Originally Posted by Jerry Lee
Originally Posted by EtherMagic
What is up with all this talk about Blooming??? I just got my 75" X900F today and im SUPER IMPRESSED!!! These complaints about Blooming was the only reason i held out on the X900F for the past 2 months, after going through 6 TV's i finally went for it i notice very little to no blooming here!
In the past 2 Months, i went through a 75" Q6FN, a 65" Z9D, a defective 75" Q7FN, and 3 65" Q8FN's all with bad DSE, and the X900F is my fav TV of the bunch right up there with the Q8!!!
Took some pics of my Panel, so far so good, was really worried about the lottery!
I'm curious what you didn't like about the Z9d? Currently I also have the 900F with some screen defects and considering swapping it for the Z9d as I would think the extra dimming zones alone would make a huge difference.
Nothing really, it was a great TV, infact, if you are going for 65" between the X900F and Z9D thats not even a question, definatly Z9D in a heart beat. I seen no bloom on my Z9D (i now do with my X900F, nothing that really bothers me though), the blacks were excellent (648 Zones is no joke), the 3D was AMAZING, brightness for HDR content was incredible. I think my only issue was that I'm a big RDR2 fan and that game has alot of natural motion blurr, I originally owned the 75" Q6 which it was able to do motion interpolation during gaming at only 21ms, i REALLY missed this feature, as it made RDR2 look as if it was running at 60fps with no blurr what so ever, which was the main reason for me trading in my Z9D for the Q8. I went through 3 Q8's all with bad DSE that i just could not get over, so here i am with the 75" X900F. I also feel i never fully got over the size difference going from 75" to 65", i never really found myself fully happy going down in size with any of the 65 inchers i had, no matter how good the TV's were.
Basically trading out your X900F for the Z9D the only downfall is you will be getting slower response times at 30ms Pixel Refresh on the Z9D (65" Z9D, the 75" Z9D has faster Response time) compared to only around 10ms on the X900F, but honestly i feel people make a bigger issue out of this then need be. In the week or 2 of owning the Z9D i watched football and tested out other sports, none of which did i notice any difference in motion compared to any of my other TV's, no blurr or trails from the football, or behind the runners, ect, and believe me i was looking, i even recorded some footage so i could study it. So basically your not getting as good refresh times with the 65" Z9D (nothing to worry about), but you are getting a brighter all around TV (for SDR and HDR), you are getting 3D (which is the only TV in this price range that offers it), you are getting almost 600 more zones meaning virtually no blooming (Z9D really is a beast in this area), and the Android OS response speed on the Z9D in WAAAAY faster aswel, pressing the menu buttom on the Z9D your in instantly, i noticed the X900F has a bit of lag in this area.
All in all, after spending more time with the X900F over the past few days i really do feel like they are almost the same TV, very similar in almost every respect, you can just look at the Z9D as a sup'd up version of the X900F, which is basically what it is. If the blooming is bothering you, you care about 3D, want faster OS, and a brighter display, go ahead and pick up the Z9D, you really can't go wrong, not to mention the Z9D is the most elegant TV I've ever seen, built like a tank with that Gold trim it looks like a TV you would find in one of Trump Towers million dollar suites (65" Z9D was almost 6 grand just 2 years ago at this time, and it shows). I will miss the 3D, i have a huge 3D movie collection with no TV to play them on. 😣 If i had the money the 75" Z9D is what i would have right now, unfortunately i didn't have an extra $1000 laying around.