Samsung UN55D8000 3D LED/LCD TV (TPV 102)

Samsung’s UN55D8000 combines stunning good looks with excellent performance

April 20th, 2011 -- by David Birch-Jones
Source: The Perfect Vision

Although last year’s Samsung 9000 series 3D LED LCD TV was the clear winner in the style department with a super-svelte look, the next tier down 8000 series models were actually better performers, as they had a more sophisticated LED edge lighting scheme.

What a difference a year makes. Their new 8000 series (presently consisting of 46” and 55” sizes) are even slimmer than last year’s 9000 models, with a front panel bezel width and depth that barely exceeds the diameter of a #2 pencil. Unlike last year’s 9000 models, the new 8000 series sets include the precision multi-zone LED dimming system, which Samsung now calls Micro Dimming Plus, that provides for contrast enhancement on a localized basis.

The new 8000 sets also ship with a way cool dual-sided remote that features a conventional TV remote control layout on one side, and a smartphone-like QWERTY keyboard configuration (with an LCD text screen) on the other.

OVERVIEW

Consider this HDTV if: you’re after a 3D LED LCD TV that’s pretty much packed to the rafters with useful features along with a stunning look that will have your friends turning green with envy.

Look elsewhere if: you’re not flush with so much green as this is most definitely a top-tier set with a price tag to match. Consider one of Samsung’s plasma 3D sets, which offer a much better dollar-per-screen-inch price ratio.

Ratings (relative to comparably-priced HDTVs)

• Overall picture quality (HD): 10
• Features: 10
• Connectivity: 9
• User interface: 10
• Value: 7

FEATURES

This Samsung has just about every feature you could possibly think of, including tremendous Internet app functionality, aided by a built-in web browser and a remote control that features a QWERTY keyboard on one of its two operating faces. There’s a LAN port for connection to a wired network, and the set features built-in Wi-Fi (b.g.n) wireless connectivity. Samsung’s app selection is pretty broad and includes a number of popular subscription TV show and movie streaming services. Along with the apps, the set features a well-designed on-screen operating manual (called E-Manual) that has highly legible text and sharp colorful graphics.

The Micro Dimming Plus feature (also known as Smart LED) provides multi-zone backlight dimming by modulating the LED edge lights around all four sides of the screen to increase contrast in select portions of the image. When paired with the Auto Motion Plus feature, which uses backlight on/off scanning to reduce perceived motion blur and smooth out movie judder, the picture quality approaches that of a top-line plasma flat panel.

When in 3D mode, the LED backlighting modulation improves the 3D experience by inserting black frames between each of the displayed left and right eye images to reduce ghosting (caused by left/right image smear) and flicker. New for this model is a 3D focal plane adjustment (3D Viewpoint) that can move the principal in-focus portion of the 3D image forward or backward. Not everybody sees 3D the same way, so the control is helpful to prevent crosstalk (which causes ghosting) by making the image more focused.

As with some earlier Samsung LED models, the 8000’s LED Motion Plus feature provides separate processing levels for video-originated and film-originated content. The Custom choice allows the viewer to individually dial up or down the processing level for both content types. Some film buffs expect to see the judder that’s a result of the comparably slow 24 frames per second film acquisition rate, so they can turn the judder reduction all the way down, effectively killing it. Or, they can choose a low level that provides a modest amount of judder reduction for movies and perhaps a higher blur reduction level for 60 frames per second video-originated content.

New for this year are two additional options, including Cinema which optimizes detail for the center of the image, and Ticker which fine-tunes the processing for the top and bottom portions of the image, where text crawls are typically positioned. There’s also a separate option, Cinema Black, which recognizes letterboxed content with black bars above and below the image, and shuts of the LED lighting for those portions to improve deep black quality.

Comments

Geickel -- Fri, 05/13/2011 - 00:25

You are on drugs...seriously. You guys' audio reviews are always spot on, but your video reviews (at least in this instance) are waaaaaaaayyyy off. Maybe you should try looking at what the real TV pros have to say about a model before publishing a review. If the criteria were on aesthetics and features alone, then this Samsung would easily be a 9 or 10...but considering the fact that the bulk of the review of a display device from a "high-end" audio and video site should revolve around image quality (and this model has several flaws), you should be ashamed that you gave the UN55D8000 a 10 in picture quality. The Panasonic ST30 is easily a more solid television from an image quality standpoint...shame, shame, shame.

discman -- Thu, 05/19/2011 - 08:06

He states his image settings and evaluation criteria. You provide none. Where does your testing differ?

