or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › LCD Flat Panel Displays › Official Samsung UN75ES9000 Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Official Samsung UN75ES9000 Thread - Page 6

post #151 of 309
I really doubt it will make the 9000 obsolete.moreover with hte evolution kit coming out now that will make it a quad chip model.

But it will be interesting to see the price of both 75 inchers if a 75 inch 8000 really comes out. Not sure there is a market for 2 75 inch models,

As things are, the only thing that will surely make the 9000 obsolete in Samsung line are either 4K modles or OLED. The rest will be mostly repackage of same technologies at its best. 4K is a hugemstep forward in pic quality for what I have seen in person, but content both in TV broadcasting and movies is an issue and at least 2 or 3 years away. OLED at this sizes is probably also few year away for similar price levels. But those 2 technologies will eventualy make any LED TV obsolete.
post #152 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eelii08 View Post

As things are, the only thing that will surely make the 9000 obsolete in Samsung line are either 4K models or OLED. The rest will be mostly repackage of same technologies at its best. 4K is a hugemstep forward in pic quality for what I have seen in person, but content both in TV broadcasting and movies is an issue and at least 2 or 3 years away. OLED at this sizes is probably also few year away for similar price levels. But those 2 technologies will eventualy make any LED TV obsolete.

You raise some very good points. I've seen both the Sony and LG 4K models in person, an they are nothing short of breathtaking when displaying 4K content. I haven't had a chance to see what upconverted HD looks like on them yet, but I've read that it's pretty darn impressive as well. With 4K and OLED on the horizon, perhaps it doesn't make a lot of sense to invest in a super high-end 1080p display such as the 75" Sammy. It's definitely food for thought.
post #153 of 309
Yeah, I figure in another few years the 8000 series will be worth $189 on ebay just like my 61" DLP Samsung is now. I've had it for 9 years now so I'm looking to upgrade and 75" is the PERFECT size for my situation. My little issue is that I'm not willing to spend $10K on a 9000 when a 65" 8000 is a third of the price (street). It really makes no sense that they priced the 9000 so high, especially with the emerging OLED sets within striking range. And now we have the 75" F8000 with a rumored price circa $6500. I can't document this, but I saw it yesterday. IF that's true (and it's an admittedly big "if") then that means a street of $5K. Compared to $3500 for a 65" that seems reasonable to me. If this line of reasoning stands up, then that means the 9000 is a test marketing piece that just happens to have gouged early adopters and it also means it's an orphan.

The other alternative, of course, is that they will price the 75" F8000 right up there with the 9000 and simply "replace" it, restoring balance to the world and their numbering scheme. If they do that, then I maintain that for all intents and purposes they have priced themselves out of the 75" market. There are quite afew other brands that have a 75" alternative more in line with other pricing.
post #154 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by gweempose View Post

You raise some very good points. I've seen both the Sony and LG 4K models in person, an they are nothing short of breathtaking when displaying 4K content. I haven't had a chance to see what upconverted HD looks like on them yet, but I've read that it's pretty darn impressive as well. With 4K and OLED on the horizon, perhaps it doesn't make a lot of sense to invest in a super high-end 1080p display such as the 75" Sammy. It's definitely food for thought.

There is always something new on the horizon that serves to render current technology obsolete. The industry promotes these technological changes in order to drive further sepending by us the consumer. The relevant question then becomes, does the new technology emerging actually translate into a superior viewing experience for the consumer. In many cases it is. But, in other cases it may not translate into a clearly better viewing experience.

I know that there is a thread on the home page of AVS debating the merits of 4k. Certainly, more pixels are preferable to less if you are looking at this from a purely technological perspective. But, does it translate into a meaningfuly better viewing experience in most situations? The general opinion in that thread seems to be that in most cases it will not.

Why? Well, first of all there is a glaring lack of native 4k material with which to feed these new sets. Certainly, there are upconverting bluray players available now that upconvert to a 4k signal. But, never having seen this material with my own eyes, I must confess to a lack of knowledge of its quality. Beyond upconverting bluray players, nothing is available to feed native 4k material and certainly nothing on the horizon is in the works for network, cable or satellite signal.

