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 30

post #871 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmay91472 View Post

Ken with all due respect. I think we are talking about two different things here. I am referring to quality control. I have no doubt that the F8000 (aside from the expected vertical banding on the 65F8000) will be an exceptional TV if one gets a defect free one. When I say crappy product, I'm NOT referring to image quality, or my previously mentioned comment on the stand, or smart hub usability..... STRICTLY quality control. Do you honestly think that Samsung will magically have improved QC overnight when for the past few years, they have been cranking out such a high % of duds?

That being said, I'm not against purchasing an F8000 which is why I like following the thread. I am definitely skeptical as many former or present ES8000 owners will be, and will be following developments throughout the summer. I definitely would not purchase an F8000 at current pricing as I'm only looking to add a secondary TV for the upstairs, so would most likely wait until Oct/Nov when the price of ES8000s starting seeing the major price reductions.

Understood. I think if you had said 'the same crappy QC', that might have better expressed it. smile.gif
post #872 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmay91472 View Post

Eagle, 3D is anything but horrible with the HX950. Who told you it was terrible. Majority of negative comments about the 3D were because people were too stupid to either get the PS3 polarizing glasses or just request the free polarizing filters from Sony online. All reviews were also done prior to the polarizing glasses. Without those, the picture supposedly flickered and degraded with the slightest head tilt, with the polarizing it is excellent.

With the polarizing 3D glasses, the 3D is almost identical to the Samsung 65ES8000 which has the best 3D of any of the Samsungs and blows away the horrendous 3D on the 60ES8000 which has by far the worst 3D of all the ES sizes due to the Sharp panel it uses. Even better yet, my 65HX950s 3D exceeds the 65ES8000 since I'm not distracted by the atrocious vertical banding.

Out if all the tvs I've owned this past year, 65VT50, 65ES8000, 60ES8000 and 65HX950, the Sony had the best 3D of all the sets with the exception of the 65ES8000, but surpasses the Samsung because of the lack of noticeable banding which ruins the Sammy's 3D presentation.

From http://reviews.cnet.com/flat-panel-tvs/sony-bravia-xbr-55hx929/4505-6482_7-34468616.html"

"The bad: ...When displaying 3D, the image flickers when dejudder is turned off, and it deteriorates rapidly when you tilt your head.

We've had the chance to test the 3D picture quality of the XBR-HX929 with new glasses, and the short story is that the issues we saw originally are still there, putting a fly in the ointment of the TV's excellent overall performance. These problems won't affect the review score, since we don't take 3D picture quality into account when determining ratings, but they're still worth noting.

...With the HX929, even the slightest tilt of the head spoils the 3D.

...We saw neither flicker nor extreme intolerance to head tilts on any of the other active 3D sets."


They say the same thing about the HX950. It doesn't sound ideal to me. According to them, the only way to avoid 3D flicker is by enabling dejudder (which is like Samsung's AMP - it results in soap opera effect by creating motion interpolation). So for 3D to not have flickering I would have to live with having the soap opera effect in all my 3D viewing, which is not something I would want. Nor would I want to live with 3D flicker. I know you mentioned the confusion with the glasses. But CNET said they requested replacement glasses from Sony to re-test the set, and still had the same flicker. At any rate, they are far too expensive for me anyways. There is no way we could ever come up with enough to purchase either of those sets - we can't afford anything over 46", and these Sony's are far too expensive (and it seems Best Buy doesn't carry the HX929 any longer, and the HX950 doesn't come in 46"). Even if we did have the funds, my girlfriend would never allow that much to be spent on a tv. I was pushing it with the 46" ES7500 last year - she's open to the idea of the F8000 or something similar, if there's a good sale at Best Buy (Samsung refunded our 7500 in the form of a Best Buy gift card, so it has to be purchased there, or else sell the gift card at a loss and lose money).

Thanks anyways for the recommendations but Sony is just out of our budget. It's a shame that $2,000-$2,200 still isn't enough to get a tv with a uniform image. I would like to see how the Sony active sets perform based on your recommendation, but the cost puts it out of or range anyways.
post #873 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by eagle_2 View Post

From http://reviews.cnet.com/flat-panel-tvs/sony-bravia-xbr-55hx929/4505-6482_7-34468616.html"

"The bad: ...When displaying 3D, the image flickers when dejudder is turned off, and it deteriorates rapidly when you tilt your head.

We've had the chance to test the 3D picture quality of the XBR-HX929 with new glasses, and the short story is that the issues we saw originally are still there, putting a fly in the ointment of the TV's excellent overall performance. These problems won't affect the review score, since we don't take 3D picture quality into account when determining ratings, but they're still worth noting.

