Once again, great for educated buyers, but confusing for the average consumer. The same model line in the largest size is quite a bit inferior to the model 3" smaller, which is also much cheaper as well. Go to any Best Buy when all these sets are up and I can assure none of the associates will know or at least inform any buyers of the differences between the Q900s and the counter-intuitive much more expensive = older/inferior. This is like when Samsung used inferior panels within the same models, shady.
Having said that, the 82" Q900 for the price looks to be shockingly better than what was expected quality and cost wise and the price will only get better with all the competition out there at the higher end, even by TCL and Hisense now. This is a far cry from when they tried to push edge lit trash at their high end and all the 'professional' reviewers followed suit declaring them to be almost perfect in picture quality. I will never trust a review over personal viewing because you cannot tell anymore who is honest and unbiased which is almost no one.
Really, you'd think OLED was the newer tech and had more room to expand, but in reality, I'd rather have an older 3D capable OLED because the picture quality versus a new one is not too different. Meanwhile, the 2000+ nits quantum LEDs with close to 500 zones and wide viewing angles are vaslty superior to even what we had last year. This year may well be where LCD beats/ties OLED in more quality categories while surpassing it in many HDR situations. I don't often say this, but with HDMI 2.1 confirmed, this is a good year to buy a large TV- almost everything is in perfect alignment except for the 4000 nit peak for Dolby Vision, though we are now close enough.