%, or even 10% off.
That said, i have some 10 bit Marshall, JVC, and Sony calibrated field monitors that are closer to 78% sRGB, and i used them every day for work (we use scopes to verify anyways; cant trust your eyes), and even a VERY VERY nice, VERY expensive calibrated 10 bit IPS LED LCD field monitor that costs as much as some new cars that is only 94% accurate.
I rely on my eyes at work every day; i have incredibly sharp and perceptive vision, and i can comfortably say that 'Movie' mode is BETTER than most other screens you would watch movies/tv on, yes including your $1,000 HDTV or $300 PC monitor. I can easily see the pixels on the smaller, 720P GS3 screen, and make them out decently on the S4 as well, even 18" away from my face. The HTC one as well, but its closer to 14" away maximum. That is incredible for me.
TFT has bad viewing angles, very bad backlight passthrough transmission, and is based on old tech. IPS LED would have been a MUCH better choice, but Samsung doesnt do much in that field; TFT they have the tech and fab for. It was a poor choice IMO.
The HTC One screen or iPhone 5 screen is way better than that of the Active for viewing angles, and also much more saturated (One is oversaturated, iPhone 5 only slightly). But for contrast and viewing angles alone, Samsung SHOULD have gone IPS.
KEEP IN MIND...
Brightness, viewing angles, saturation, gamut, and contrast are quantifiable. These are what i base my statements on; what ive measured and what ive seen.
PERCEIVED color is not; thats your brain, mostly. Your eyes only collect raw data. I could show you correctly calibrated images under different lighting and you would swear the peoples faces were purple, green, etc, when in fact they are absolutely correct, and its your brain compensating.
As far as the S4A camera, i had read Samsung had a problem with supply on the 13MP units, and opted for the same part as the S III camera as it was available, and part numbers stack up (pinouts do not). The software camera app on the S4A may not be up to snuff in that case; the S III takes great shots for a camera phone; and if you look at S III, S4A, and S4 shots side by side with the same settings of the same objects under same lighting and other conditions, the S4A and S III are pretty damn close to identical if you check out scopes or histograms; the S4 with the 13MP camera has a slight edge.
I cant see the Perseus kernel doing much better; most of the issue with the S4 screen is gamma shift based off the PenTile display architecture; yes the S4 screen is RGBG, which is an RGB variant, but in practice calibrating it is WILDLY different from an RGB screen. If anyone gets a chance, take a look at the exact same picture (both the one i attached and also one of people) on a Motorola Atrix 4G with the RGBW (red green blue white) pixel layout; the Atrix has THE WORST COLORS I HAVE EVER SEEN, period. BUT, you could see that thing perfectly in the glare of the sun at any angle.

Grainy Screen?

Is it just me or the screen is grainy when in low light and in darker images?

same here, very disappointed in this camera

Yes , it's like a very thin layer of dust or paper is on the screen .

Raay said:
Yes , it's like a very thin layer of dust or paper is on the screen .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think this is common with OLED, I've only seen a handful of them though...check out another OLED device or TV in store & check for it.

Ace42 said:
I think this is common with OLED, I've only seen a handful of them though...check out another OLED device or TV in store & check for it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is it a common problem or common in all oled? If it's a problem I'm going to return the phone. It's noticeable when you watch videos without light and lowest brightness.

Its common with this phone, not with oled in general.
If its just grainy then you are in luck, mine has clear vertical and horizontal lines.
I believe its called mura with oled technology.
My galaxy nexus a few years back had it way worse and i traded that in after 2 days at the store for a galaxy s3.
My galaxy s3 had perfect screen (to this day it is still perfect except for the cracks in the screen)
Trying to sell my g flex 2 as i have a taiwanese imported phone (h959 red 32gb) in europe and LG webcare refuses to help me with it (and sending it back to vendor will cost me tons of transport and import again ...).
Also LG webcare stated it was normal and even a screen replacement wouldn't fix much. So i was kind of bitter and told them they where 4 years behind on samsung in oled technology if this is normal.
Anyway, good luck with it.