...With the HX929, even the slightest tilt of the head spoils the 3D.

...We saw neither flicker nor extreme intolerance to head tilts on any of the other active 3D sets."


They say the same thing about the HX950. It doesn't sound ideal to me. According to them, the only way to avoid 3D flicker is by enabling dejudder (which is like Samsung's AMP - it results in soap opera effect by creating motion interpolation). So for 3D to not have flickering I would have to live with having the soap opera effect in all my 3D viewing, which is not something I would want. Nor would I want to live with 3D flicker. I know you mentioned the confusion with the glasses. But CNET said they requested replacement glasses from Sony to re-test the set, and still had the same flicker. At any rate, they are far too expensive for me anyways. There is no way we could ever come up with enough to purchase either of those sets - we can't afford anything over 46", and these Sony's are far too expensive (and it seems Best Buy doesn't carry the HX929 any longer, and the HX950 doesn't come in 46"). Even if we did have the funds, my girlfriend would never allow that much to be spent on a tv. I was pushing it with the 46" ES7500 last year - she's open to the idea of the F8000 or something similar, if there's a good sale at Best Buy (Samsung refunded our 7500 in the form of a Best Buy gift card, so it has to be purchased there, or else sell the gift card at a loss and lose money).

Thanks anyways for the recommendations but Sony is just out of our budget. It's a shame that $2,000-$2,200 still isn't enough to get a tv with a uniform image. I would like to see how the Sony active sets perform based on your recommendation, but the cost puts it out of or range anyways.

Eagle,

David Katzmeier tested the PS3 glasses with the HX950 and reported the anomalies were fixed with the polarizing glasses. Not sure if you had seen that report.

Also, dejudder does not add any soap opera effect to the image like the equal setting on the ES8000s.

Can't comment on the HX929 other than to say comparing 2011 3D to 2012 3D on not just Sony, but Samsung and Panasonic is night and day difference.
post #874 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by schnura View Post

cmay91472 I don't think it's a fair to use a LG 84" review to warn all potential Samsung 65" F8000 owners that they will suffer from vertical banding.

And here we go again blaming the Samsung Tijuana workers for q/c issues. Assuming you are correct and more ES8000 series panels had a higher rate of defects vs let's say Sharp or Sony, why not believe that a company like Samsung would not recognize these problems and be pro-active to solve them in the 2013 model year. Also consider that it may have actually been the parts that were inconsistent and not the assembly workers rolleyes.gif

Because we have reasons to doubt Samsung being pro-active in general. Samsung's 3D glasses last year were awfully designed, a huge step back from the 2011 models. I actually have 2 pairs of the 2011 glasses and they are awesome. The 2012 ones were crap - design issues and cheaply built. So this year what did they do? Nothing, same 2012 glasses.

Last year the touch remote was pretty unimpressive, and most people like the standard remote better. So what do they do this year? It looks like they don't even give you the standard remote anymore.

I was also hoping to hear Samsung announce some improvements in 3D motion, now that Panasonic has their "3D motion Remaster" technology to address specific motion issues that active 3D suffers from. Instead, Samsung has done nothing about it. The 3D on the ES models were excellent but they did suffer from the exact 3D motion issue that Panasonic addresses - a year later and Samsung pretends it doesn't exist.

Also I have seen 2011 D series Samsungs and they suffered from stuttering in AMP mode. When I bought the 2012 ES model I was certain they would have addressed that, and they did nothing - still the same stutter in most AMP modes.

So they don't exactly have the best track record of addressing concerns, in my opinion.
post #875 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmay91472 View Post

Eagle,

David Katzmeier tested the PS3 glasses with the HX950 and reported the anomalies were fixed with the polarizing glasses. Not sure if you had seen that report.

Also, dejudder does not add any soap opera effect to the image like the equal setting on the ES8000s.

Can't comment on the HX929 other than to say comparing 2011 3D to 2012 3D on not just Sony, but Samsung and Panasonic is night and day difference.

I wasn't aware of that actually. That review always stuck in my head. Very interesting. Why would Sony have sent them PS3 glasses when they requested new glasses due to 3D issues? Wouldn't Sony have sent them the right ones?

Well the cost is another issue anyways for us, but thanks for that info - maybe I can keep Sony in mind this year, but I guess they'll be expensive as usual and I don't know if they have anything announced for this year yet.
post #876 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by eagle_2 View Post

I wasn't aware of that actually. That review always stuck in my head. Very interesting. Why would Sony have sent them PS3 glasses when they requested new glasses due to 3D issues? Wouldn't Sony have sent them the right ones?

