LCD TV Reviews

PRICE $4,500

AT A GLANCE
Plus
Excellent blacks and shadow detail
First-rate resolution
Compelling high dynamic range
Minus
HDR limited to HDR10
No 3D

THE VERDICT
In some important respects, Samsung’s new top-of-the-line TV improves upon the company’s previous flagship, and at a lower price.

When we last reviewed one of Samsung’s so-called SUHD sets, Ultra HD with high dynamic range (HDR) was not yet available on Blu-ray. But the arrival of such discs—together with UHD Bluray players like Samsung’s own UBD-K8500—has changed the game.

The 4K resolution of Ultra HD sets is all well and good, but HDR is the most eye-popping feature of UHD. Not all 4K sets, however, incorporate HDR, and those that do don’t necessarily perform at the same level. HDR still can’t be done well cheaply; at present, the displays that do it best are their respective makers’ premier offerings. The Samsung KS9800 series definitely belongs in that company—and among the three models within that family, the 65-incher we’re discussing here is the smallest.

PRICE $40,000

AT A GLANCE
Plus
Accurate color
Superb resolution
Near state-of-the-art black level and shadow detail
Huge, bright picture
Minus
Price

THE VERDICT
The UN85S9AF is a hyper-expensive flagship for Samsung, and more of a technology demonstration than a product for the masses. But the money, as they say in Hollywood, is up there on the screen to see.

I once joked about the humongous 100-inch-plus HDTVs many manufacturers trot out at trade shows, suggesting that the best way to get them into your house was to place the TV where you thought it should go on the slab of your house under construction, then build the house around it. Samsung’s new 85-inch (diagonal) Ultra HD isn’t that big, but it’s close.

Mmmm, 1080p.

There is something to be said for 1080p. It is, after all, the so-called holy grail of HD. As far as the mainstream end of the market is concerned, there are only three displays available now that support it: This Sharp, the "mine's bigger than yours," 1-inch-larger Samsung LCD, reviewed in the April 2005 issue, and the Sony 70-inch LCOS (sorry, SXRD) rear-projection TV. If you have money to burn, there are several front projectors that are 1080p and cost more than a Camry—and a couple of plasmas that cost more than several Camrys.

<IMG SRC="/images/archivesart/207sharplc46d92u.jpg" WIDTH=450 HEIGHT=311 BORDER=0>

Sharp has been in the LCD flat panel television game as long as anyone. If someone mentions LCD televisions, the first word that pops into your head might well be "Sharp," Followed closely by "AQUOS."

<IMG SRC="/images/archivesart/207sharplc52d92u.jpg" WIDTH=450 HEIGHT=311 BORDER=0>

What the big bucks get you.

Per screen inch, this is the most expensive TV we've reviewed in years. The early 50-inch plasmas were certainly more expensive (and obviously smaller), but, in the era of higher yields and vicious competition, it's rare to see any company come out with a model that unabashedly eschews the price wars. An obvious comparison would be one of a Ferrari, and Sharp would indeed love that comparison. For the extra money, does this 57-inch offer greater performance compared with the Camrys of the LCD world? The better question would be, does it offer enough better performance to justify its substantial premium?