Originally Posted by Kamran Jahadi
For anyone interested, I found a home theater store that had an 82" Q6 and Q8 side by side. The store was pretty empty and the sales guy let me do what I wanted.. so I streamed videos and tests on both sets at the same time for a true comparison, making sure all the settings were equal.
The main thing I wanted to know was whether the Q8 suffered from the same motion blur I was having on my Q6. What I found was that the Q8 does have motion blur, but it's not nearly as bad as on the Q6. The motion trails were definitely harder to see and I'd say in my opinion was about 50% less noticeable than on the Q6, but still definitely visible on the motion blur dot test, and a hockey game streamed on Youtube.
Other observations - The Q8 screen has more of a glossy black finish to eliminate glare. This has the effect of making the blacks look more "inky" like OLED, so combined with the better local dimming and FALD, it's got better contrast. Not OLED levels but closer. However I would say one side effect of the screen finish is that the overall brightness is reduced. Compared to the Q6 next to it, the Q8 just wasn't as bright.
Color volume was slightly better on the Q8... colors were more rich/vivid. It was noticeable but very slight improvement. You're probably not missing much with the Q6 unless you happen to have a Q8 next to it.
DSE was a little bit more pronounced on the Q8 than on the Q6 next to it and also mine at home. I realize this is hit or miss with the panel lottery, but this is also confirmed by Rtings so beware you may likely have a set with more DSE if choosing a Q8 over Q6.
So I haven't decided yet if what I saw was worth a $1500 price difference from the Q6. Yes, the trails are annoying but that's also very situational and most obvious when watching motion against against a white background which I don't typically spend alot of time doing. I wonder if i'd be better off pocketing the $1500 and using it a couple years down the road for my next upgrade. I think I need to reconsider the X900F as well.
OK, at least the Q8 is a little better (in the case you tested). AngryJedi stated they were all bad, including the Q8 he checked.
The Q8FN and Q7FN both have better screen coating than the Q6FN. I have to say, after owning the Q6FN, the main thing you see is how much less the Q7FN reflects light from the room. With the Q6FN I often had to dimm the lights or close the blinds because it was almost like looking in a mirror. The Q7FN seems to swallow or absorb the reflections allot better which makes it easier to watch TV in a bright room or during daytime. Also, as you mentioned, the black levels seem a little deeper due to the very good coating.
You will get more DSE with the Q8 due to it's full array backlight system. I had a Sony with full array and the DSE was terrible.
The blacks may be better, but you get other issues like DSE unfortunately. I was very impressed with the uniformity on my KS9000 and it's also great on the new Q7F. Almost no DSE and only very little banding if tested with a moving test-screen. This is why I moved away from FALD. A well built Edge-Lit TV will always offer a much better uniformity in comparison to FALD. The blacks are also VERY good on the edge-lit so I decided not to go for the Q8. DSE is quite distracting.
Technically speaking, the Q6FN should reach a max. peak of 1000nits, the Q7FN 1500nits and the Q8 2000nits.
I was surprised how bright the 82" Q6FN got to be honest. I thought it would never reach the brightness needed. But it did very well.
Yes, the Q7FN is a little brighter and my friends Q8 is even brighter with it's 2000nits and deep black levels due to FALD.
In the end, I think all of these TV's reach incredible bright levels. And unless you are watching HDR content, you'll find yourself using the automatic dimming option allot. It is blinding in a dark room on all of these sets.