Originally Posted by Keithian
Thank you for the advice. As I've stated in a couple of my other replies, yes, I need to do a bit more in person comparisons between the Sony and the Q9 as despite the OLED bias here, the consensus seems to be that Sony is the better buy. Whether that is hate for Samsung or not I have no idea....but in the end...I need to do more research. I may take your advice and wait a bit more for what is down the pipeline with Sony as I didn't know they also had a 77" coming in.
The thing is, Samsung really hasn't made a near-reference set since their last plasma (F8500) and that was a few years ago now. Their LCD division has always been "good" at best, as they've never been able to master a proper FALD implementation on the limited models they have produced over time. In addition, regardless of their backlight choices, their LCD PQ has typically produced garish, oversaturated, digitized (i.e. non-cinematic), and often inaccurate color replication (especially with reds and skin tones). Motion has also been a problem with them, but has somewhat improved recently. These areas are based on owners' experiences, plus measurables/comparisons conducted by past and current professionals. So while critical commenting might be confused by some as "hate", in reality, this is a science forum first and foremost so everything is under the microscope.
I think what bothers people most is that Samsung has long been making sets based on their principle of "form over function" (as evidenced by their design language) for many years now. And as a result, their PQ has continued to suffer in many areas. In itself, that wouldn't be such a big deal as nothing is perfect. However (as others have mentioned), the fact that their LCD division has outspent other TV OEMs many times over, has complicated matters since marketing has the greatest impact on the more casual
of consumers. As a result, videophiles have often felt like the priority of improving PQ (for the entire TV industry on a whole) has often taken a back seat across the industry due to Samsung's influence. Also, the fact that Samsung hasn't produced anything emissive since plasma hasn't helped either, as the vast majority of videophiles much prefer emissive tech (CRT, plasma, OLED) to transmissive.
All said, I'm very sure most videophiles would welcome Samsung if they made the concerted effort to put themselves back on the map with an emissive technology - either by joining the OLED movement, or bringing a true emissive QLED product to market. And hopefully that time comes sooner rather than later.
Originally Posted by Keithian
As far as the Elite, my bad...I was confused with what I owned...it is the right model number but if it isn't a Plasma then I believe you lol..further proof that I am not a Samsung specialist as one or two suggested...I'm just someone who was looking for a new TV to upgrade from 1080P to 4K with gaming as one of the reasons and I couldn't understand the pull to pay premium for what I was seeing in the store i went to. Yes, I know it was some type of a join venture and I recall in my first year where even those companies would misdirect me for help with regard to reaching out to technical support before a person finally figured out there was a specific elite phone number...but that was years ago. I love my TV, I just can't put up with the resolution for gaming and I figured if I'm going to splurge now...I want one of the best pictures for TV and movie watching as well.
Yeah, Sharp worked with Pioneer engineers on the Elite LCD. No problem, but yeah, it's helpful to understand what you currently own and thus the type of picture you're currently use to (and maybe ultimately prefer?). In the end, everyone's going to ultimately buy what their eyes tell them, but it doesn't hurt along the way to understand the technical discussions if one's willing to factor-in the proper conditions and scientific results into their next purchasing decision.