or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › LCD Flat Panel Displays ›  Samsung F8000 -- 2013 Flagship Models
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung F8000 -- 2013 Flagship Models - Page 47

post #1381 of 3645
Is there a list of all the reviews available? I can't find any technical reviews, as they seem to be mostly just plain and bland. Here's some I read so far:
http://reviews.*******************.com/samsung-tv/samsung-un55f8000.html(I think this guy just saw the TV at CES, not a proper review)
http://thenewlivingroom.com/samsung-un55f8000-review-55-smart-led-hdtv/ (decent, but doesn't get very technical)
http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-UN55F8000-55-Inch-1080p-240Hz/product-reviews/B00BCGRLUI (Pretty decent review from someone who's about to publish a proper review I think)

Any others?

edit: Looks like the starred out one is fishy anyways
Edited by phobium - 3/17/13 at 10:18am
post #1382 of 3645
That's what I'm hoping. But my biggest concern is that tvs are more like computers now. when I was a little kid in the early 70s, my Dad bought a tv that lasted until the early 90s. He bought another that lasted until the late 00s, and it was only switched out because the redecorated the room it was in. Now, like computers, I think tvs might have a useful life of 4-5 years before they're surpassed by technology. Hopefully I'm wrong.
post #1383 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dstone001 View Post

That's what I'm hoping. But my biggest concern is that tvs are more like computers now. when I was a little kid in the early 70s, my Dad bought a tv that lasted until the early 90s. He bought another that lasted until the late 00s, and it was only switched out because the redecorated the room it was in. Now, like computers, I think tvs might have a useful life of 4-5 years before they're surpassed by technology. Hopefully I'm wrong.

When they finally release the Evolution Kits for the 2012 models, we'll get a good idea of how upgrade-able these TVs are.
post #1384 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by AGuy01 View Post

Yeah, I was wondering what the heck was going on with my F8000 when it did that. All of a sudden the image just started to fade. But it and other eco modes can indeed be disabled. The dimming also turns itself off if you adjust any of the core brightness settings, as well.

Sorry to belabor a point, but this would be a big deal. What specific setting are you changing in standard mode that turns on/off the auto dimming? Also, Cinema black used to be an on/off feature, not low/medium/high. What differences have you noticed with this setting? Is it still intended to dim the top/bottom bars in widescreen content? Can you confirm that cinema black is available in standard mode?

Thanks!
post #1385 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavinwow View Post

Sorry to belabor a point, but this would be a big deal. What specific setting are you changing in standard mode that turns on/off the auto dimming? Also, Cinema black used to be an on/off feature, not low/medium/high. What differences have you noticed with this setting? Is it still intended to dim the top/bottom bars in widescreen content? Can you confirm that cinema black is available in standard mode?

Thanks!

The dimming I was referring to is some kind of eco mode that just lowered the brightness depending on what was playing in the Standard preset, not the LED zone dimming (Smart LED), but both of those can be enabled, disabled and configured in every picture preset. Cinema Black does indeed work to keep the top and bottom bars consistently black in widescreen content, and it is available in every mode save for 3D. Even with it off in 3D, though, the bars were perfectly black and uniform.

I really don't have any complaints about the picture quality. I've noticed no flashlighting, clouding, uniformity issues of any kind, banding, or stuttering on my 55" model. I love this TV. It absolutely devours the Sony HX850 that I had before this.
post #1386 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dstone001 View Post

I just bought one (55") from Best Buy. I need a tv fast and, what the hell. I can't believe I spent this much $ on a tv, but I said that 4 years ago when I bought the a850 (which I loved). It arrives on Tuesday. This thing better last 10 years. I'm sure I'll regret it in the morning. smile.gif

I had and miss my A850 mad.gif.

You picked a worthy successor...I went through 2 D series and an ES series Samsung.

I saw the F8000 at Best Buy a few days ago.

I was just as impressed with the F8000 as the A850 back in '09.
post #1387 of 3645
My local store just got the f8000 in today along with the lg la7400, the f8000 store mode still has washed out colors
post #1388 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trackman View Post

Ken would be better able to answer, as he's had both lcds and plasmas, but plasmas are often thougth to have a more film-like image, whereas lcds appear more digital. Like Ken, I don't mind the lcd look - I see it a a sharper image. Also, lcds often suffer from screen uniformity issues which degrade the picture. The final factor is off-center viewing angle, where lcds rapidly degrade in color fidelity and contrast '

Yup. LCDs biggest drawback, once you get to the better ones where overall PQ is excellent, is off-axis viewing. This is still a problem that hasn't been solved and where plasma still trumps LED. Screen uniformity issues vary with model and sometimes from sample to sample. Sometimes, like in my 60" Elite, it is actually excellent. I've seen others that are also very good. My friend's Sony 929 had very good uniformity, the 929 I had wasn't so good. I can tell you first-hand that even my 60" Kuro had screen uniformity issues, so I don't see this problem as unique to LED/LCDs, although it's more common in the latter.

