Originally Posted by Do-It-Yourself
This is something not worth fretting about.
Other companies "falsely advertise" refresh rate. In a sense, Sony advertises "MotionFlow XR [Refresh Rate]" indicating the usage of MotionFlow that allow the said refresh rate. Nothing wrong with that. However, "falsely advertise" is a rather strong accusation... and misleading as you've said is a more appropriate term. But even if it's misleading, it still shows the refresh rate the television is capable of doing. Native 120hz and perceived 240hz processing. It shouldn't make you go all whilly wanka over 120hz vs 240hz honestly.
Otherwise what makes Samsung still the way to go? They aren't any more honest than any other company. Enjoy your unit as you probably will not EVEN notice an improvement with a native 240hz set buddy
I noticed you keep up with the usual rhetoric regarding 120hz. The OP thinks the specs are identical, and if you go off some websites they incorrectly list the EX720's specs. Most notably the refresh rate. Some people are on the market for a 240hz hdtv, regardless of what you think about refresh rates. Making sure you are not buying something you think is something else in regards to specs does matter and it is better the OP goes into it knowing that.
Look I am not going to pretend to be a "HDTV Pro", but when even Cnet is skeptical about 120hz 3D Tvs, regardless of their "gimmicky hz emulation", then I would pause to even consider what you say is "true".
There is a reason 240hz and 120hz exist, and if you continue to spout (regardless of what even others have said) there is no visual difference, and therefore no point, then Its hard to take you seriously. Not everyone can see a 3D image with this technology, and not everyone can see the difference in quality between the two. Maybe you are one of them.
Sony's previous motionflow, called motionflow pro was in reference to the actual hz. It seems by switching out the pro with XR is an intentional marketing ploy,between 2010 and 2011, as a means to lower the hz but keep the same perception as pro.
Also you are insinuating that i said "false advertising", with quotations and then say Its more misleading than false advertising.
Since you DO bring up false advertising, your own words in this thread, not mine, but when a TV is advertised as being 240hz, along with all the other true 240hz HDTVs (many times under a specific filtering system), and it is 120hz instead, it is false advertising and is not overly strong. YOU CANNOT LOGICALLY begin to dispute that. I didnt say it was entirely on Sony's end. Check out how Amazon sells the EX720 by the way. [Sony BRAVIA KDL40EX720 40-Inch 1080p 240 Hz 3D LED HDTV, Black]
Is listing the actual refresh rate at 240hz. No matter what you are saying this is false information, and quite frankly, it matters to some people.
Finally, I have yet to see a Samsung HDTV that incorrectly advertises or hints at a different refresh rate through gimmicky naming conventions (not to say they havent, but I personally havent seen it). In fact they had specifically said they will not do that regarding refresh rates (article from 2009/2010 I believe). It seems Sony fell in line with LG and others emulating hz rather than delivering true hz. Samsung isnt the Messiah for hdtvs by any means, but after seeing first hand the differences in image and build quality between the two, Samsung is clearly (pun intended) better.
The OP is asking about 3D tvs, and for a "3D" tv the hz do matter for stereoscopic viewing regardless of your opinion.