Well the cost is another issue anyways for us, but thanks for that info - maybe I can keep Sony in mind this year, but I guess they'll be expensive as usual and I don't know if they have anything announced for this year yet.

LOL. Here is the sad part. Sony never sent them to CNET. David had to buy a pair himself after a number of readers emailed him telling him the issues were fixed with the PS3 glasses.
post #877 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmay91472 View Post

Eagle, 3D is anything but horrible with the HX950. Who told you it was terrible. Majority of negative comments about the 3D were because people were too stupid to either get the PS3 polarizing glasses or just request the free polarizing filters from Sony online. All reviews were also done prior to the polarizing glasses. Without those, the picture supposedly flickered and degraded with the slightest head tilt, with the polarizing it is excellent.

With the polarizing 3D glasses, the 3D is almost identical to the Samsung 65ES8000 which has the best 3D of any of the Samsungs and blows away the horrendous 3D on the 60ES8000 which has by far the worst 3D of all the ES sizes due to the Sharp panel it uses. Even better yet, my 65HX950s 3D exceeds the 65ES8000 since I'm not distracted by the atrocious vertical banding.

Out if all the tvs I've owned this past year, 65VT50, 65ES8000, 60ES8000 and 65HX950, the Sony had the best 3D of all the sets with the exception of the 65ES8000, but surpasses the Samsung because of the lack of noticeable banding which ruins the Sammy's 3D presentation.
Have you seen the 3D on the Sharp PRO 70 X5FD Elite ? If you have how would you compare it to the other ones ?
post #878 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmay91472 View Post

15 day exchange/return policy change has nothing to do with online price matching. The change was added to the list of policy changes that took effect this past week as a result of the losses the company took on exchanges and returns in general. It may have occurred simultaneously but they are not related.

Ok so that is 3 different opinions as to why the policy was implemented. You speak with such authority. Do you have a link or source to provide to be certain that is the reason for the change? I at least proceeded my statement with "I believe".
post #879 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenee View Post

Have you seen the 3D on the Sharp PRO 70 X5FD Elite ? If you have how would you compare it to the other ones ?

Yes, I have tested it in store, where as the others I had in home. The 3D on the elite is probably the weakest of all. But this is where people confuse my statement.... I'm comparing 3D to the 2012 models, not the 2011 models. If you compare the elite 3D to the VT30, D8000 and HX929, then it holds its own. But the 2012 3D on Panasonic, Samsung and Sony all ironed out many issues crosstalk wise plaguing their respective 2011 models.
post #880 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by DustinLH00 View Post

Ok so that is 3 different opinions as to why the policy was implemented. You speak with such authority. Do you have a link or source to provide to be certain that is the reason for the change? I at least proceeded my statement with "I believe".

Curious, what other reasons were you given? I was told by a corporate representative of BB as to why it was reduced to 15 days as I had a number of conversations in regards to exchange policy when I was given a 90 day exchange/return ban despite bring a silver reward zone member.

Obviously no one will ever know for sure unless you are part of the corporate decision making process, but a severe policy change kind this is normally implemented to cut losses if it isn't one to satisfy customers. Unlike the online price matching, this certainly is not to satisfy customers.
post #881 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmay91472 View Post

Curious, what other reasons were you given? I was told by a corporate representative of BB as to why it was reduced to 15 days as I had a number of conversations in regards to exchange policy when I was given a 90 day exchange/return ban despite bring a silver reward zone member.

Obviously no one will ever know for sure unless you are part of the corporate decision making process, but a severe policy change kind this is normally implemented to cut losses if it isn't one to satisfy customers. Unlike the online price matching, this certainly is not to satisfy customers.

What other reason would there be then to minimize return losses? Just think about it logically.
Not only does BB have to forego the revenue of the sale, but they also put most items back on the floor at a reduced open box price.

BB is at its breaking point and this seems to be a last ditch effort to stop the bleeding, however, most analysts say the online competition is to high and BB will be out of business within the next 1-2 years.
post #882 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmay91472 View Post

Curious, what other reasons were you given? I was told by a corporate representative of BB as to why it was reduced to 15 days as I had a number of conversations in regards to exchange policy when I was given a 90 day exchange/return ban despite bring a silver reward zone member.

Obviously no one will ever know for sure unless you are part of the corporate decision making process, but a severe policy change kind this is normally implemented to cut losses if it isn't one to satisfy customers. Unlike the online price matching, this certainly is not to satisfy customers.

eagle_2 stated they changed the policy because of the number of television sets returned last year, especially the Samsungs.