Second (and to me the most relevant), a 4k picture seems to really only be beneficial on extremely large screens. Larger than 75 inches. Why? Because for most individuals, the seating distance will prevent them from being able to distinguish the difference between a 1080p image and 4k. The human eye just doesn't have the ability to discern a difference when considering the total screen size versus average distance to the viewer. When viewing an image on anything under a 100 inch screen or smaller, I would think that in order to tell a difference, you would have to sit so close to the screen that the whole experience would feel awkward.

What this means to me, is that 4k will only render 1080p obsolete in specific market segments (extremely large screen sizes), or when the price point of the technology is only marginally higher than the price points of 1080p sets for the same size. I doubt that is going to be the case for years still to come.

What IS relevant today, is a set's ability to render accurate color, screen uniformity, smooth motion, high contrast etc.,. The 75ES9000 excels in all of these areas. Whether or not it makes financial sense to invest in a television costing this much is difficult to know. The biggest issue would be the uncertainty of future pricing of 4k technology and how quickly pricing on 1080p drops in the future. I just know that TODAY, you can buy this television and enjoy the benefits of an excellent image that's capable of delivering a picture that will surpass the limitations of the human eye in most seating situations.

Many of the members of this forum are much more educated on this subject. Maybe they could weigh in with their opinions.
post #155 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by mschuyler View Post

Yeah, I figure in another few years the 8000 series will be worth $189 on ebay just like my 61" DLP Samsung is now. I've had it for 9 years now so I'm looking to upgrade and 75" is the PERFECT size for my situation. My little issue is that I'm not willing to spend $10K on a 9000 when a 65" 8000 is a third of the price (street). It really makes no sense that they priced the 9000 so high, especially with the emerging OLED sets within striking range. And now we have the 75" F8000 with a rumored price circa $6500. I can't document this, but I saw it yesterday. IF that's true (and it's an admittedly big "if") then that means a street of $5K. Compared to $3500 for a 65" that seems reasonable to me. If this line of reasoning stands up, then that means the 9000 is a test marketing piece that just happens to have gouged early adopters and it also means it's an orphan.
The other alternative, of course, is that they will price the 75" F8000 right up there with the 9000 and simply "replace" it, restoring balance to the world and their numbering scheme. If they do that, then I maintain that for all intents and purposes they have priced themselves out of the 75" market. There are quite afew other brands that have a 75" alternative more in line with other pricing.

Yeah, I can understand where you're coming from. The 9000 is not a television for the mass consumer. The price point is too high.

However, at least with respect to the 2012 models, there does seem to be a relevant difference in picture quality in the 9000 versus the 8000 series. Very little or no flashlighting / clouding exists in the 9000. Whereas the 8000 seems to have some issues with this. And, there is no 75 in. 8000 series. How would that stack up against the 9000 if it existed? No one knows.

People fail to acknowledge that even though there is only 10 inches difference between the two sets, those 10 inches technologically seem to have a marked impact on a manufacturers ability to keep screen uniformity and flashlighting in check.

Purchase decisions in this area are all relative. To YOU, the difference in price is not worth it. And, I can understand. But for those that have the money and the desire to buy a set in this size and want one of the best pictures available today, it can make perfect sense. And, OLED sets in this size are not within striking range. At some point maybe they will be, but not in the next several years...at least.
post #156 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by stoks4you View Post

Well, first of all there is a glaring lack of native 4k material with which to feed these new sets. Certainly, there are upconverting bluray players available now that upconvert to a 4k signal. Beyond upconverting bluray players, nothing is available to feed native 4k material and certainly nothing on the horizon is in the works for network, cable or satellite signal.

