Originally Posted by Ngerstman
Hello all on the 900f thread, haven’t been on the forum in a while. I’ve ordered a 75 inch 900f, just wondering if there is that much of a difference between it and the z9f, not a crazed videophile who needs the blackest of blacks. Need accurate crisp picture with good motion and accurate color, that’s good enough for me. I own a 65 inch Sony 950b up in NJ that I still think has the best picture I’ve seen yet on an led tv, better than the older z9 if you ask me. I also own an lg e6 that I still can’t understand why got such rave reviews from the video press, average motion, sharpness and horrible black crush, the picture just falls apart in dark scenes. That alone should have killed the ratings imo. So what do you guys think, is the 900f more than great enough, especially at half the price of the Z, and even on its own merits. Thanks. Regards. Ned.
Originally Posted by iserum
Z9f is better as compared to 900f, in my case it is not worth the almost double the cost of z9f, if money no issue at all z9f is great. I would save the money and spend on nice sound bar or better 4K player.
I also tried the Z9F out for a month and eventually settled on a 900F. The 900F, at least the one I have, has a very uniform screen with only a single small spot that can be seen in extreme circumstances... meaning, like, 97% of the time I can't see it and even then I need to pay attention in order to see it. Otherwise, very uniform... certainly none of the shadowy (albeit minor) jail bars that my old Vizio (2016 M Series) had. I was actually surprised coming from the Z9F just how clean the 900F looked overall for half the price.
The Z9F black levels are actually fine, despite what a lot of haters who had never even seen the television have to say. Yeah, the native contrast ratio is low, but it means nothing in practice. Here's where the Z9F fares better: It has more zones and it shows. The 900F has larger bloom spots when things need to be lit against a dark background. The Z9F fares worse with the cinema bar bleed which can get virtually white... the 900F can have cinema bar bleed as well but not as severe... I think the big difference here is because of the Z9F's optical layer over the panel in combination with the brighter lighting.
Both TV's are great are producing accurate colors and whatnot. As far as the quality of the picture I'm seeing overall... honestly, I don't find there's a huge difference between both television outside of the zone lighting and how it looks/responds.
So the TL;DR here is that no, I don't find the Z9F is worth twice the price. The 900F is inferior but not drastically so, especially considering the price difference.