WittePens said:
Its common with this phone, not with oled in general.
If its just grainy then you are in luck, mine has clear vertical and horizontal lines.
I believe its called mura with oled technology.
My galaxy nexus a few years back had it way worse and i traded that in after 2 days at the store for a galaxy s3.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not noticing any major grainy areas, at least it's less noticeable than on my Galaxy S1 & Vita. I unfortunately got one with yellowing along the bottom edge, but I can only see it on light colors.
Also the Mura effect consists of black blotches on black areas, those lines you have are something else.
Sent from my LG-H950

Mura is cloudy effects on the screen, eg yellow spots.
Banding is lines.
I got both and LG refuses to fix it.

POLED
WittePens said:
Its common with this phone, not with oled in general.
If its just grainy then you are in luck, mine has clear vertical and horizontal lines.
I believe its called mura with oled technology.
My galaxy nexus a few years back had it way worse and i traded that in after 2 days at the store for a galaxy s3.
My galaxy s3 had perfect screen (to this day it is still perfect except for the cracks in the screen)
Trying to sell my g flex 2 as i have a taiwanese imported phone (h959 red 32gb) in europe and LG webcare refuses to help me with it (and sending it back to vendor will cost me tons of transport and import again ...).
Also LG webcare stated it was normal and even a screen replacement wouldn't fix much. So i was kind of bitter and told them they where 4 years behind on samsung in oled technology if this is normal.
Anyway, good luck with it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, true, it is common with this phone and not with OLED technology in general. Now, what else you need to note is that this phone uses POLED type of display. POLED differs with regular AMOLED and OLED display technology in the plastic substrate that employs as opposed to the glass substrate in regular AMOLED/OLED displays, hence the letter "P" in POLED. Plastic is used to make the display bendable and this POLED technology by LG is not perfected yet. I do not know if Samsung uses POLED for S6 Edge, S6 Edge Plus and Note Edge, if they indeed use plastic substrate in their curved displays, then your claim that LG is behind in this tech. is true. I think i've read somewhere that Samsung uses normal display tech in their curved mobile displays, but i cannot remember what website hosted this article.
I own LG 55EC9300 OLED TV and i can tell you that LG's regular OLED tech. is as good as Samsung's. This is not straightforward correlation with mobile display tech. since i do not know of any OLED based phone of LG. My opinion is that LG's normal OLED tech. is just fine, just that they need to polish this POLED tech.

Mine's screen is ok on minimal brightness, however it is too bright on minimal and use Twilight. And than the screen is really grainy. But there is no way around it, 0% brightness is too much at night. I hate that. And there is too much white GUI. We need more BLACKS.

itflexes said:
Is it just me or the screen is grainy when in low light and in darker images?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Coming from G2 to G Flex 2 I really noticed non-uniform solid colors on G Flex 2 and I found two solutions: raise average brightness (grain is much more noticeable on lower brightness setting) and get used to it. Really, second option helped me a lot, my eyes got used to this screen within a week and now I don't notice it and happy with overall screen quality. I understand that second solution is not for everyone.

wishod said:
Coming from G2 to G Flex 2 I really noticed non-uniform solid colors on G Flex 2 and I found two solutions: raise average brightness (grain is much more noticeable on lower brightness setting) and get used to it. Really, second option helped me a lot, my eyes got used to this screen within a week and now I don't notice it and happy with overall screen quality. I understand that second solution is not for everyone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah same here, i hardly notice it anymore. also coming from a nexus 5, the flex 2 screen is way way superior

le grande magnetto said:
Mine's screen is ok on minimal brightness, however it is too bright on minimal and use Twilight. And than the screen is really grainy. But there is no way around it, 0% brightness is too much at night. I hate that. And there is too much white GUI. We need more BLACKS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i agree. i use the app darker now. in lowest setting it's usable. but more black in GUI would bee better

