My friend, You are completely wrong !!!
We are a sony dealer for 20 years and I personally install and calibrate and install these Tv's everyday. We received the X850's last week and we think it blows away the X900's all day long. The new Glass is far superior. The motion blur is much much smoother and the picture overall is more realistic and presents itself like the 55W900 which we and many reviewers think is the best LED on the market.
You are getting wowed by the gloss screen which most people don't want as it brings so much unwanted glare and if you have any perpendicular light in the room the gloss panels are not good. The X900 is gorgeous and for the first 4K sony panel it was nice but now its about picture quality and usable panels that fit in everyones room decor.
We are not 100% sure but but we kind of heard that LG produced Sony's passive screens like the 47" models and the XBR900's as well and the picture quality was nice but not awesome. The 55W900 which again is very different than all the other sony tvs we are pretty sure used a Samsung Panel. The 55W900 is active and the new X850's are as well and that panel just seems to be better overall. The smooth image and color uniformity is clean and film like and reminds us of Pioneer Elite Panels.
The X900's look nice but the colors are bleeding heavy red and look a bit fake to us.
I appreciate your enthusiasm and I understand your Girlfriend saying oh yes the X900 looks better but trust me this is the same case for people that walk into best buy and see Samsungs Super bright colors flying off the screen and then they get it home and the motion blur freaks them out and they return the TV.. Samsung has a 30% return rate at best buy on every tv sold. Sony is 5% return. That comes from a Regional Mgr for best buy.
Wait till some people on this forum get their 850's and see what they say..
The Matte Screen is great for any lighting concerns and the overall picture is stunning on the X850. We will be hooking up the 4K server to it next week and I will take some pics and post them.
HDMI 2.0 Standard as well on the X850 !!
Thanks for posting your impressions of the 850, but I think it's out of line to tell someone their impressions (subjective, by the way) are wrong. There's no one TV for every single person. Take me, for example. In my bedroom, which is light controlled with blackout curtains, the X9's glossy screen doesn't bother me at all, and in many ways, holds benefits over a matte screen. The speakers, which others don't like, are perfect for me, because I don't want speakers all over my room. For others, a glossy TV might be a dealbreaker in a living room with a lot of ambient light. That's why Sony put out the 850s while keeping the 900s.
I've also heard (but have yet to test myself, so I can't confirm) that the 850s introduce much greater input lag than the 900. By one measurement, the 850 input lag was nearly double that of a 900. Now, I wouldn't take that as gospel, but it's something to investigate if you're a gamer and leaning towards the 850. Again, different strokes for different folks. A very large portion of people either wouldn't notice or wouldn't care, but for a subset, that wouldn't work for their needs. That's the precise reason I elected the 900 over the Samsung f9000.
Additionally, I'm a little confused by your comments about "heavy red," especially when you say that you have calibrated X9s in the past... On the X9s, the red isn't the problem, the blue is (a direct result of the Triluminous technology). In fact, one of the knocks against this set is that it's nearly impossible to get blues in line, while reds calibrate nicely. So, when you're talking about reds that are "heavy," that leads me to question whether or not you've had substantial one-on-one time with the 900.
Edited by BrianMundt - 10/2/13 at 11:14pm