Interestingly, Ed Johnson, the excellent ISF calibrator that Robert used for his F8000, pretty much verified what I had said in a previous post about the ANSI CRs that Buzzard had posted and their 'real world' value. Despite the good, but by the numbers, less than 'stellar' CR of the F8000 that Ed had measured, he made a comment that perfectly reflects the point I had made. He said that regardless of how much bright content was in the scene, blacks remained black to the eye. Instrumentation would have and did pick up a slight rise in black levels as bright content increased, thereby dropping the ANSI CR, but this black level increase was never visible to the naked eye. Call me crazy, but that's what counts in my book, how does the picture look to the naked eye.

Additionally, as Ed commented, he had set peak white to 56fl and if it had been set to a level more appropriate for a dark room, the peak whites would have been lower as would be the increase in black levels. Again, he never saw a rise in black levels regardless of content. Blacks were jet black as has been the observations of others.

Numbers are great and they do give us a basis for comparison, but used in a vacuum, their usefulness can be diminished.

Let the flames begin. wink.gif
post #1389 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by zAndy12 View Post

You know what's confusing me no end is that the reviews of this TV have been universally amazing, owner reviews as well so far have been overwhelmingly positive. The blacks are inky black, the greyscale , colours etc are all reference after calibration and yet we get comments from e.g, Corey Fisher saying the F8500 plasma is far superior to this and I have to ask myself 'in what way'. If all of the reviews of the F8000 LED are so favourable, even from respected calibrators and reviewers on various forums then there can't be anything 'wrong' with the picture on the F8000 can there and therefore I have to ask how is the F8500 plasma so much better? Are the blacks more inky black, is the grey scale and colour reproduction more reference , it baffles me to be honest. This TV on the face of it ticks all the boxes for me, size, style, performance etc but what's the compromise cos there clearly is one if the F8500 plasma for example is so much better?

Thanks

Andy, you might ask yourself how he can say this when at the time of his writing the F8500 hadn't even been released. So where did he see it (short of CES) that he came to this conclusion. My guess? He's just basing it on what he 'thinks' will be the results. Yet another very unscientific way to conduct any comparisons.
post #1390 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Yup. LCDs biggest drawback, once you get to the better ones where overall PQ is excellent, is off-axis viewing. This is still a problem that hasn't been solved and where plasma still trumps LED. Screen uniformity issues vary with model and sometimes from sample to sample. Sometimes, like in my 60" Elite, it is actually excellent. I've seen others that are also very good. My friend's Sony 929 had very good uniformity, the 929 I had wasn't so good. I can tell you first-hand that even my 60" Kuro had screen uniformity issues, so I don't see this problem as unique to LED/LCDs, although it's more common in the latter.

Interestingly, Ed Johnson, the excellent ISF calibrator that Robert used for his F8000, pretty much verified what I had said in a previous post about the ANSI CRs that Buzzard had posted and their 'real world' value. Despite the good, but by the numbers, less than 'stellar' CR of the F8000 that Ed had measured, he made a comment that perfectly reflects the point I had made. He said that regardless of how much bright content was in the scene, blacks remained black to the eye. Instrumentation would have and did pick up a slight rise in black levels as bright content increased, thereby dropping the ANSI CR, but this black level increase was never visible to the naked eye. Call me crazy, but that's what counts in my book, how does the picture look to the naked eye.

Additionally, as Ed commented, he had set peak white to 56fl and if it had been set to a level more appropriate for a dark room, the peak whites would have been lower as would be the increase in black levels. Again, he never saw a rise in black levels regardless of content. Blacks were jet black as has been the observations of others.

Numbers are great and they do give us a basis for comparison, but used in a vacuum, their usefulness can be diminished.