Geickel -- Thu, 05/19/2011 - 11:54

Admittedly, my "review" of this review is pretty harsh. I think my problem with it has to do with the seeming lack of a standard or reference display with which to compare. This TV was awarded a "10" in HD picture quality, as was the now legendary 9th generation Pioneer KURO plasma. In this review, it is stated that the D8000 only comes close to the best plasmas...the KURO sets are widely revered as the best consumer display device ever made. Further, if you read David Katzmaier's review of this set, he also claims this television has excellent overall performance...except for one huge flaw that significantly affects every other area...screen uniformity. The CNET review goes soooo much more in depth than this one. Again, I think the D8000 is arguably the most gorgeous of all televisions to date, but I wouldn't buy a television based on cosmetics alone...not even cosmetics AND features alone; but it is highly likely that I would purchase a television with perfect picture quality even if it were the ugliest around and had no additional features. I think most users of this site would agree: you can build a speaker out of gold and diamonds and pearls, but if it doesn't perform as well as it looks, who gives a s#*t? Then there's the price...I can buy a 55-inch VT30 for $2800 (MSRP), which is significantly less money than the 55-inch D8000's price tag, and I would have the next best thing to a KURO, with excellent off-angle viewing and virtually no screen uniformity issues, with better black level performance as well as a 600hz refresh rate (which is another inherent issue in LED-based LCDs: you WILL have motion blur unless you enable some sort of processing, be it 120hz or 240hz; either way you WILL the "soap opera effect)...and what will you score the VT30...an 11 or 12? Alright, I'm done with my rant. Happy viewing.

Dan

discman -- Thu, 05/19/2011 - 12:49

I guess, but the stated comparison is to "other similarly priced HDTVs". That may not be as exact as you would like, but there is a reference (I think there are also colorimetry standards and observational standards indicated). I think the Kuro is not part of this reference set (for rating of 10) because it was $6500. Even if you split the 50" Kuro and 60" Kuro price, we're still talking $5250, so both devices receiving a 10 have different meanings. I agree it is a little vague, but I can't agree with you characterization of the reviewer being on drugs. Maybe you want your information spelled out more clearly, but that request doesn't require a personal attack IMHO.

I do agree that scoring any technology is difficult. If you say something is a 10 and next month something better comes along, what do you do? But if you say something like the Samsung is a 2 to leave yourself room for a decade of progress, it doesn't represent reality very well either. Maybe we just have to chill and assume a 10 means "really good for the money and among the best I've seen so far".

Geickel -- Thu, 05/19/2011 - 23:49

I am in agreeance that the personal attack was uncalled for (although the comment was a figure of speech, not an assertion that the reviewer is literally on drugs; sorry for not clarifying). Last year's Panasonic VT25 would still be the better performer, and would cost less at its street price early last year when it came out. The "10" rating should be reserved for equipment that truly bests or at least matches all others at or below its price. This model does not. Concerning the KUROs, its interesting that you are using the retail price of a television that hit the market over 3 years ago to defend the fact that a model 3 years newer still can't compete with it...regardles, plasmas still rule the roost and a rating of "10" should never have been given to this model...and someone should probably educate our friend, the non-drug-using reviewer, on what he is actually looking for when reviewing a television. If this were some amateur review, I would see tbings differently...but it is a professional review...by a website/publication that pays their reviewers to accurately represent the best of what the high end has to offer, and, in my opinion, the ratings given by this reviewer fail AVguide.com's readers.

discman -- Fri, 05/20/2011 - 09:58

Your plasma point makes sense if you change the meaning of the rating as you insist upon. But this isn't how they define it. Not trying to be argumentative, but your complaint about Plasma is simply that you don't like their rating system. Which is fine. You say this is about accuracy, but really that bit is about defining things the way you want to. I take your point about the pricing of the Kuro (presumably it would be cheaper today; we don't know), but I'm not sure what could be practically be done about that since the product isn't made any more. I suspect reviewers actually just do their ratings vis a vis today's products?

