Originally Posted by Keithian
Yes, seeing something in person is always the better less risky route, but there is no SOE if you turn auto motion off or keep it around 0,0. However, motion to me at least is better on my moms 75" 900f. Despite that, I'd pick this set and the Q9fn over the 900f each and every time. To me they are in different classes for numerous other reasons and the motion on the Q9 both this year and last year are more than good enough...unless you literally are looking for weirdness like a bird flying very fast flapping it's wings in planet earth 2 and you have auto motion set to Auto.
What are some of the reasons you consider the Samsung to be in a different class? I'm just curious because it might help in my decision making process. I do watch a lot of cable TV and live sports (DirecTV), so good upscaling and motion are important characteristics for me.
Originally Posted by ray0414
the Samsung will definitely have the punchier image. It'll have better blacks and more oled like highlights with its better precision. color volume also noticeably better on hdr content.
soe is adjustable via the judder control setting, it goes from 0-10. at 0 there is no soe, but may need to be Bumped up a couple notches to help the smoothness, but but judder isn't readily apparent until about 5.
this picture is from a video on YouTube that had the Q9FN and 900f side by side.
75Q9FN* Oppo 203/UB820*S10+*DenonX4200
I appreciate that information and screenshot. To be honest, outside of demo material at places like Best Buy, I've never viewed HDR content. I am extremely happy with the picture on my plasmas, and they are not super bright. I tend to prefer a more natural and realistic looking picture. That's not to say I won't be impressed with HDR, however, my main goal is to get a much larger screen for 4K playback and that will upscale well for DirecTV/live sports viewing. Having an eye-searing bright display is not a goal of mine. I'm able to keep my theater room relatively dark at all times.
Originally Posted by thirdkind
I've spent the last several years in a wait-and-see posture and decided it was time to move on from plasma. I've always been fairly particular about motion and it was a concern of mine moving to LCD, but I think the Q90R looks great in this regard. In fact, it looks great, period. No way I'd go back to my Kuro after seeing the Q90R. But as I mentioned in my earlier post, it's an absolutely brutal display that will reveal every last flaw in the source. My Kuro masked a lot of those flaws. The upside is that the best sources look phenomenal—bright and punchy with deep blacks and minimal blooming that I don't find objectionable.
Maybe I've just lost my edge as I've gotten older, but I tend to view the differences between all these high-end displays as extreme nitpicking. The top models from all manufacturers look great this year and it's impossible to make a bad choice. The issues that plagued the Q9FN have been resolved in the Q90R. It's not a perfect display, but that's because the perfect display doesn't exist.
I agree completely about nitpicking. However, it's what I (and a lot of others here) do before dropping this kind of money on a TV. Speaking of which, that is one of the major things I need to decide... whether or not the Q90R is worth $2k more than the larger X900F. I don't know when Samsung prices typically begin to drop, but I can't justify the current price of the 82" Q90R at this time.
It's encouraging to hear that you would not go back to your Kuro after experiencing the Q90R, though.