Let the flames begin. wink.gif

Thanks for your input Ken! I will wait for the 60"F8000 and pray it is just as good as the 55" and then come December, I will make this model my new TV once the 60" drops down to $2800. I am in no rush as it will be foolish for me to spend $500 dollars more than what I would pay if I wait. Then I will get the sweet deals that come with the new set. For now, my 55"D8000 is going to have to hold me.
post #1391 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by orijin View Post

My local store just got the f8000 in today along with the lg la7400, the f8000 store mode still has washed out colors

You shouldn't have to worry about washed out colors in a home environment. It's damned gorgeous. I put in Tangled earlier and everything just popped from the screen.
post #1392 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by JSteel View Post

Thanks for your input Ken! I will wait for the 60"F8000 and pray it is just as good as the 55" and then come December, I will make this model my new TV once the 60" drops down to $2800. I am in no rush as it will be foolish for me to spend $500 dollars more than what I would pay if I wait. Then I will get the sweet deals that come with the new set. For now, my 55"D8000 is going to have to hold me.

JSteel, I've got my fingers crossed the 65" is as good as the 55". We'll find out before too long, but the 65" will be released last. I believe Robert was expecting the 60" on or about 4/15.
post #1393 of 3645
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trackman View Post

Ken is correct. A well-known ISF calibrator told me that once contrast gets above a certain level, additional increase yields little visible benefit. Sorry, I can't quantify the diminishing returns.

You can appreciate the difference between 5,000:1 and 10,000;1 on ANSI/simultaneous CR.

What you can't do is appreciate anything much above that -- period. It's biology. The human limitations may be somewhat north of 10K:1, but they aren't significantly above it.

What I think confuses the issue here is that what Ken prefers an image that is demonstrably worse on CR but unequivocally brighter.

If we call "plasma black" level 1 and acknowledge the correct maximum luminance is "10,000" and it doesn't matter what kind of TV you own, the plasma can do this on an ANSI test pattern. It's simply true and if you want to argue this, you really need to get off the AV Science forum and go someplace else. There is also no way there is a perception issue here -- what Ken talks about -- because you can measure every single square of the test pattern and see that zero of them are being affected by ABL off the desired luminance of "10,000" (please note we are talking about either Day or Night modes here, it doesn't matter... what will matter comes next in this discussion, but consider 10,000 for "Night" mode).

An LCD can obviously do "10,000" too, but it can't do "1", so it does "3".... resulting in a contrast ratio 1/3 as good. (The Elite in this exercise does "1.5", which is really quite good.)

Now, here's where it gets different....

The 10,000 is available to the LCD on any content.

On the plasma, on some content the level falls to, whatever, call it 5,000. (If someone wants to come over to my house with a good light meter, we could do some testing....)

On that "ABL trigger" content... the plasma still might have better contrast, but it's less bright, less "white", and Ken (among others) would prefer the still less contrasty LCD image because the higher peak white provides a beautiful contrasty image of its own that is punchy enough.

---> Where Ken and I differ is I don't believe there is much content that triggers ABL that gets watched in a dark room when the only thing being asked for is "10,000". I just don't see it. And even when it comes on, I think the reduction is more like 10,000 --> 9,000 or 8,000. Every once in a while, the reduction is more severe but I'm not persuaded I want to give up all the other times where I have a clearly superior black level and clearly superior contrast.

Take this example to another level using Day modes...

The calibration goes to 15,000, perhaps that limits the plasma black to "2" and the LCD black to "5"... The plasma still wins on the ANSI test, 7500:1 vs. 3000:1.

But now the ABL is even more punishing... When it kicks in, the plasma still gets capped at "5000" (it's all the TV can do on a very white screen). Not only is the CR lower, the peak white is very compromised vs. the LCD, which can "power through" a bright room and hold the "15,000".

--> This scenario is real, although I have to say I find even sports very satisfying on the plasma, the vast majority of the time. During the day, I'd prefer an LCD if there was one that could be viewed off axis without compromise.
post #1394 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Buzzard, I'm not doubting your ANSI CR numbers, but it does make me scratch my head when it shows the VT50 having almost double the CR of the Elite. Having seen both numerous times, there's no way I'd suspect that from a purely 'non-instrumented', visual perspective. I suspect this is a classic case of the law of diminishing returns. We get to a point where the eye simply has more and more difficulty discerning subtle changes.

It also gets back to a point I've made many times over the years. Some people rely so heavily on numbers, they forget to listen to the speakers or audio equipment or watch the display device. My point is certainly not unique as its been brought out countless times in the better professional reviews. Many times the numbers simply don't tell the story. A frequency response plot says one thing, yet listening with your ears says something very different. At other times the charts DO reflect exactly what you hear or see.

I'm simply saying that there are times a piece of equipment defies what the numbers say. Numbers that state the VT50 has a CR nearly double that of the Elite, is a case in point. Call me blind, I simply don't see it.

Thus far we have reports on the F8000 having blacks that are 'pitch black'. I've heard this from Robert and we've heard it from the one owner here. These are not observations in a bright room or even in a dimly lit room, they are in dark environments.