Lack of OLED is a disappointment

LG is falling behind in the smartphone display world. My Note7 is the best phone display I have ever had, by far, and that is no exaggeration. Yet here we are with another flagship release by LG who are using dated technology on the most important component of a phone - the display. IPS contrast sucks. Contrast is a huge deciding factor in image quality - perhaps the most important. Additionally, LCDs and IPS in particular have substantial pixel response motion blur over AMOLED. I HAD to return my HTC 10 because I couldn't stand using the display with how muddy it looked compared to the AMOLED on my 6P, even though HTC touted their display as having a fast response rate. Simple actions like pulling down the notification shade produced easily noticeable differences between the devices. LG is well aware of how great OLED is - they invest billions in their OLED TV division. I have spent $7,000 this year between their 65" and 55" OLED TVs, and they are mind-blowing. LG needs to either purchase Samsung display panels, or invest in their seriously lacking mobile division, because they're going to end up like HTC sooner or later at this rate.
I hope this IPS panel is at least an improvement. The contrast is likely no better than 2000:1, which is great for an IPS, but poor overall. I'm not stoked about the always-on-display in the ticker area either. It is far less useful than the G5's or Note7's - another step backwards. And at night, LCD always-on-displays also look like crap with tons of halo/light bleed. The lack of detailed performance specs at the launch event was disappointing. Using the SD 820 was a poor choice, and you could have easily thrown 6GB of RAM in there. And launching in a few weeks is idiotic as well. They could have capitalized on the Note7's recall and gotten their device out before the iPhone 7 if they wanted to. We'll be lucky to have it by October. There better be a decent promotion, because I am on the fence about buying this phone with its poor display, less than stellar battery (even if replaceable), lack of water resistance, and ugly UI. I must give credit where it is due, and that is the audio and camera capabilities are out of this world (except for the 5 MP front camera - WHY) - and I appreciate them destroying the competition in those VERY important areas., and keeping a removable battery with a premium and durable design. But this phone could have been the best of 2016 if they wanted it to be. This phone hardly has any advantage over the Axon 7 for far less cash.

In their defense, LG manufactures MANY flat panel TVs with excellent picture quality. I suspect their choices of phone screens are based upon energy consumption, cost effectiveness, and the plain ole theory that such a small size doesn't require an extravagantly engineered screen. Don't get me wrong, I love a super-amoled / OLED screen personally. When I compared the S7 vs my G5, I honestly was like....hmmmmmmmmmm, wish I had that screen though.. LOL
But from what I have read, the V20 screen is supposed to be far superior to that of the V10.

AMOLED has a major minus: screen burn, and the white turns muddy over time.
G Flex used to have AMOLED, but it turned out LG abandons it.

mingkee said:
AMOLED has a major minus: screen burn, and the white turns muddy over time.
G Flex used to have AMOLED, but it turned out LG abandons it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AMOLED doesn't burn in normal use conditions anymore - this isn't 2012. The white also does not turn "muddy" over time - whatever the hell that means. You're making stuff up. Sure, some panels have had white uniformity issues... but Samsung may be resolving that as my Note7 is literally perfect. There is no defense for LG here. They either were too cheap to invest in their mobile division's display panels, or they are behind in their mobile division... which is funny considering they make the best OLED TVs in the world. Basically the only OLED TVs.

I've had an OLED display with my Note 2, 3, and 4. I too had hoped that LG was going with OLED this time for the V20, since they do make OLED TVs, but instead looks like they are still using the same LCD that is on the V10. At least Samsung stepped up the OLED on the Note 7 to support HDR.

You're very unlikely to see any light bleed on a high quality IPS-screen. I've never seen light bleed on an iPhone for example, but I had really bad light bleed on my Nexus 5. I also have absolutely zero light bleed on my OnePlus One.

mekanismen said:
You're very unlikely to see any light bleed on a high quality IPS-screen. I've never seen light bleed on an iPhone for example, but I had really bad light bleed on my Nexus 5. I also have absolutely zero light bleed on my OnePlus One.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The v10 had significant light bleed from the second screen.

