I can't say gamma shift bothers me nearly as much as the lack of contrast and off-angle glow from IPS panels. Significant color shift (TN-like) does annoy me, but I haven't observed that with most VA momitors I have seen.
Well everyone has their own preferences, but I really dislike how much the image changes on VA-type panels when you move your head even slightly.
Don't get me wrong, I obviously appreciate the extra contrast, but I'm not convinced that the trade-off is worth it when IPS is better in nearly every other way.
I want to learn more about that first, on paper and in the marketing that panel simply sounds too good to be true.
Sharp actually had a prototype a decade ago which used the same principle to achieve 1,000,000:1 native contrast too, it's just that Panasonic are the first to put a display like that into production.
Basically you have two LCD panels - your "display" panel, and a monochrome panel behind it to modulate the backlight.
Two 1000:1 panels layered like this result in a display with 1,000,000 contrast.
There are obviously a lot of technical challenges in producing a display like this, but that's the basic principle behind it.
I see no reason to doubt their claims - especially when that display is aimed at professional markets.
I think that's a solvable issue, as demonstrated by LG's TVs. The nice thing about OLED is that you start with something which is already excellent for gaming - extremely low switching times and great contrast - rather than all the inherent compromises of LCD tech.
LG's OLEDs have been stuck around 150 nits fullscreen brightness for years too. They've barely made any progress in that regard.
All their brightness improvements are in small area brightness, not fullscreen brightness.
They're also using an RGBW pixel structure which trades off image quality and accuracy to cheat brightness measurements. That's not really acceptable for a PC monitor.
The AOC doesn't appear to have ULMB, the others look to be almost identical outside price.
The thing with ULMB is that it's an absolutely awesome tech, held back by some annoying limitations.
They get nearly everything right - it's single-strobe, and you have full control over the duty cycle.
Except it only works at 85/100/120/144Hz frequencies - and only some of those are available depending on which monitor it is.
The main time I would be wanting to use ULMB instead of G-Sync would be in games that are capped to 60 FPS and do not fully benefit from G-Sync.
But you can't use ULMB with those games, since it starts at 85Hz.
Additionally, even if it
did support 60Hz, it's really difficult to run a lot of games at a
locked 60 FPS without ever dropping a frame.
Any time the framerate does drop with ULMB, it's going to be even more noticeable than a regular display which doesn't have G-Sync.
It's frustrating that you have to choose between motion clarity and motion smoothness, and that you don't have the option to use ULMB at lower refresh rates where it would be most useful.
I don't know that there is really a solution to it though. I just wish that if you do have to make that choice, that they'd actually let it work at all refresh rates instead of being so restricted.