I was very careful to caution people that although my observations of the F8000 also showed blacks that were pitch black, I saw them in relatively subdued lighting, not a truly dark room. So my observations were to be taken with a grain of salt.

I'm certainly not saying to throw out the numbers, I look at them as much as anyone. But anyone that makes a decision on any piece of equipment only 'by the numbers', is likely to miss out on some truly excellent equipment. The 'predictive value' of these numbers seem to vary from an excellent correlation on one piece of equipment to fair at best on another. Why it varies like this is anyone's guess and something that's been discussed in some of the more detailed reviews for years.

http://*********************/images/pdf/Shootout%202012%20contrast%20ratio.pdf Edit - VE site

http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/hdtv-video-displays-processors/64719-samsung-2013-unxxf8000-46-55-60-65-75-a-4.html#post598825

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trackman View Post

Ken is correct. A well-known ISF calibrator told me that once contrast gets above a certain level, additional increase yields little visible benefit. Sorry, I can't quantify the diminishing returns.

THX Certification Course Manual:

Top Five Image Quality Parameters (THX Observations)
1. Optimal Black Level of Image
2. Contrast Ratio (Dynamic Range)
3. Accurate Colors and Grayscale
4. Image Resolution
5. Quality Source material (Everything depends on this...)

Nothing about diminishing returns that I was ever taught....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Call me crazy, but that's what counts in my book, how does the picture look to the naked eye.

Numbers are great and they do give us a basis for comparison, but used in a vacuum, their usefulness can be diminished.

Same type argument you used a year and a half ago defending the horrible Sharp Elite tracking. It doesn't fly.
post #1395 of 3645
I shall again state what Ed Johnson mentioned: "As with all LCD/LED sets the black levels start to rise as bright content starts to appear. The only set that I have come across where this did not happen was the Sharp Elite. But this has always been a topic of discussion, even though the black levels rise, they do not rise enough that with the bright content present the eye still perceives the blacks as being black.

Keep in mind this is with the set at a peak white output of 56 fl. If it was going in a dark theater room the peak white would be lower and the rise in the black level should be proportionally less. In any case even though it was measured, visually I did not see it on actual content in the store."

I can't make this much clearer and anyone that disagrees can discuss it with Ed. I have seen precisely what Ed points out relative to the stated ANSI CRs of the VT50 and the Elite. The VT50 shows, according to Buzzard's #s, a CR almost double. Visually, with your naked eye, there is no way in God's green earth that looks to be the case. Blacks stay black and I see no visual difference whatsoever between the two.

The point here is that I do NOT 'prefer an image that is demonstrably worse on CR but unequivocally brighter'. What I DO prefer is an image where blacks stay black when they are supposed to regardless of what the stated ANSI CR is. So if the stated ANSI CR of display A is worse than display B, but actual visual observations show blacks that are essentially identical on both displays but display A is unhampered by an ABL, then in that case I do prefer the 'demonstrably worse ANSI CR' of display A.

So if one would like to say "Ken prefers an image where the measured ANSI CR is demonstrably worse but visually identical to another display that has a superior measured ANSI CR', I'll buy that! Stated otherwise, simply untrue. I refuse to be a slave to numbers. Numbers must be used intelligently and when not coupled with actual visual observations, they can be next to useless.
Edited by Ken Ross - 3/17/13 at 2:30pm
post #1396 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzard767 View Post


Same type argument you used a year and a half ago defending the horrible Sharp Elite tracking. It doesn't fly.

You may think it doesn't fly, but I and many owners that live with the display certainly do. And I will still contend that the color cyan is not one often seen let alone in the luminance ranges where the error is greatest. Owners don't seem to be crying out that their colors are whacked. Might I remind you once again that I was the first to point out the cyan error on this board? I never ever try to hide shortcomings of anything I own. But I do try to put things in perspective unlike those that made it a career of knocking the color of the Elite (almost all of whom were plasma zealots). Until this error was pointed out, most never ever saw it.

I refuse to resurrect this silliness. Enough. Anyone interested in the Elite cyan debate can find 1,000s of posts on this in the Elite section. If that doesn't put you to sleep nothing will. rolleyes.gif

BTW, you may not have been 'taught' about diminishing returns, but it surely does exist. If you can't see that going from a theoretical MLL of .5 to .25 would yield a greater VISUAL impact than going from .01 to .005, there's not much I can say. Both are a halving of the MLL.
post #1397 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

I shall again state what Ed Johnson mentioned: "As with all LCD/LED sets the black levels start to rise as bright content starts to appear. The only set that I have come across where this did not happen was the Sharp Elite. But this has always been a topic of discussion, even though the black levels rise, they do not rise enough that with the bright content present the eye still perceives the blacks as being black.