Just like the current 1080p sets, the 4K sets will internally scale any incoming signal to the panel's native resolution. In the case of the Sony, it appears to have an extremely robust upscaling chipset that was designed specifically for the set. So you don't necessarily need an upconverting Blu-ray player to reap the benefits. I realize that the upscaled content will never look as good as native 4K source material, but from the reviews I've read, the results are rather impressive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stoks4you View Post

Second (and to me the most relevant), a 4k picture seems to really only be beneficial on extremely large screens.

To me, the biggest benefit of a 4K screen at this point in time is its ability to show passive 1080p 3D without sacrificing resolution. Is it worth paying three times what the 75" Sammy costs just to gain this benefit? I guess that depends on how much money someone has to shell out on an entertainment device. smile.gif
post #157 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by stoks4you View Post

However, at least with respect to the 2012 models, there does seem to be a relevant difference in picture quality in the 9000 versus the 8000 series. Very little or no flashlighting / clouding exists in the 9000. Whereas the 8000 seems to have some issues with this. And, there is no 75 in. 8000 series. How would that stack up against the 9000 if it existed? No one knows.

At this stage why are we even talking 2012 models? The UN75F8000 is here: http://www.theverge.com/products/un75f8000/6615 So the question remains: How are they going to price this model? Will they price it in line with the other F8000 models or will they try to skim the top of the market?
Quote:
Purchase decisions in this area are all relative. To YOU, the difference in price is not worth it. And, I can understand. But for those that have the money and the desire to buy a set in this size and want one of the best pictures available today, it can make perfect sense. And, OLED sets in this size are not within striking range. At some point maybe they will be, but not in the next several years...at least.

Of course, but this gets into the statistics of the market. Just how many people ARE willing to pay three times more for ten inches? Sure there are people who don't care one way or another whether they are gouged because they have enough discretionary money so that it is meaningless, At ANY price point there are people who will put on the brakes and not go any further and fewer people who will forge ahead. If not $10K for a 75" why not spend $25K for a big OLED? And the LG 55" OLED is priced at $12K, surely not out of range for the $10K buyer. We're not privy to their market research. Perhaps their break-even point for the 2012 9000 really is at the $10K mark and they simply would not sell enough sets at a lower price point to make it worthwhile.

But you've got to admit that something is awry here. It doesn't fit their normal pattern. The 9000 was introduced oddly, priced oddly, and numbered oddly. The new 75F8000 is at least introduced and numbered properly. Now we just have to wait for the price.
post #158 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by mschuyler View Post

At this stage why are we even talking 2012 models? The UN75F8000 is here: http://www.theverge.com/products/un75f8000/6615 So the question remains: How are they going to price this model? Will they price it in line with the other F8000 models or will they try to skim the top of the market?

The 2012 model discussion is relevant because as far as I know, no 9000 model has been announced yet for 2013. There was a noticeable difference in the quality of the picture between the 8000 series and 9000 series in 2012. People weren't just paying a higher price for an extra 10 inches. The 9000 series had a superior quality picture. Why? I do not know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mschuyler View Post

Of course, but this gets into the statistics of the market. Just how many people ARE willing to pay three times more for ten inches? Sure there are people who don't care one way or another whether they are gouged because they have enough discretionary money so that it is meaningless, At ANY price point there are people who will put on the brakes and not go any further and fewer people who will forge ahead. If not $10K for a 75" why not spend $25K for a big OLED? And the LG 55" OLED is priced at $12K, surely not out of range for the $10K buyer. We're not privy to their market research. Perhaps their break-even point for the 2012 9000 really is at the $10K mark and they simply would not sell enough sets at a lower price point to make it worthwhile.

But you've got to admit that something is awry here. It doesn't fit their normal pattern. The 9000 was introduced oddly, priced oddly, and numbered oddly. The new 75F8000 is at least introduced and numbered properly. Now we just have to wait for the price.

I would guess that very few individuals would pay three times the price of the 65in for a 75 in. However, throw in the possibility of a superior picture and you would have more takers. You've oversimplified the comparison by limiting the differences to just inches.

