or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › LCD Flat Panel Displays › Official Sony KDL-55W900A Owners Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Official Sony KDL-55W900A Owners Thread - Page 39

post #1141 of 4279
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve1971 View Post

UFO I have watched the Cnet review and Ty Pendlebury never said it was the best LCD set for 2013. He said the colors were very good but the black levels were a step back from the black levels of 2012's HX850. But I look at it this way and that is as long as people enjoy it and like it that's all the matters. Cnet is all about Plasma after all and in their view nothing beats the all mighty Plasma sets.
Its mentioned in the write up not the video. Its mentioned lightly when he says "If you want a 55-inch LED LCD and care foremost about the picture quality, the W900A could be your best option in 2013." which is not directly stating its the best 2013 LCD set, but infers it. I had the HX950 for a day before returning it, as well as seeing the hx850 extensively in the store, and I can say I prefer the black level of the w900a over the HX850 or the HX950. The HX950 could make true black, but it did so with obvious blooming. With local dimming turned off there was no noticeable difference unless you had both tv's side by side, and even then its pointless to critique that because the difference is meaningless. When reviewers say "its a step back" in terms of black level, they make it sound like the w900a has noticeable lighter blacks than the hx850, which it doesn't. You would have to be a serious enthusiast to notice the difference in black level. What is noticeable is the picture depth, which is much greater on the w900a. Whether its the triluminous tech or not, the w900a has a deeper picture. Still not as good as my $700 plasma, but hey its an LCD.
Edited by *UFO* - 8/29/13 at 11:17pm
post #1142 of 4279
Quote:
Originally Posted by *UFO* View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by steve1971 View Post

UFO I have watched the Cnet review and Ty Pendlebury never said it was the best LCD set for 2013. He said the colors were very good but the black levels were a step back from the black levels of 2012's HX850. But I look at it this way and that is as long as people enjoy it and like it that's all the matters. Cnet is all about Plasma after all and in their view nothing beats the all mighty Plasma sets.
Its mentioned in the write up not the video. Its mentioned lightly when he says "If you want a 55-inch LED LCD and care foremost about the picture quality, the W900A could be your best option in 2013." which is not directly stating its the best 2013 LCD set, but infers it. I had the HX950 for a day before returning it, as well as seeing the hx850 extensively in the store, and I can say I prefer the black level of the w900a over the HX850 or the HX950. The HX950 could make true black, but it did so with obvious blooming. With local dimming turned off there was no noticeable difference unless you had both tv's side by side, and even then its pointless to critique that because the difference is meaningless. When reviewers say "its a step back" in terms of black level, they make it sound like the w900a has noticeable lighter blacks than the hx850, which it doesn't. You would have to be a serious enthusiast to notice the difference in black level. What is noticeable is the picture depth, which is much greater on the w900a. Whether its the triluminous tech or not, the w900a has a deeper picture. Still not as good as my $700 plasma, but hey its an LCD.


Good post UFO and I agree with some of your points except for one and that is the black levels between the HX850 and the W900a. The 950 has better black levels then the w900a because its Full Array LED and there aint a tv out their except Plasma's that can match its black levels. The HX850 has darker black levels then the w900a and to prove that all you would have to do is put both TV's side by side with proper calibration to see the difference. The only thing the W900a has on the HX850 is the colors are more deeper and that's due to the Triluminous tech Sony is using right now. But hey its all here nor there in my book and you and I could argue about this all day but why do that? Lets just enjoy our TV's and this great technology we have now because god only knows it could all change over to something new in a heart beat. smile.gif
post #1143 of 4279
I've seen both, in room, at the same time. The HX850 does have slightly deeper blacks. However, there are a couple of caveats.

First, turning the Advanced Contrast Enhancer (I think) to low on the W900 made the blacks deeper with no discernible negative effects. (hat tip to one of the review sites that mentioned this)

Also, with the dimming option set to standard on both, the HX850 tended to make very dark scenes go to near black from time to time, while the W900 seems to get that right. 1 scene in particular that I tried this on was from the last Harry Potter movie. There's a scene where the 3 protagonists are having a conversation in a stairwell with one of their friends. The HX850 after a second of two would invariably make this scene almost completely black. Sony seems to have figured it out for the following year's set.

Lastly, and this might be tied to the previous point, the W900 had better blacks with the automatic dimming OFF--in other words, deeper blacks natively. This might explain why the W900's dimming algorithm is not as aggressive.