In a different thread, someone there said that the policy was changed due to the online price matching policy to prevent people from buying today from Best Buy, then ordering online after they decide they like it, and then returning the product to Best Buy to recoup the sales tax. Of course that can still occur within 15 days, but it makes it more challenging.

In reality, it is probably a combination of all of them. Usually when corporations make a policy change, they like to back it up with 3 or more bullet points of positive effects from making the change.
post #883 of 3645
What causes banding? Is it a side effect of improperly implemented edge lighting? Having never owned an edge-lit set before, and now considering the 75" F8000, this whole banding thing has me a little nervous.
post #884 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by DustinLH00 View Post

eagle_2 stated they changed the policy because of the number of television sets returned last year, especially the Samsungs.

In a different thread, someone there said that the policy was changed due to the online price matching policy to prevent people from buying today from Best Buy, then ordering online after they decide they like it, and then returning the product to Best Buy to recoup the sales tax. Of course that can still occur within 15 days, but it makes it more challenging.

In reality, it is probably a combination of all of them. Usually when corporations make a policy change, they like to back it up with 3 or more bullet points of positive effects from making the change.

Ummm... Not to be mean, but both of those are examples of trying to cut losses.
post #885 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by dad0118 View Post

What other reason would there be then to minimize return losses? Just think about it logically.
Not only does BB have to forego the revenue of the sale, but they also put most items back on the floor at a reduced open box price.

BB is at its breaking point and this seems to be a last ditch effort to stop the bleeding, however, most analysts say the online competition is to high and BB will be out of business within the next 1-2 years.

There could be several reasons for the change and "minimizing return losses" is broad enough to cover each of the suggested reasons listed in this thread, such as too many televisions being returned and online price matching as I stated in the post above this.

Of course they are trying to minimize losses, but I bet there are more specific reasons behind it. Regardless, we do not need to spend 3 pages discussing Best Buy's return policy. Lets get back to bashing Samsung and casting doubts on the quality of the upcoming displays.
post #886 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmay91472 View Post

Ummm... Not to be mean, but both of those are examples of trying to cut losses.

Then why were you so quick to dismiss my comment about price matching?

Perhaps a better response would have been: "That is probably part of the overall goal of minimizing losses on returns".
post #887 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by DustinLH00 View Post

Then why were you so quick to dismiss my comment about price matching?

Perhaps a better response would have been: "That is probably part of the overall goal of minimizing losses on returns".

The online price match policy HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH reducing the exchange/return window. One is meant to cut losses and the other is one to grab market share.

Again, I'm not trying to be mean here, but this is not rocket science.
post #888 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmay91472 View Post

The online price match policy HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH reducing the exchange/return window. One is meant to cut losses and the other is one to grab market share.

Again, I'm not trying to be mean here, but this is not rocket science.

Whatever dude. I just explained why the online price matching policy could affect a return policy to which you agreed "was an example of trying to cut losses" and then you state it has nothing to do with it. I am glad you have a corporate buddy at Best Buy that provides you your information. I am sick of all of these "experts" on here that dismiss everyone else's opinions and ideas.

Again, why do we have to spend all of this time arguing about it. It doesn't matter. It is all speculation, just like these new sets from Samsung. Lets just drop it. None of us work there and know why and honestly who really gives a s@#t anyways?
post #889 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by nu02wrx View Post

Got a 55F8000 at work today(Best Buy), the look of the tv is nice. I like the new stand although it does seem a little unstable. Picture quality is good, better then the ES series I think. The new cinema black helps with black level, but it seems to crush blacks(tv in Movie mode) a good amount. Motion seemed better but still not great. I'm more of a plasma fan myself but overall not a bad tv. I do think the new Smart Tv functionality was much improved, much more smooth and detailed.

Well guys, I think you can file this one in the BS column. I went to BB's largest Long Island location, Westbury, where they tend to be the 'showcase' store for L.I. They did not have the F8000 nor does any store on Long Island have it. In fact the Samsung rep had been in there a few days prior and said April at the earliest.

Why do people do this? rolleyes.gif

On a brighter note, I went over to the Sony store that's very close to this BB and was impressed with the 65" XBR950. It looked very nice...including what appeared to be excellent uniformity.
post #890 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Well guys, I think you can file this one in the BS column. I went to BB's largest Long Island location, Westbury, where they tend to be the 'showcase' store for L.I. They did not have the F8000 nor does any store on Long Island have it. In fact the Samsung rep had been in there a few days prior and said April at the earliest.