Nitemare3219 said:
AMOLED doesn't burn in normal use conditions anymore - this isn't 2012.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you please explain further?
Don't all amoled screens burn in regardless of use because of it's organic components?

mekanismen said:
You're very unlikely to see any light bleed on a high quality IPS-screen. I've never seen light bleed on an iPhone for example, but I had really bad light bleed on my Nexus 5. I also have absolutely zero light bleed on my OnePlus One.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I had a G4 and V10 both with terrible light bleed on a corner that I had to exchange. Also, IPS glow is a huge problem, and at night you don't get true blacks which is especially distracting with the second screen.
rivera02 said:
The v10 had significant light bleed from the second screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly.
Sharpshooterrr said:
Can you please explain further?
Don't all amoled screens burn in regardless of use because of it's organic components?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That isn't burn in. Burn in is permanent image retention and an actual ghost image always being on the display. You may be thinking of OLED wear over time, becoming less bright - but it takes a significant amount of time for this. Theoretically I suppose if you used an OLED display for several hundred thousand hours it could eventually get so dim that you wouldn't want to use it anymore. But you are never going to hit that amount of hours. You will have moved onto something else long before then.

Sharpshooterrr said:
Can you please explain further?
Don't all amoled screens burn in regardless of use because of it's organic components?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My Galaxy S1 equivalent screen on my Samsung Epic was used 3 straight years as primary phone and didn't fade or burn-in.
I've read cliches' like this for years and mostly do not agree. The limitation I saw with using the older 2010 era Amoled screen was screen brightness in daylight. That's no longer an issue with newer Amoled panels since 2014 and always improving to the point Samsung Amoled panels exceed LCD panels in virtually every use category including brightness and efficiency.
Other users have experienced burn-in. My mother-in-law burned her S6 screen by charging phone and playing solitaire at same time. Not sure but I think fast charging was enabled. Heat combined with images that are continually displayed and not pixel shifted factor heavily with burn-in. So yes, it's possible but never happened to me. (Samsung does utilize pixel shift in the status bar to prevent burn-in. I'm unaware if pixel shift is used in third party applications like solitaire; her game used white cards on green background. Card images were retained and didn't respond to typical scrolling images to alleviate it.)
I don't use fast charging unless needed. Temperature can be bad on battery and display. I also try to avoid using my phone while in early stages of charging but my Note 4 does revert to slow charging when display is on.
IIRC, I read LG was transitioning to Amoled screens in late 2017. Apple is rumored to be switching to Amoled as well.
I've been known to squeeze 9 hours screen on time on my Note 4's stock 3220mah sized battery when mostly browsing on a single charge. Very much wanted the Note7 but locked bootloader kept me away before their battery became a headline exploding issue. Was also disappointed with edge only screen version and sealed battery. What an open for LG! I looked to LG to address shortcomings but lack of Amoled screen and locked bootloader prospect have me still looking and undecided for 2016 offerings thus far.
I may consider V20 if the bootloader was unlocked to allow TWRP and custom kernels. But I'd miss the Amoled screen. The battery door latch is cool though; I didn't want to lose removable battery feature and see little reason to trust Samsung's batteries to last 24 months without a letdown.
Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