Now, just to let everyone know where I'm coming from on this, I was extremely upset when the replacement Sony sent me for the 850 was not a refurbished 850, but a brand new W900. My brother commented on never seeing anyone so unhappy to get a brand new TV before. lol. I was so happy with the 850 and had not heard the best things about what it was replaced with. So I called Sony before even turning the new set on to find out what options I had. And after first setting it up, my first thought was that the out of the box settings for OTA broadcasts were MUCH better on the W900. But then I hooked it up to my PC and was very disappointed, only to find out it was because I had missed the Light Sensor option being on.

All in all, 2 great sets, both enormous steps up from my XBR9. I'd say black levels go to the HX, no question. But it is really close. Colors, depth,pop and....consistency of black levels goes to the W. Not to mention text when displaying PC is better (yes, even with the setting set up correctly on both). To me, I think the W is a better set OVERALL, although I loved the HX.

Just my 2 cents.
post #1144 of 4279
I have been looking for a TV now for a few weeks and it's been hard for me to make up my mind. The TV I have now is a Sony Bravia 52W4100. I was looking to upgrade my TV before the Xbox One and PS4 came out. At first I was looking into making the jump to Plasma. The Pansonic TC-65PS64 was the TV I was looking into. I went to Best Buy and was looking at the 900A compared to plasmas and it is real hard for me to tell in a store environment which one I prefer. The Pansonic was a nice jump in size and is $1000 cheaper than the Sony. But after reading the drawbacks for both, I think I am more comfortable with a LED TV. But still on the fence.

I got a few questions about this TV. I use my TV for gaming, Blu-rays, sports, and regular TV watching. I know the TV is good for gaming, but how is it for watching Blu-rays and sports?

Will this be a big upgrade from my older TV? I could tell in the store that the colors were more vibrant from my TV.

How does this TV handle motion? Is there any ghosting? What about all the other drawbacks of LEDs/LCDs? How bad is the clouding on these models? And what about the viewing angle? I read it was real bad on these models but in the store, it didn't look to bad to me.

Any help would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.
post #1145 of 4279
I took a look at the specs of your TV and yes it's a significant upgrade. The gaming performance and color alone is
worth the price of admission. I can't comment on the viewing angel since I sit directly in front of the TV. I bought the W9 for TV, movie and gaming. The first game i played on it was The Last of Us, it looked amazing.
Can't wait to see how the next gen systems will look on it.
Anyway read the HDTVtest review. You shouldn't be dissipointed, IMO it's the best edge lit TV you can buy.
post #1146 of 4279
Now that Samsung fixed the input lag on the f8000, wonder if this tv is still the best option? Thanks.
post #1147 of 4279
Quote:
Originally Posted by giantsx6 View Post

Now that Samsung fixed the input lag on the f8000, wonder if this tv is still the best option? Thanks.

In the CNet review of the F8000, think they compared the 2--long story short, for performance, W900 wins. For features and aesthetics, F8000 wins.
post #1148 of 4279
Quote:
Originally Posted by giantsx6 View Post

Now that Samsung fixed the input lag on the f8000, wonder if this tv is still the best option? Thanks.

The w900a has better black level than the f8000, better colors, and higher quality components. Since when did the f8000 even stand a chance? The input lag, (which even now isnt as good as the w900a) is just beating a dead horse.
post #1149 of 4279
As long as nobody measured the input lag of the F8000 with latest FW, I would be careful anyways with what others say.
Obviously when it comes to the input lag both the F8000 and the W900 don't stand a chance to the good old W4100 which AFAIK has an input lag that corresponds to a CRT display. I noticed the higher input lag when I made the jump from the Sony W4000 to the W905.
post #1150 of 4279
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yappadappadu View Post

As long as nobody measured the input lag of the F8000 with latest FW, I would be careful anyways with what others say.
Obviously when it comes to the input lag both the F8000 and the W900 don't stand a chance to the good old W4100 which AFAIK has an input lag that corresponds to a CRT display. I noticed the higher input lag when I made the jump from the Sony W4000 to the W905.