Keep in mind this is with the set at a peak white output of 56 fl. If it was going in a dark theater room the peak white would be lower and the rise in the black level should be proportionally less. In any case even though it was measured, visually I did not see it on actual content in the store."

I can't make this much clearer and anyone that disagrees can discuss it with Ed. I have seen precisely what Ed points out relative to the stated ANSI CRs of the VT50 and the Elite. The VT50 shows, according to Buzzard's #s, a CR almost double. Visually, with your naked eye, there is no way in God's green earth that looks to be the case. Blacks stay black and I see no visual difference whatsoever between the two.

The point here is that I do NOT 'prefer an image that is demonstrably worse on CR but unequivocally brighter'. What I DO prefer is an image where blacks stay black when they are supposed to regardless of what the stated ANSI CR is. So if the stated ANSI CR of display A is worse than display B, but actual visual observations show blacks that are essentially identical on both displays but display A is unhampered by an ABL, then in that case I do prefer the 'demonstrably worse ANSI CR' of display A.

So if one would like to say "Ken prefers an image where the measured ANSI CR is demonstrably worse but visually identical to another display that has a superior measured ANSI CR', I'll buy that! Stated otherwise, simply untrue. I refuse to be a slave to numbers. Numbers must be used intelligently and when not coupled with actual visual observations, they can be next to useless.

Those aren't my numbers, Ken. They're from the VE Shootout and the measurements were taken by Ed, D-Nice, and Kevin.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

You may think it doesn't fly, but I and many owners that live with the display certainly do. And I will still contend that the color cyan is not one often seen let alone in the luminance ranges where the error is greatest. Owners don't seem to be crying out that their colors are whacked. Might I remind you once again that I was the first to point out the cyan error on this board? I never ever try to hide shortcomings of anything I own. But I do try to put things in perspective unlike those that made it a career of knocking the color of the Elite (almost all of whom were plasma zealots). Until this error was pointed out, most never ever saw it.

I refuse to resurrect this silliness. Enough. Anyone interested in the Elite cyan debate can find 1,000s of posts on this in the Elite section. If that doesn't put you to sleep nothing will. rolleyes.gif

BTW, you may not have been 'taught' about diminishing returns, but it surely does exist. If you can't see that going from a theoretical MLL of .5 to .25 would yield a greater VISUAL impact than going from .01 to .005, there's not much I can say. Both are a halving of the MLL.

Broken record.

Perhaps it's their magic marketing gimmick yellow pixel. Who knows? But the tracking stinks. You know it does. Sorry - still doesn't fly.
post #1398 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzard767 View Post

Those aren't my numbers, Ken. They're from the VE Shootout and the measurements were taken by Ed, D-Nice, and Kevin.

Buz, let me say it again, I'm not disputing the numbers. What I am trying to say is that the numbers don't always tell the whole story. When you have two displays with different ANSI CR numbers that both, to the naked eye have the same black levels, who cares what the ANSI CR numbers are? I sure don't. If you told me the ANSI CR of display A was 10X that of display B, but to the naked eye they both appeared the same, who gives a rat's tush? I sure don't. If there's some kind of 'pride' in having the highest ANSI CR, so be it, but I'm not in that group...particularly if the display with the lesser #s offers me more of the qualities I'm looking for (freedom from IR, greater brightness with no issues from ABL, etc.).

We already have one calibrator and one owner who report precisely the same thing. Blacks are jet black regardless of how much or how little black is in the scene. Whatever the meters are reading is NOT visible to the naked eye. It just amazes me that some people can't accept this. Some 'buy em by the numbers', I buy em by how they look. As they say in French, 'Whatever'. rolleyes.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzard767 View Post

Broken record.

Perhaps it's their magic marketing gimmick yellow pixel. Who knows? But the tracking stinks. You know it does. Sorry - still doesn't fly.

Broken record yes, but only because the facts as I've laid them out haven't changed. Again, as with these ANSI #s, I don't dispute the fact that there are more accurate displays for color than the Elite, but what I am disputing is how that translates to visible errors with real world material, not test charts. Yes, I'll even acknowledge the addition of the yellow pixel may be to blame, but it doesn't change the fact that discerning owners who know video very well, do not see the manifestation of these errors in anything other than rare occurrences.