Nitemare3219 said:
LG is falling behind in the smartphone display world. My Note7 is the best phone display I have ever had, by far, and that is no exaggeration. Yet here we are with another flagship release by LG who are using dated technology on the most important component of a phone - the display. IPS contrast sucks. Contrast is a huge deciding factor in image quality - perhaps the most important. Additionally, LCDs and IPS in particular have substantial pixel response motion blur over AMOLED. I HAD to return my HTC 10 because I couldn't stand using the display with how muddy it looked compared to the AMOLED on my 6P, even though HTC touted their display as having a fast response rate. Simple actions like pulling down the notification shade produced easily noticeable differences between the devices. LG is well aware of how great OLED is - they invest billions in their OLED TV division. I have spent $7,000 this year between their 65" and 55" OLED TVs, and they are mind-blowing. LG needs to either purchase Samsung display panels, or invest in their seriously lacking mobile division, because they're going to end up like HTC sooner or later at this rate.
I hope this IPS panel is at least an improvement. The contrast is likely no better than 2000:1, which is great for an IPS, but poor overall. I'm not stoked about the always-on-display in the ticker area either. It is far less useful than the G5's or Note7's - another step backwards. And at night, LCD always-on-displays also look like crap with tons of halo/light bleed. The lack of detailed performance specs at the launch event was disappointing. Using the SD 820 was a poor choice, and you could have easily thrown 6GB of RAM in there. And launching in a few weeks is idiotic as well. They could have capitalized on the Note7's recall and gotten their device out before the iPhone 7 if they wanted to. We'll be lucky to have it by October. There better be a decent promotion, because I am on the fence about buying this phone with its poor display, less than stellar battery (even if replaceable), lack of water resistance, and ugly UI. I must give credit where it is due, and that is the audio and camera capabilities are out of this world (except for the 5 MP front camera - WHY) - and I appreciate them destroying the competition in those VERY important areas., and keeping a removable battery with a premium and durable design. But this phone could have been the best of 2016 if they wanted it to be. This phone hardly has any advantage over the Axon 7 for far less cash.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Would the v20 screen be less bright than the N7?

Nitemare3219 said:
AMOLED doesn't burn in normal use conditions anymore - this isn't 2012.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, it is 2016 and burn in at OLED displays still occurs and will occur. No matter how it's called (supertrooper amoled etc). At my SG7E, I got burn in after 10 days - I used Waze 2 hours every day; brightness at 50% etc. I've been told thay would replace a display as it was in warranty, but I decided to get money back (14 days period) and I will never go for OLED again.

ISP was what has me interested in this device, despite swearing LG off. I do not like OLED, mostly for the burn in issue. Yes, the technology has improved but burn in still exists.
Regarding the screen, I do have one question. It's touted as having a 5.7 inch screen but isn't part of that the second screen? If you can't shut off the second screen and use that space for displaying what's on the main screen, then the device has a 5.5 inch screen, not 5.7.

Should be the main screen that is 5.7 inches. That's how the v10 is. With the second screen it's closer to 5.9"
Sent from my awesome T-Mobile LG V10!

That's be nice. A competitive price and I could be swayed back to LG, provided they offer an unlocked model and do so reasonabley quick.

Sammae7 said:
ISP was what has me interested in this device, despite swearing LG off. I do not like OLED, mostly for the burn in issue. Yes, the technology has improved but burn in still exists.
Regarding the screen, I do have one question. It's touted as having a 5.7 inch screen but isn't part of that the second screen? If you can't shut off the second screen and use that space for displaying what's on the main screen, then the device has a 5.5 inch screen, not 5.7.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The V10 an V20 really have one LCD. It is just partitioned into the main 5.7" display, and the top ticker display.

I'm glad that they decided on LCD instead of AMOLED. Despite what has been said in this thread, burn-in is still happening especially when on screen navigation buttons are used. That's why Samsung avoids them. Also uneven degradation happens fairly quick when the status bar is black, which is the case with many apps such as Chrome.

I for one am happy that LG using IPS instead of OLED because the majority of OLED screens flicker at 240hz, which causes eye problems I seem to have eye damage and cannot use OLED screens at all.
I wrote more info about this problem here

I have an amoled burn in in the top of my screen note 3 and 4
Technically it's brighter since the white isn't usually used, the rest of the screen lost a couple percent brightness
It's amoled ageing not burn in. I'm probably getting a v20 if it's rootable. Almost got a note 7 but can't stand no root, sealed battery and fires. I'll admit I'd rather have amoled but ips is ok. Kinda sucks on nexus 5, hope v20 is much better.