The w4000 has around 10ms of input lag with the camera method, which translates to 20ms of input lag with the leo bodnar device. Its not possible for an LCD to have 0ms input lag. The LCD panel response time alone is going to be around 12ms.
post #1151 of 4279
Okay regarding the fact that the input lag of the W4000 is not as low as CRT.
Hm, according this review http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/sony-kdl55w905a-201305172987.htm the W900/W905 has 20 ms with the Leo Bodnar tester.
The W4000 definitely feels more responsive, so if we were to use the Leo Bodnar tester, then we should get below 20 ms for sure.
All I wanted to say is that coming from the W4000/4100, of course you'll notice the difference at first.
post #1152 of 4279
Going to check this set out this week since all I've heard is positive things about it. Im still looking at that 70r550a too though. By any miracle will Sony maybe announce a 60-70 inch version for the 900a series at the ief expo in Germany this week???
post #1153 of 4279
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yappadappadu View Post

Okay regarding the fact that the input lag of the W4000 is not as low as CRT.
Hm, according this review http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/sony-kdl55w905a-201305172987.htm the W900/W905 has 20 ms with the Leo Bodnar tester.
The W4000 definitely feels more responsive, so if we were to use the Leo Bodnar tester, then we should get below 20 ms for sure.
All I wanted to say is that coming from the W4000/4100, of course you'll notice the difference at first.

What you are without a doubt experiencing is the placebo effect because you were lead to believe the w4000 had CRT like input lag. It is not physically possible for an LCD to have CRT level input lag because of the nature of LCD panels. Like I said pixel response alone is going to be at least 12ms and the w900a has a total input lag as 19.1ms exactly. Even if the w4000 had zero input lag, leaving only the response time (which isnt possible) it would be impossible to tell 12ms from 19ms in the real world.
post #1154 of 4279
So the only thing that the F8000 has that is better is the smart features and the sound, is that correct? If so I see no reason to buy it over the w900, especially since I preordered the PS4 and X1 and will have a sound bar.
post #1155 of 4279
Quote:
Originally Posted by giantsx6 View Post

So the only thing that the F8000 has that is better is the smart features and the sound, is that correct? If so I see no reason to buy it over the w900, especially since I preordered the PS4 and X1 and will have a sound bar.

The CNET review notes The f8000 has better motion resolution in movies with no soap opera effect whatsoever. It looked good to me, though hard to tell from the content that was available at the store. On the other hand, if you are more into games and want to the motion resolution for games and are willing to deal with drop in brightness and flicker, the Sony has the Impulse mode...

Would sure be nice if one set had great motion resolution for both movies and games..
post #1156 of 4279
Will barely watch movies on this TV, will watch movies on the TV in the living room. Will just use it for gaming mostly, BTW is it really worth paying 800 more bucks for this TV over the 802a?
post #1157 of 4279
Quote:
Originally Posted by giantsx6 View Post

Will barely watch movies on this TV, will watch movies on the TV in the living room. Will just use it for gaming mostly, BTW is it really worth paying 800 more bucks for this TV over the 802a?


giants if that's all your going to use the tv for then I would get the 802a instead. But that's just me.
post #1158 of 4279
Quote:
Originally Posted by giantsx6 View Post

Will barely watch movies on this TV, will watch movies on the TV in the living room. Will just use it for gaming mostly, BTW is it really worth paying 800 more bucks for this TV over the 802a?

My opinion is, if you have the money, yes. Also about motion resolution, go read the samsung threads. Nothing but problems with its frame interpolation modes. The frame interpolation is so good on the sony its almost at the level of Mitsubishi's implementation.
post #1159 of 4279
Quote:
Originally Posted by *UFO* View Post

My opinion is, if you have the money, yes. Also about motion resolution, go read the samsung threads. Nothing but problems with its frame interpolation modes. The frame interpolation is so good on the sony its almost at the level of Mitsubishi's implementation.

Some are saying the input lag is fixed though, what's the difference between that and frame interpolation?
post #1160 of 4279
frame interpolation is what converts 60fps content to 240hz by making up extra frames. Input lag has to do with how long the signal gets displayed on the screen. As far as them saying it was fixed, photo proof of it being tested with the leo bodnar tester needs to shown. For all we know it could be down to 30ms, which in my opinion is not "fixed".
post #1161 of 4279
Is the picture quality on the w900a really better? Because http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/samsung-ue55f8000-201303212755.htm that review says otherwise? Heard that site is legit, no?
post #1162 of 4279
Cnet claims the w900a has better color and black level than the f8000. I got to play with both the f8000 and w900a in store and there is just simply no comparison. The colors and overall image pop on the w900a just destroys the f8000. If you want a pretty tv with apps you can get on any blu-ray player now, then get the f8000. If you want pure picture quality with a fast and easy to use GUI, then the w900a has no competition this year as far as LCD's go. Not to mention the f8000 is a korean tv made with korean parts that are known to fail.
post #1163 of 4279
Quote:
Originally Posted by *UFO* View Post

My opinion is, if you have the money, yes. Also about motion resolution, go read the samsung threads. Nothing but problems with its frame interpolation modes. The frame interpolation is so good on the sony its almost at the level of Mitsubishi's implementation.