I again point out to you how long these ' gross errors' went totally, 100%, unnoticed in the video community. If you think that's a manifestation of some 'gross color errors', so be it. I don't. I live with this display day in and day out and I'd be the first to tell you if this display had significant color errors, that were visible with any degree of frequency. I am being totally objective and people that know me know I am not prone to BS. Period. End of sentence.
post #1399 of 3645
Like many here, I went to BestBuy to see the UN55F8000 in person.

The feed was coming across an ethernet (network) cable, so I don't think you can honestly make much if anything of the picture quality from seeing it in store.

Also unfortunate, they had the F8000 among all of the other "normal" LCDs - not in the Magnolia area and no where close enough to compare to the ES8000 series (which I currently have - the 65").

What I can confirm is that the build quality and design versus the ES8000 is WAY, WAY, WAY better. Specifically:

1) The bezel/frame on the F8000 is one continuous band of aluminum with a very, very minimal frame before the picture starts. Compared to the ES8000 which had what I'd call almost unfinished corners (where the metal was bent to meet together) this is a much, much more refined design.

2) The clean back design is heads and shoulders better than the ES8000. Don't know what the material actually is, but it seems like some type of brushed metal (though I think it may be plastic made to look like brushed metal) - nonetheless, the back design is much improved over the ES8000. This is probably only important to those who have the panel mounted to the wall, but still is an improvement.

3) Even though it was somewhat cool to have the camera at the top of the ES8000, the F8000's design of allowing it to retract and be hidden is much more refined and adds to the look of the very slim frame.

4) The Samsung logo at the bottom is smaller and again more refined. Told that you can turn off the backlight and because the entire design element of where the logo is has been significantly sized down it won't look like a dingleberry if you decide to leave it off.

5) The stand - much maligned by some is great in person. Versus the "viking ship" stand on the ES8000, the F8000 stand blends into the background and doesn't take any attention away from the picture and TV itself. Sure, it is as wide as the TV and may be a problem for some with a small TV stand, but otherwise is a nice improvement.

Can't wait to see the picture quality in a real-life situation and I hope that the 65" matches the picture quality we've heard of here about the 55". That said, the actual design of the TV is a big step forward from the ES8000 in every way.
post #1400 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by zAndy12 View Post

You know what's confusing me no end is that the reviews of this TV have been universally amazing, owner reviews as well so far have been overwhelmingly positive. The blacks are inky black, the greyscale , colours etc are all reference after calibration and yet we get comments from e.g, Corey Fisher saying the F8500 plasma is far superior to this and I have to ask myself 'in what way'. If all of the reviews of the F8000 LED are so favourable, even from respected calibrators and reviewers on various forums then there can't be anything 'wrong' with the picture on the F8000 can there and therefore I have to ask how is the F8500 plasma so much better? Are the blacks more inky black, is the grey scale and colour reproduction more reference , it baffles me to be honest. This TV on the face of it ticks all the boxes for me, size, style, performance etc but what's the compromise cos there clearly is one if the F8500 plasma for example is so much better?

Thanks

This is the first I've heard anyone say the F8500 will be much better. I don't think anyone has been able to compare the 64F8500 and 65F8000 to say that (except the folks at Samsung, and they're not about to throw their top of the line under the bus).

I can think of 3 compromises: 1) at larger size >= 65", you may see flashlighting and uniformity issues. We don't know yet; we will see; 2) the usual LCD viewing angle; 3) price. The 65F800 will list for at least $1000 more than the 64F8500, if past pricing is any guide.
post #1401 of 3645
Sony1717, it's really disappointing to see how these units are displayed. Of course it's not unusual to see really nice displays butchered by retailers, it happens all the time. I've been lucky in that the BBs I've gone to gave me access to the remotes and, in one case, had it displayed in the Magnolia section. I suspect that may have been a transient location at that one store.

I can't attest to the changes in build quality since I was never really interested in prior Samsungs (other than the 32" LED model we have in our kitchen). But it's nice to hear from someone like you that has had the experience and can see the improvements in quality.
post #1402 of 3645
Our BB has the F8000 on display too... I thought about asking for the remote, but decided it wasn't worth it due to the fact that it is out in the regular TV area (although they do have that area dimmed compared to other BBs) and it's in the top row of tvs, so anything I'm viewing is not a true representation of the tv. Our PC richards has it too and they have it on a nice stand, but they have stadium lighting in there. It would make my XBR4 look like the world's inkiest tv
post #1403 of 3645
Okay, I finally got to play around with an F8000 today. I went to a different local Best Buy, and asked them if I could try the touch remote. They, like the other Best Buy I tried, either couldn't find the remote or didn't want to bother looking for it. One guy told me it's packaged up and taped behind the tv for when it's sold later. Whatever.