Nitemare3219 said:
LG is falling behind in the smartphone display world. My Note7 is the best phone display I have ever had, by far, and that is no exaggeration. Yet here we are with another flagship release by LG who are using dated technology on the most important component of a phone - the display. IPS contrast sucks. Contrast is a huge deciding factor in image quality - perhaps the most important. Additionally, LCDs and IPS in particular have substantial pixel response motion blur over AMOLED. I HAD to return my HTC 10 because I couldn't stand using the display with how muddy it looked compared to the AMOLED on my 6P, even though HTC touted their display as having a fast response rate. Simple actions like pulling down the notification shade produced easily noticeable differences between the devices. LG is well aware of how great OLED is - they invest billions in their OLED TV division. I have spent $7,000 this year between their 65" and 55" OLED TVs, and they are mind-blowing. LG needs to either purchase Samsung display panels, or invest in their seriously lacking mobile division, because they're going to end up like HTC sooner or later at this rate.
I hope this IPS panel is at least an improvement. The contrast is likely no better than 2000:1, which is great for an IPS, but poor overall. I'm not stoked about the always-on-display in the ticker area either. It is far less useful than the G5's or Note7's - another step backwards. And at night, LCD always-on-displays also look like crap with tons of halo/light bleed. The lack of detailed performance specs at the launch event was disappointing. Using the SD 820 was a poor choice, and you could have easily thrown 6GB of RAM in there. And launching in a few weeks is idiotic as well. They could have capitalized on the Note7's recall and gotten their device out before the iPhone 7 if they wanted to. We'll be lucky to have it by October. There better be a decent promotion, because I am on the fence about buying this phone with its poor display, less than stellar battery (even if replaceable), lack of water resistance, and ugly UI. I must give credit where it is due, and that is the audio and camera capabilities are out of this world (except for the 5 MP front camera - WHY) - and I appreciate them destroying the competition in those VERY important areas., and keeping a removable battery with a premium and durable design. But this phone could have been the best of 2016 if they wanted it to be. This phone hardly has any advantage over the Axon 7 for far less cash.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Non-full rgb amoled's are garbage. IPS is superior. Nothing to see here.

AMOLED vs P-OLED screen

From what I read in GSMArena website:
https://www.gsmarena.com/google_pixel_2-8733.php
https://www.gsmarena.com/google_pixel_2_xl-8720.php
Pixel 2 has AMOLED screen
Pixel 2 XL has P-OLED screen
I know with AMOLED screen, we can prolong the battery life by using BLACK wallpaper.
How about P-OLED screen?

OLED displays use less power when showing dark images because they turn off pixels that are not being used. Both are OLED displays.
In fact LG's "Plastic OLED" displays are active matrix displays, and Samsung's "Active Matrix OLED" displays these days use a plastic substrate, so the names "P-OLED" and "AMOLED" don't tell you anything important about them. They are just branding names for the two companies' implementations of the same basic ideas.

Large Hadron said:
OLED displays use less power when showing dark images because they turn off pixels that are not being used. Both are OLED displays.
In fact LG's "Plastic OLED" displays are active matrix displays, and Samsung's "Active Matrix OLED" displays these days use a plastic substrate, so the names "P-OLED" and "AMOLED" don't tell you anything important about them. They are just branding names for the two companies' implementations of the same basic ideas.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My understanding is that Samsung's "AMOLED" is a branding name, but LG's "POLED" is a more generic term. Also, although Samsung is using a plastic substrate in displays with curved edges, it is also possible to make AMOLED displays with glass, so they are not necessarily always identical in that regard to a POLED display. And even with regard to those instances where both Samsung and LG are using active matrix and a plastic substrate together, there are still some other more technical differences.
Here are some detailed explanations:
https://www.androidauthority.com/poled-vs-amoled-792869/
https://www.androidauthority.com/lg-v30-poled-vs-samsung-super-amoled-797330/

Indeed. Samsung's earlier OLEDs had glass substrates, but the flexible ones they've been using the last few years (including all of this year's flagships) are plastic.

I didn't follow the technology lately, but remember my Nexus One had AMOLED screen. Back then it was known AMOLED is prone to aging, and different colors fade through different time (thus the green clock, etc). I was wondering, is this still an issue with AMOLED, or nowadays it's much more advanced?