The higher motion resolution on the F8000 is with frame interpolation off. The W900a needs interpolation to equal the F8000 in motion resolution unless Impulse mode (with it's own side effects) is engaged on the W900a. Of course that is one detail among many.

Mark
post #1164 of 4279
Quote:
Originally Posted by marktib View Post

The higher motion resolution on the F8000 is with frame interpolation off. The W900a needs interpolation to equal the F8000 in motion resolution unless Impulse mode (with it's own side effects) is engaged on the W900a. Of course that is one detail among many.

Mark

The motion resolution on the w900a is 330 lines with no processing, which is just a limitation of LCD technology. The F8000's 1200 lines of motion resolution with motion smoothing "off" is achieved with processing still. Id rather have the ability to completely disable artificial processing than have it on all the time.
Edited by *UFO* - 9/2/13 at 10:22pm
post #1165 of 4279
Quote:
Originally Posted by *UFO* View Post

The motion resolution on the w900a is 330 lines with no processing, which is just a limitation of LCD technology. The F8000's 1200 lines of motion resolution with motion smoothing "off" is achieved with processing still. Id rather have the ability to completely disable artificial processing than have it on all the time.

You can turn off all motion processing on the F8000 and get 330 lines if you so desire. I don't know why you would do that for 24p movies, since the non-judder processing has no SOE and no change in cadence on the F8000. Personally I think that "dark frame insertion" with controlled backlight scanning is very very useful to the human eye perception of detail in motion. Very different from interpolation.

Mark
post #1166 of 4279
If only samsung FI was even usable. Read the samsung forums. Very glitchy with HD content. Even samsung said the FI wasnt intended for HD material as the processor could not handle it. You an even see it in the store. Blu-ray movies riddled with artifacts with the samsung FI turned on any setting.
post #1167 of 4279
Hi guys, I've just replaced my 42w805 (EU Version) with a 46W905 (EU Version) and I'm very pleased with it, but it does have a small issue It's darker on both sides of the screen, you can only see it when bright colors is displayed, I don't know if it's normal or not, here's a picture of it.





Please let me know what you guys think.

Cheers.
post #1168 of 4279
Quote:
Originally Posted by *UFO* View Post

If only samsung FI was even usable. Read the samsung forums. Very glitchy with HD content. Even samsung said the FI wasnt intended for HD material as the processor could not handle it. You an even see it in the store. Blu-ray movies riddled with artifacts with the samsung FI turned on any setting.

That only impacts you if you actually like SOE. Again, the F8000 gives high motion resolution with *no* FI for movies and TV. Personally, I never engage FI. The same effect on the W900a requires Impluse mode with the corresponding brightness hit and flicker. On the other hand, the W900a gives you the option of the Impulse setting with all picture modes, including gaming, whereas the F8000 does not have that option for gaming. For me, the F8000 has a completely usable system for high detail in motion on video content. The w900a gives a system with side effects, but it's available for video and gaming. One of many tradeoffs between the two sets.

Mark
post #1169 of 4279
Hey Mark so which TV do you think is better for gaming, are they both equal with the update on the f8000 or not?
post #1170 of 4279
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaRaven View Post

Hi guys, I've just replaced my 42w805 (EU Version) with a 46W905 (EU Version) and I'm very pleased with it, but it does have a small issue It's darker on both sides of the screen, you can only see it when bright colors is displayed, I don't know if it's normal or not, here's a picture of it.
Unfortunately, that's completely normal for the W905. Almost all of them have those shadows (though some more noticable than others) and whoever says that he doesn't see it on his set is probably better off not looking for them.
After a while I didn't notice them anymore, so I could live with them. The pinkish viewing angle (thank you, Triluminos) is far more annoying.
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 Sony KDL-55W900A Owners Thread