So I asked a manager, and he produced a standard remote that still worked with the set. So I played around with the menus a great deal today and tried a few things.

First off, being familiar with the menus from last year on the ES7500, I can say that there are a few small changes to a few options, but most of the options are the same. There is no option for enabling or disabling micro-dimming in any mode - nor is there any option to enable or disable CE-dimming (auto-dimming) in any mode.

So it's way too early for any of us to know what modes have what enabled. But it's clear, like last year, that we have no control over any of the dimming modes. Now, I went into the menus in both standard mode, and movie mode, and disabled everything I could - I turned off all image enhancement settings, disabled ECO sensor, and all other options. Then I watched the demos. The tv was in demo mode because it was constantly popping up its own generated sales pitch - listing features and whatnot on the left side and bottom of the set, like a small menu sort of. In standard mode, when the Best Buy demo video would fade to black before switching to the next video clip, I could definitely see some auto-dimming going on. This was obvious because the text in the tv-generated sales blurbs would dim as the screen went black, and then brighten again when a new video clip would start up. This was consistent with last year - The ES series did the same thing - when the screen would get darker, whatever bright areas were still on screen (text, stars, whatever) would darken also, a by-product of the entire screen auto-dimming. The same thing was happening today, with all possible options disabled.

So that's not great to see. I was really hoping that this year we would at least have the option of controlling auto-dimming. Not everybody would want that. And that's separate from micro-dimming. Now, what is weird, is I then brought up the full on-screen menu (still in standard mode here), and when the screen would fade to black, the full menu would not dim! This is weird because last year, the menu would dim drastically when auto-dimming kicked in. It was an easy way to see the drastic effect of auto-dimming because if you just left the menu up, it would dim when the screen dimmed. But the F8000 kept the menu just as bright with no obvious sign of dimming with a black screen. This is very different from last year. So I don't know what to make of it. It does appear to use some auto-dimming, but it seems there is something different about it this year. Last year auto-dimming could be reduced by bumping up the brightness and dropping the white balance offsets to compensate. I imagine this would work the same this year if necessary, but I'm really hoping it won't be necessary.

When I switched over to movie mode, I could not make out any sign of auto-dimming. This was the same last year, where auto-dimming was disabled in movie mode. But keep in mind that micro-dimming was also disabled in movie mode last year. So does this mean micro-dimming is disabled in movie mode this year also?

As far as the menu goes, the main menu system appears very similar, almost identical, to last year, which is fine because it works nicely. The Smarthub however is totally re-designed. It's a drastic improvement over last year, and navigating through the apps and options are buttery-smooth with very nice animations. When you exit the Smarthub it sort of just quickly fades away instead of closing. Very nice visual touches all-around.

The image itself was gorgeous, even with Best Buy's crappy signal they were feeding it. I can't imagine how it would look with blu-ray material. I enabled the Cinema Black feature, but I'm not sure if I got a chance to see it working. There was one very short video clip with a short trailer that was in Cinemascope with black bars, but it wasn't much time to see what was going on. It did appear that the bars were still on - they didn't appear to actually be off - but I can't say for sure. They were incredibly black though. In fact the blacks in the set were far deeper than I think I've ever seen before on an LCD (not that I'm an expert - just from my own experience). 3D mode had a new feature that let you select normal brightness or maximum brightness, and at maximum, the screen was crazy bright. In fact I put the backlight on 20 in 2D mode just to see how bright it could get, and even at 20, which is far brighter than you would ever set the tv in your home, the blacks looked deep. I saw no clouding or flashlighting, though the lighting was far from ideal to make any judgement. In 3D mode, I tried to see if I could spot any motion interpolation, but they were feeding it a video signal anyways, so that wasn't ideal. I just couldn't tell. I would need to see some 23.976 material to see if it was smoothing the motion in 3D even with AMP off. I also set AMP to full to watch for stuttering. Again, due to Best Buy's lousy video feed, I really couldn't judge too well. The motion looked insanely smooth at max setting but I couldn't say one way or the other if the stuttering in AMP has been eliminated or not. Also, since the tv was way too high on display, I really wasn't seeing it the way it should be seen. Thanks, Best Buy, for the great demo. One guy offered to find me a pair of 3D glasses to try (even though I was just playing around with the 2D conversion setting to see what 3D options I had available), and he never came back.

Regarding color, again, not much to work off of with Best Buy's signal, but anyone thinking the colors look faded needs their glasses checked. The colors are in no way faded. Not on the set I saw today, in standard mode or movie mode. If you want your image to look neon, just bump up the saturation in the menu. I don't think faded color will be an issue at all with these sets. I just hope there isn't a red push like last year's set had.