As for OLED? I don't really know. I've never seen an OLED in person. I assume the picture would be superior to the LCD tech. Is the improved color and contrast compelling enough for buyers to pay substantially more money for a set that is smaller in size? Maybe. For some, maybe the bigger issue is screen size.

Here's what it boils down too...For 2012, the difference between the 9000 series and the 8000 series was more than screen size. You can't draw cost comparisons between the two series on size alone. The larger size AND superior picture of the 9000 make the pricing discrepancy vs the 8000 less odd in my opinion.

If the new 75 in F8000 has a picture comparable to last years 75 in 9000, and is substantially less expensive, then Samsung is going to have a hit on their hands.
post #159 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by stoks4you View Post

The 2012 model discussion is relevant because as far as I know, no 9000 model has been announced yet for 2013. There was a noticeable difference in the quality of the picture between the 8000 series and 9000 series in 2012. People weren't just paying a higher price for an extra 10 inches. The 9000 series had a superior quality picture. Why? I do not know.
I would guess that very few individuals would pay three times the price of the 65in for a 75 in. However, throw in the possibility of a superior picture and you would have more takers. You've oversimplified the comparison by limiting the differences to just inches.

I really don't think I'm oversimplifying. Or if I am, I'm certainly not the only one. For example, when i asked why the 9000 was so much more expensive on the 8000 thread, jestered replied:
Quote:
Because it was such a strange way of releasing that 75" model, I would assume it was more of a market/demand test for Samsung than anything. The talked about that TV being the ES8000 version last year, but when it was released they rebranded the model to the ES9000 with a huge price tag. That TV is nothing more than the 65" with an upgraded dimming system and larger screen and that's all. It's really an ES8000.

I've heard this sentiment elsewhere as well. Of course we're talking subjective issues here. I've not seen the two sets next to each other and likely never will. In any case, I'm probably drifting off topic here. My apologies. For now it's just a waiting game. CES 2013 gave us some new numbers and precious litttle data to work with.
post #160 of 309
Yes, and also we are talking of teh 75 ES9000 model be ouse this is the thread of such model.... Not the 75 8000 or any other.... As in other model's threads, people posting discuss the model, are mostly owners or people considering buying it.

That is surely what I would like to read here. The 75 8000 may be a great tv, or not I dont know. But maybe starting a new thread for it makes more sense. If the 9000 is expensive or not, is for each one to decide. I dont see the point formthose ones who think so and would never buy it to post just to say that, franklymspeaking. Though I respect it, dont see how it can be of use to any owner of the model.
post #161 of 309
If you can download the LG 3D demo. And watch it seating at 1,5 meters... You are literaly inside thenscreen. I just tried it and still freaking out. And I am not a fan of 3D at all. Incredible...
post #162 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by mschuyler View Post

. There are quite afew other brands that have a 75" alternative more in line with other pricing.

What other 75" Brands/models are there?

Thanks
post #163 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by moonhawk View Post

What other 75" Brands/models are there?

Thanks

Assuming you'll allow a little variation since none are exact, including samsung, the ones I was thinking about are the cirrently available Sharp LC-70C847U at $4000 list and about $3300 street, and the new as yet unavailable sony KDL-70R550A with no price announced. Both are billed as 70" sets with similar specs to the samsung.

The real issue for me is what can I fot on a credenza that is 66" wide? Assuming a narrow bezel and no huge speakers a 75" fits perfectly, but an 80", which Sharp also sells, is too wide.
post #164 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by mschuyler View Post

Assuming you'll allow a little variation since none are exact, including samsung, the ones I was thinking about are the cirrently available Sharp LC-70C847U at $4000 list and about $3300 street, and the new as yet unavailable sony KDL-70R550A with no price announced. Both are billed as 70" sets with similar specs to the samsung.

The real issue for me is what can I fot on a credenza that is 66" wide? Assuming a narrow bezel and no huge speakers a 75" fits perfectly, but an 80", which Sharp also sells, is too wide.