Generally speaking it's better than it was then (I had an early model HTC Desire, with the same panel), but by the nature of organic LEDs they do lose luminosity with usage (which is what can produce "burn in" effects), and at different rates for different colours (which is what produced that colour shift). An LCD has better longevity, and whatever the manufacturers claim we won't know for sure how resistent these particular panels are to such effects for a couple of years.
I'd personally rather have had a good LCD, because the things where OLED has a concrete advantage (faster response time for VR, darker when used in dark rooms) are of little to no importance for my usage, and I'd prefer not to even have a theoretical worry about these aging effects. But it wasn't a big enough concern to stop me ordering one; my Desire lasted me 3 years, and by the end there was a green tint that you could notice if you looked for it but wasn't bad enough to be a problem most of the time.

Sad to hear. So using the always-on ambient display thing is a bad idea. That's why I was concerned, not like I ever used it, but thought I would.

I expect that the ambient display will move around a bit so as not to constantly use the same pixels. I don't know this is the case, but it's what others do.
I've personally no real intention of using it. When my phone is not in use it's usually in a pocket, so it would just be a waste of energy.

Large Hadron said:
I expect that the ambient display will move around a bit so as not to constantly use the same pixels. I don't know this is the case, but it's what others do.
I've personally no real intention of using it. When my phone is not in use it's usually in a pocket, so it would just be a waste of energy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With ambient display, using my S8+ as an example, when you phone is in your pocket it either cuts off or dims to almost none use.

Does the screen have ghosting (low response rate)?

As it's a poor quality IPS, does the screen have any ghosting? I can't find an answer in any review. My old Oneplus 3T and dirt cheap Mi Max 2 also had IPS screens but they had zero ghosting, then I bought a Mate 20 which cost 3x more yet that DOES have ghosting, so if a high-end phone has ghosting it's likely the Zenfone 6 does too, especially if most people are saying it's a poor quality IPS.
This is the only video that mentions it has ghosting but it's the one guy, so I wanted more opinions to confirm:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8EH9_BEpAA

Vicxx said:
This is the only video that mentions it has ghosting but it's the one guy, so I wanted more opinions to confirm:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8EH9_BEpAA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you mean this part?
https://youtu.be/U8EH9_BEpAA?t=125

I had the G5S+, where I noticed ghosting. Coming to the zenfone I was concerned about the same stuff but there is significantly less ghosting on this screen. I'm actually not sure there are ghosting, if it is its miniscule.

_jis_ said:
Did you mean this part?
https://youtu.be/U8EH9_BEpAA?t=125
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes the way he describes it is exactly how I feel about my Mate 20, I'm thinking it might be using the same display. It's an amazing screen but as soon as I start scrolling text and images becomes blurry and I've never seen it this bad since the early 2000s LCD screens.
leiros said:
I had the G5S+, where I noticed ghosting. Coming to the zenfone I was concerned about the same stuff but there is significantly less ghosting on this screen. I'm actually not sure there are ghosting, if it is its miniscule.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what other phones have you used? the G5S+ has an IPS so it could've had ghosting.

Vicxx said:
yes the way he describes it is exactly how I feel about my Mate 20, I'm thinking it might be using the same display. It's an amazing screen but as soon as I start scrolling text and images becomes blurry and I've never seen it this bad since the early 2000s LCD screens.
what other phones have you used? the G5S+ has an IPS so it could've had ghosting.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nexus 4, Galaxy S3, Xperia Z2, Lenovo P2, G5S+ and this Zenfone 6.

I just tested it side by side with the HTC U11, it's actually more fluid than that one. Though I believe it has slightly smaller viewing angles.
I also think it's PWM free, it's quite ok to watch for longer periods. For comparison, the display on the LG G7 gave me a weird sensation (that one had PWM).

kvrx said:
I just tested it side by side with the HTC U11, it's actually more fluid than that one. Though I believe it has slightly smaller viewing angles.
I also think it's PWM free, it's quite ok to watch for longer periods. For comparison, the display on the LG G7 gave me a weird sensation (that one had PWM).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The G7 used PWM at a frequency of 1,174Hz, and then only at 42% brightness and below. If you're capable of noticing that you should go talk to Guinness about your record-breaking visual abilities.