Why do people do this? rolleyes.gif

On a brighter note, I went over to the Sony store that's very close to this BB and was impressed with the 65" XBR950. It looked very nice...including what appeared to be excellent uniformity.

How was the 3D?
post #891 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by DustinLH00 View Post

How was the 3D?

Sorry, I didn't look at that Dustin. I'm just not in to 3D either in the movies or at home, so it's not something I look for. I have a 60" Sharp Elite and I thought the 3D on that is good even though I never use it.
post #892 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Sorry, I didn't look at that Dustin. I'm just not in to 3D either in the movies or at home, so it's not something I look for. I have a 60" Sharp Elite and I thought the 3D on that is good even though I never use it.

No prob. There was a debate a few posts up about the 3D quality on this set, so that is why I asked. There is a Sony store by me so I may have to check it out to see. What price were they asking at the store?
post #893 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Well guys, I think you can file this one in the BS column. I went to BB's largest Long Island location, Westbury, where they tend to be the 'showcase' store for L.I. They did not have the F8000 nor does any store on Long Island have it. In fact the Samsung rep had been in there a few days prior and said April at the earliest.

Why do people do this? rolleyes.gif

On a brighter note, I went over to the Sony store that's very close to this BB and was impressed with the 65" XBR950. It looked very nice...including what appeared to be excellent uniformity.


I love my 65HX950.... But your 60 Elite still can't be touched by it for 2D. Two year old model yet still reigns supreme! smile.gif
post #894 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Well guys, I think you can file this one in the BS column. I went to BB's largest Long Island location, Westbury, where they tend to be the 'showcase' store for L.I. They did not have the F8000 nor does any store on Long Island have it. In fact the Samsung rep had been in there a few days prior and said April at the earliest.

Why do people do this? rolleyes.gif

On a brighter note, I went over to the Sony store that's very close to this BB and was impressed with the 65" XBR950. It looked very nice...including what appeared to be excellent uniformity.

Not only is it not listed on the BB Site but it's not listed on Samsung's Site yet either. How could one store on Long Island get the F8000? Maybe it's a F5000 the guy opened up. Those are listed on Samsung's Site as being available now.
post #895 of 3645
Haha going to work later ill take pics. Have some proof before you call bs. And no I don't work at westbury, I work farther east. And a quick check by one of the workers at bby in our inventory system would have shown one on shelf display in my store. No need to lie about it, trying to be helpful.
post #896 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Well guys, I think you can file this one in the BS column. I went to BB's largest Long Island location, Westbury, where they tend to be the 'showcase' store for L.I. They did not have the F8000 nor does any store on Long Island have it. In fact the Samsung rep had been in there a few days prior and said April at the earliest.

Why do people do this? rolleyes.gif

These days, everybody has a camera built into their phone. If someone claims that they saw a new TV but doesn't provide any pics, I'm always skeptical.
post #897 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by nu02wrx View Post

Haha going to work later ill take pics. Have some proof before you call bs. And no I don't work at westbury, I work farther east. And a quick check by one of the workers at bby in our inventory system would have shown one on shelf display in my store. No need to lie about it, trying to be helpful.

I don't think anyone's saying you're lying about it, just maybe a mix-up since no one else seems to have it anywhere, including Samsung.
post #898 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by DustinLH00 View Post

No prob. There was a debate a few posts up about the 3D quality on this set, so that is why I asked. There is a Sony store by me so I may have to check it out to see. What price were they asking at the store?

$5199
post #899 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmay91472 View Post

I love my 65HX950.... But your 60 Elite still can't be touched by it for 2D. Two year old model yet still reigns supreme! smile.gif

Cmay, I know the Elite has less blooming than the 950, but what other differences have you seen? The Elite's off-axis viewing is nothing to rave about and I assume the Sony is not too much different. I had a 920 that I traded for the Elite and my biggest issue (I think it was my sample) was poor uniformity. My buddy got the same set and his uniformity was far better.
post #900 of 3645
Quote:
Originally Posted by nu02wrx View Post

Haha going to work later ill take pics. Have some proof before you call bs. And no I don't work at westbury, I work farther east. And a quick check by one of the workers at bby in our inventory system would have shown one on shelf display in my store. No need to lie about it, trying to be helpful.

The salesguy did check all stores on L.I. and nothing showed up. Not one in stock, not one on display. Further, the Samsung Rep told him April at the earliest. Just let me know which store further east, I have access to all of them.

We all look forward to your pix and the location you work at. I'm sure others on Long Island would love to see the F8000 on display.
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