For me, too, the form factor is as important as the actual size. Mine sits in front of a large picture window, and I hate to block the view, so I need to mount as low as possible. So, a low stand and a thin bezel, like this Sammy has, allows me a larger screen size taking up no more space. $9K is a little steep though, so I'm, looking for price info on the new F8000.

Thanks for the info, I'll check out those models you mentioned.
post #165 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by mschuyler View Post

Assuming you'll allow a little variation since none are exact, including samsung, the ones I was thinking about are the cirrently available Sharp LC-70C847U at $4000 list and about $3300 street, and the new as yet unavailable sony KDL-70R550A with no price announced. Both are billed as 70" sets with similar specs to the samsung.

The real issue for me is what can I fot on a credenza that is 66" wide? Assuming a narrow bezel and no huge speakers a 75" fits perfectly, but an 80", which Sharp also sells, is too wide.

The only thing that Sharp has in common with the 75ES9000, is that they are both at least 70 inches in size.

I'm not sure if you are seriously trying to compare that Sharp to the Samsung discussed in this thread, but there is absolutely no comparison in picture quality. None. At all.

Others in this thread who have actually compared both in person have stated so as well.
post #166 of 309
As much as I need a new TV and want to pull the trigger on the 9000, I think it would be silly at this point not to at least wait to see what the deal is with the 75F8000. If the new 8000 turns out to be as good or better than the 9000 for less money, I'd feel like a chump for buying the 9000 when I could have just waited a couple months.
post #167 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by gweempose View Post

As much as I need a new TV and want to pull the trigger on the 9000, I think it would be silly at this point not to at least wait to see what the deal is with the 75F8000. If the new 8000 turns out to be as good or better than the 9000 for less money, I'd feel like a chump for buying the 9000 when I could have just waited a couple months.

I agree wholeheartedly. Certainly, if you have the ability to wait, it would be well worth looking at the new F8000.

However, comparing the 75ES9000 to other televisions like the Sharp referenced earlier, is laughable to anyone that actually cares about picture quality. Trying to draw comparisons between the two by focusing primarily on price differential is absurd. Anyone who has actually invested the time and energy to research it in person knows this to be the case.

The fact remains that the 75ES9000 has arguably the best in terms of picture quality of any set available today in the 70 inch to 75 inch category. Whether you consider this a value, is a matter of opinion.
post #168 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by stoks4you View Post

I agree wholeheartedly. Certainly, if you have the ability to wait, it would be well worth looking at the new F8000.

However, comparing the 75ES9000 to other televisions like the Sharp referenced earlier, is laughable to anyone that actually cares about picture quality. Trying to draw comparisons between the two by focusing primarily on price differential is absurd. Anyone who has actually invested the time and energy to research it in person knows this to be the case.

The fact remains that the 75ES9000 has arguably the best in terms of picture quality of any set available today in the 70 inch to 75 inch category. Whether you consider this a value, is a matter of opinion.

Carefull about saying...the fact remains that the 75ES9000 has arguably the best in terms of PQ in any set available today in the 70" category. The Elite Pro-70X5 owners will certainly argue that point.
post #169 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by bekindrewind View Post

Carefull about saying...the fact remains that the 75ES9000 has arguably the best in terms of PQ in any set available today in the 70" category. The Elite owners will certainly argue that point.

Yes, I chose the word "arguably" as opposed to the word "definitively" for just that reason.

I wrestled with deciding between the Sharp Elite 70 in. and the 9000. In the end, my subjective opinion was that the 9000 had a better picture. I also much preferred the thin bezel of the 9000 to the Elite.

But certainly, the Elite is a fine set.

Although, strangely enough, there seems to be quite a bit of owner discontent in recent posts in the Elite thread.
post #170 of 309
So, was wondering, now that people have these for a while now, what setings owners are using as their best. I keep playing around and trying to figure out.

Seems like movie is best for BD and HD 1080p files. I have read people tend to turn all options off but I am not sure that yields better image quality.