As for the Panasonic, you may be right that it is better (I don't have any experience with either set), or as we often see, better at some things and worse at others. I'd be interested to see what Birch-Jones says specifically on the subject, but judging from his review of the ST30 (picture quality = 8, though I'm unclear if this is in the context of plasma or just price) he doesn't agree with you. He at least has actually had both sets in his lab. You claim he has an erroneous view of the parameters he evaluates, but offer no specifics; he says what he tests and how.

Again, I don't have a horse in this race, but your righteous claims seem to lack substance and you're attacking the professionalism (e.g. erroroneous, uneducated, inaccurate) of a person, which you can't just avoid by saying "non-drug-using". My view: too much of the dialog in the world right now consists of people who sensibly or conceptually disagree but who elevate the disagreement to slander. I don't believe this is necessary or helpful (it doesn't contribute to my understanding of this TV which is why I'm making the point).

Geickel -- Sat, 05/21/2011 - 00:15

Have you read David Katzmaier's review...if you haven't, here's the link:
http://reviews.cnet.com/flat-panel-tvs/samsung-un55d8000/4505-6482_7-345...

As a side note, Katzmaier has been reviewing televisions for Cnet for several years now. In his review you will find pre- and post-calibration reports of the TV. He states the test equipment he is using, and what televisions he is directly comparing the image to. To me, this is a big deal. A properly calibrated television is, in my opinion, the only way to really evaluate a television. Birch-Jones does include his picture settings, but he doesn't (to my knowledge) offer the equipment he used to arrive at those settings...I don't know if he just set it by what appealed to him, or if there was some reference.

OF COURSE I disagree with the ratings system...because they can give a "10" to any television if they want to, but that doesn't mean they all perform the same. It doesn't mean I am wanting to define the ratings system "the way I want to" so much as it means I want to define the ratings system in a way that makes sense. THERE HAS TO BE A REFERENCE besides just liking the TV. Maybe his ratings system just disagrees with the way I would evaluate a television.

I DID offer one specific flaw of the UND8000 that affects all others, be it black level performance, color accuracy, gamma, or any other criteria on which a proper television review should be based: SCREEN UNIFORMITY. That is the only specific I needed, as the television seems to perform quite well in all other areas, but is fundamentally flawed if it can't reproduce those attributes evenly and consistently across the entire panel.

Allow me to contribute to your understanding of this TV: I work with these televisions every day, as I am a sales associate at a Magnolia Home Theater, which means nothing more than that I get to tinker with these sets every day, and therefore "have a horse in this race", since I somewhat religiously follow television reviews and evaluate them myself after having read the reviews, and have a passion for making sure people are getting what THEY are looking for in a television, be it LCD, LED, or Plasma. The subject of this review, the Samsung UN55D8000, performs most excellently in all of the areas where picture quality is concerned, except for screen uniformity, which negatively affects the performance of most of the other areas to a significant extent (there is also the artifical motion often referred to as the "soap opera effect" that is caused by all 120 or 240 or 480 hertz processing that I've ever seen, which will absolutely ruin the look of a film and the director's intent). It has just as many features and doo-dads as any other TV, if not more, and is arguably one of the most beautiful sets ever designed (except for the "SAMSUNG" bulge at the bottom).

I AM NOT against this television. If you want to maintain the look of the original program material, plasma is still the way to go. If you like really bright, really saturated colors, and could care less about an "accurate" picture, then LED or LCD may be for you; but where picture accuracy is paramount, plasma still reigns supreme...and for less of your hard-earned money.

I would like to apologize to David Birch-Jones for slandering him, who, for the record, hasn't personally contacted me and demanded an apology. I would also like to offer discman an apology for slandering David Birch-Jones' professionalism, as he seems to have been more affected than Mr. -Jones. I do mean this sincerely to both of you, as the things I said in the very first post were the result of a disappointing review following a particularly bad day. Thank you for your acceptances of my apology in advance.

I have nothing further I wish to say on the topic of The Perfect Vision's review of the Samsung UN55D8000, as I believe I have stated my disagreement with this review to the extent of my wishes, and I no longer wish to "not trying to be argumentative" with you about this topic. Thank you and good day.

Dan

discman -- Mon, 06/06/2011 - 19:46

Dan: here is what Birch-Jones says about his testing approach and the equipment used.

http://www.avguide.com/blog/how-playback-conducts-video-tests

I don't understand this very well, so perhaps it doesn't answer your questions, but it does seem to me that it isn't arbitrary. Of course even a data-driven approach like the one he uses requires interpretation, so there will be room for disagreement.