Overall I was blown away by what little I saw. But I'm still being cautious. I can't wait to hear more personal thoughts from owners as they start getting these things in their home. I guess this probably doesn't tell anybody too much but I thought I'd share my thoughts on what I saw today.
Edited by eagle_2 - 3/17/13 at 7:08pm
post #1404 of 3645
Eagle, is it possible that the self-generated demo engages settings that would normally not be engaged for regular programming? I confess to being unfamiliar with some of these Samsung terminologies. Is 'auto dimming' something that is coupled to an ambient light room sensor? I'm not sure what role this dimming would play if not related to micro dimming. It's hard to see how these two different dimming settings wouldn't step over each other. confused.gif

It also seemed as if AGuy implied that all of these dimming techs can be turned on or off in any mode.

Perhaps AGuy can shed some 'light' on this?
post #1405 of 3645
damn...damn my sammy LNT-5271F looks be finally dying. Some sort of interlacing problem, horizontal blacks lines everywhere. So I might be in the market for this 55F8000. Anyone have any luck with best buy wiggling on the price? Sometimes they throw in stuff or gave some sort of deals...from what i can remember like 6 years ago. Any online price matches people have found yet?
post #1406 of 3645
Quick question to those of you who have the actual set in home.. When I watched the CNet CES video on this tv, they said that it has the ability to take information from your cable box and control the cable box. Has anyone tried this? I have all of my cable boxes centrally located and the ability to get rid of the IR blaster I would need to install in the living room we are remodeling would be incredible. We don't have a dvr so we would not need that function, just the ability to change the cable channel through this tv (not basic cable ether, the full array of channels). Thanks in advance!
post #1407 of 3645
In case anyone is interested, here's a direct link to the manuals ...

Full User Manual:

http://downloadcenter.samsung.com/content/UM/201303/20130311100031171/[ENG_US]FP9ATSCF-2.101.pdf

Quick Guide:

http://downloadcenter.samsung.com/content/EM/201302/20130227145412734/[UF8000-ZA]BN68-04786A-01ENG-0207.pdf
Edited by gweempose - 3/17/13 at 8:32pm
post #1408 of 3645
Ken Ross -

Yup - at the BestBuy I visited the guy from the Magnolia room actually walked me over to see the set since I couldn't find it. He said that, "Samsung would kill us for showing this set on a $199 stand along with the lower-end LCD TV sets, but we haven't had time to set it up in the Magnolia room yet..."

I do currently have the UN65ES8000 and I can assure you that the physical build quality of the F8000 is far superior to that of the ES8000, and I am a stickler for that kind of thing.

As for the comments on picture quality from those viewing the set in a BestBuy store, I would take those with a grain of salt (with all due respect to those who took the time to post and share their opinion) for the following reasons:

1) The demo feed in a BestBuy is typically coming across a network cable, probably HD, but who knows at what resolution, frame rate, etc. Note: if you are viewing the set in the Magnolia room the feed may be different depending on their setup.

2) The lighting in a typical BestBuy (outside of the Magnolia room) is not optimal.

3) Most importantly, the demo feed material itself is of course designed to highlight the strengths of the typical LCD TV set. It is highly unlikely that you would ever be able to pick up typical panel uniformity issues such as clouding, flashlighting, stuck pixels, dead pixels, and vertical banding (sometimes referred to as Dirty Screen Effect or DSE) on this source material.


It does sound like the picture quality from those who actually own the set is very, very good. I can only hope this holds true for the 65" as I will be picking one up the day it becomes available.
post #1409 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by aracnoz View Post

@Lwood

"cinema black" features (in Picture Options) it's only activable in movie mode?

does it work with standard mode?

do you confirm the good impression of the first reviews, with no clouding, bleeding and banding in a dark room?

active in all modes.

for your last question. i dont know what any of that means.
post #1410 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by AGuy01 View Post

You shouldn't have to worry about washed out colors in a home environment. It's damned gorgeous. I put in Tangled earlier and everything just popped from the screen.

They call that the bug light effect, cartoons will always bring out every tv's capabilities. Its the actual real movies that tests a TV, dark scenes etc. Not a cartoon that has bright scenes and even if the exaggerated color would still look good. I had the c8000, ever since then I haven't seen certain things in a samsung 8000 model that I wanted. Went with the LG and sony instead.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: LCD Flat Panel Displays
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › LCD Flat Panel Displays ›  Samsung F8000 -- 2013 Flagship Models