Pnly thing sure far I now for sure, is in my case motion plus for movies only works in mild or off.
post #171 of 309
I just cancelled my order on the Elite 70", and ordered the ES9000 after reading all the complaints in the Elite owners forum. There are folks that have gone through 5 or 6 of those sets trying to find one without what they consider to be unacceptable issues. There was an ES9000 at the shop I had ordered mine from, and in my humble opinion, I do feel that the Elite does have slightly better PQ ( the black levels, and the processing does seem to be MARGINALLY better ) , having said that, the ES9000 was in a less favorable location. The Elite was in a bit of an alcove with next to no lighting sources anywhere nearby, whereas the ES9000 was directly across from some large windows and had tons of reflected sunlight off of the cars in the parking lot coming in through the large windows. The screen on the ES9000 was very reflective in that environment, and when there were black screens it was mirror-like. I commented to the sales person that there must be some strange voodoo going on with that set because I could not find any issues at all that I have seen with other edge-lit tv's. Screen uniformity was definitely comparable to the Elite's which really surprised me as the Elite has full-array LED backlighting with local dimming. Now I just have to keep my fingers crossed that it arrives before Super Sunday :P

I will post pictures when it arrives, and hopefully some of the current owners on here will post some thoughts on preferred settings. I did flip through the picture modes in the store and natural and movie both seemed pretty good for out of the box, and other than adjusting contrast down to 85 in the natural mode, it looked like it will require little adjusting to get a great picture.
Edited by pred1973 - 1/21/13 at 12:21pm
post #172 of 309
Congrats Pred1973

I use Movies for that, movies on BD and HD source. For regular TV and HD TV I use standars.

Regarding all the settings I am still playing around trying to find the best? PQ is very good out of the box already, but to get it fine tuned is a bit more dificult with all the alternatives.

Right now I have settings at

Movies
Advance settings
Dynamic contrast mid
Vlack tone: midpic options
Colour tone warm2

DNF and MPEG noise filter auto
hDMI black level low
Motion plus clear
Led motion plus off
Smart led standard
Cinema black on

Backlight! Contrast and the rest trying to figure out.

In reality, the only settings I am clear I will leave a motion plus set to clear and HDMI black level set to low, and cinema black on.

The rest still experimenting.
post #173 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by pred1973 View Post

I just cancelled my order on the Elite 70", and ordered the ES9000 after reading all the complaints in the Elite owners forum. There are folks that have gone through 5 or 6 of those sets trying to find one without what they consider to be unacceptable issues. There was an ES9000 at the shop I had ordered mine from, and in my humble opinion, I do feel that the Elite does have slightly better PQ ( the black levels, and the processing does seem to be MARGINALLY better ) , having said that, the ES9000 was in a less favorable location. The Elite was in a bit of an alcove with next to no lighting sources anywhere nearby, whereas the ES9000 was directly across from some large windows and had tons of reflected sunlight off of the cars in the parking lot coming in through the large windows. The screen on the ES9000 was very reflective in that environment, and when there were black screens it was mirror-like. I commented to the sales person that there must be some strange voodoo going on with that set because I could not find any issues at all that I have seen with other edge-lit tv's. Screen uniformity was definitely comparable to the Elite's which really surprised me as the Elite has full-array LED backlighting with local dimming. Now I just have to keep my fingers crossed that it arrives before Super Sunday :P

I will post pictures when it arrives, and hopefully some of the current owners on here will post some thoughts on preferred settings. I did flip through the picture modes in the store and natural and movie both seemed pretty good for out of the box, and other than adjusting contrast down to 85 in the natural mode, it looked like it will require little adjusting to get a great picture.

Congrats on the purchase! I really think you're going to be happy with the set once you have it dialed in.

I know the Elite's are a great set, but I spent a considerable amount of time researching and viewing the Elite 70 vs. the ES9000 and I am convinced that for me, the ES9000 was a superior television. You summed it up appropriately by stating there must be some "voodoo" going on with this set, because it definitely seems to avoid the issues that plague other edge lit televisions. In mine, there is no flashlighting, clouding or uniformity issues. At all. I find myself continually amazed at the quality of the picture.

Once you receive the set, please let us know your impressions when you've had time to get it up and running. I would love to hear about it.
post #174 of 309
Apparently it will take a week to arrive. So until then its reading reviews (of which there is less than handful so far, not including the many "reviews" that are really just regurgitated press releases it seems) and hunting for settings (Thanks to Eelii08 for posting yours) to give me a starting point when setting it up. There does seem to be a fair bit of disbelief over in the Elite owners thread over my comments that I thought the PQ of the 2 sets were highly comparable. I would never say that I thought it was good value, but there does seem to be a higher WAF factor than a lot of TV's so thats got to be worth something LOL.
post #175 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by pred1973 View Post

I would never say that I thought it was good value, but there does seem to be a higher WAF factor than a lot of TV's so thats got to be worth something LOL.

If there is one thing I've learned in this hobby, you should never underestimate the WAF. A powerful thing indeed. smile.gif
post #176 of 309
Well, she is a lot more likely to use the online features of the tv. I will use the Skype feature, but other than that, I usually have a HTPC connected for anything I would want to do online which I have found is ALWAYS superior to anything built into the tv. But my wife does seem to enjoy her ipad and having access to FB, email, and she is also into those pop culture mini-games that you get on the app store, so I'm sure she will get a kick out of the Angry Birds game. Whether or not the apps on the tv make her put down the ipad remains to be seen tongue.gif For me, I like watching movies and have no interest in using the PIP to have social media stuff onscreen at the same time.
post #177 of 309
I am trying the settings of CNET for the model ES8000. I can't find any settings fo the 9000 and it sees noone got their done, so I figure out I would give it a try.

will report how I feel they work. SO far from just a few minutes seems ok.

2 questions:

how do you select the color space in this tvs? (RGB or YCbCr)?

Under system, general, anyone knows what anti flicker is supposed to be at (50 or 60). It is confusing. I have to say I am no expert and not familiar with samsung menus, but was not this a 120 or 240hz tv? Or is it a complete diferent thing?
post #178 of 309
Also, anyone knows how to set up the picture mode to 1080 24p to whatch BD and similar 24fps files?
post #179 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eelii08 View Post

I am trying the settings of CNET for the model ES8000. I can't find any settings fo the 9000 and it sees noone got their done, so I figure out I would give it a try.

will report how I feel they work. SO far from just a few minutes seems ok.

2 questions:

how do you select the color space in this tvs? (RGB or YCbCr)?

Under system, general, anyone knows what anti flicker is supposed to be at (50 or 60). It is confusing. I have to say I am no expert and not familiar with samsung menus, but was not this a 120 or 240hz tv? Or is it a complete diferent thing?

As far as I know, color space is set on your source, but I could be mistaken, as mine doesn't arrive until tomorrow and I am just going off reading the manual online.

Anti flicker should be set to 60, that has to do with the frequency of electricity the tv is getting, 50 would be for Europe/Asia if I am not mistaken.
post #180 of 309
Ok, the settings of CNET for the ES8000 are Ok. Colors are fine, but you do loose detail, and overall the image is a bit dull. I think I am going back to the standard settings. However some of the settings do seem to work.

If you set up smart led motion as they suggest (custom with se settings they say) it works quite well. You don't get that opera soap effect or however ut is called. I used to leave that either off or mild, but I think this way looks better.

Thanks for reply. Color space I have set it both, in source and receiver with the same settings. But I thought it had to be set in TV as well. I just don't see where. Not an expert at all. But for what I have read here and there, it should be set the same in all the reproduction chain, including TV. But I may be wrong.

Are you sure on the anti flicker setting? I am in Europe so I guess I should set it at 50hz than? I thought it had to do with refresh of the screen?

thanks for answering.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: LCD Flat Panel Displays
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › LCD Flat Panel Displays › Official Samsung UN75ES9000 Thread