• New Patreon Tier and Early Access Content available. If you would like to support AVForums, we now have a new Patreon Tier which gives you access to selected news, reviews and articles before they are available to the public. Read more.

Answered Cheapest proper HDR (over 500 nits) TV?

mrtickleuk

Prominent Member
Preamble: I'm a big HDR fan and have an LG C8 OLED; before than a Samsung KS7000.

Several friends have bought TVs since I discovered the HDR revolution. It was the first "wow" I've had for many, many years - widescreen, HD, are all "meh" in comparison. (Aside: Constantly frustrated by those pushing 4k/8k picture resolution as "the thing", it's a distraction: HDR is the biggest improvement in picture quality since colour was introduced in my opinion. American networks are considering adding HDR to 1080p, before/instead of broadcasting 4k HDR).

Friend 1: "We've bought a new TV". I discover that it's a Samsung LCD, low down in their 2017 range. I told them about HDR after checking their TV could do it. "This'll knock your socks off!" I said as I played a YouTube HDR clip. Huge disappointment, barely no effect at all - as the TV can barely do 300 nits.

Friend 2 asked me for advice before purchasing. Not wanting him to be screwed over, unable to persuade him to spend enough to get 800-1000 nits, the best I could do was ensure he got a TV that does Dolby Vision, in the hope that the customised tone-mapping would help. He settled on a LG 49SK8100PLA. On paper it can do 500nits for a 10% window, but the reality disappointed me. And the milky blacks were horrible to my OLED-accustomed eyes.

So the problem is - what can I recommend in good conscience to friends on a budget? What is the cheapest TV available to buy in the UK - ignoring all other factors - that can do 750 nits HDR?

TIA :)

edit: I can't change the thread title, whoops. You can see I've upped the number...
 

zeppelino

Distinguished Member
Sony XF9005 or LG B8 at 55” - c£1k for both.

For full on brightness it’s the Samsung Q9FN but that’s £1800. Sony ZF9 is another option but light leaks into black bars.
 

mrtickleuk

Prominent Member
Thanks, yes but I don't think I can persuade them to spend £1,000, that's the problem.

Once you get to 750 nits, you can see HDR. Below that it's not worth it - just like those horrible "HD-ready" TVs they used to sell - those 720p panels left over from TV monitor manufacturer that got packaged up into consumer TVs to get rid of them.

I love my C8, so I'd recommend a B8 for him in an instant!

It's so frustrating that there are LOTS of 300-nit TVs for around £500, and then a huge jump to high-nit TVs for £1000. But a chasm in between.
 
Last edited:

michaelmoravian

Established Member
Samsung 55NU8000 is £750. 1000 nits and HDR10+. Not 100Hz but decent picture and the usual good smart features.
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
Its not just about nits, local dimming is more important. That is why the Sony XF9005 is mostly recommended against the Samsung Q7FN/Q8FN when the Samsung's get brighter.

HDR comes at a premium, you just can't get what you are looking for. Best of a bad bunch is probably the Samsung NU8000 but its HDR is only average and can still look washed out.

Samsung 55NU8000 is £750. 1000 nits and HDR10+. Not 100Hz but decent picture and the usual good smart features.
It is using a 120hz panel at 55"+ but it doesn't reach 1000nits and doesn't have local dimming.

tldr - you need to tell them HDR is a premium and a TV like the Sony XF9005 is worth saving for. Sometimes Sony centre direct have the 49" version for £650 refurbished.
 

michaelmoravian

Established Member
Best of a bad bunch is probably the Samsung NU8000 but its HDR is only average and can still look washed out.

It is using a 120hz panel at 55"+ but it doesn't reach 1000nits and doesn't have local dimming.

Yes, it is the 49" that isn't 100Hz. And you are also right that without local dimming the HDR won't have the same effect. But under £1000 the Samsung is about the only option.
 

mrtickleuk

Prominent Member
Its not just about nits, local dimming is more important. That is why the Sony XF9005 is mostly recommended against the Samsung Q7FN/Q8FN when the Samsung's get brighter.

I agree, I would go with the Sony every time. It also supports Dolby Vision. I have personally been burned by Samsung's broken promises and u-turns on their support for the KS 2016 range. I could not recommend a Samsung to anyone that I know personally with a clear conscience.

HDR comes at a premium, you just can't get what you are looking for. Best of a bad bunch is probably the Samsung NU8000 but its HDR is only average and can still look washed out.

Yes, unfortunately that's the conclusion I'm coming to... just a shame I enthuse about HDR and then it's such a let-down on their TVs when they see it!

It is using a 120hz panel at 55"+ but it doesn't reach 1000nits and doesn't have local dimming.

YUK! :)
 

Analysis

Banned
Samsung 55NU8000 is £750. 1000 nits and HDR10+. Not 100Hz but decent picture and the usual good smart features.

Sorry but that's false information, no way does the NU8000 hit 1000 nits, it's got no local dimming either so it's pretty poor for HDR overall, you need something like the XF90 or Q series from Samsung, or an OLED like the LG B8.

For Dolby Vision it's 4000 nits to be represented properly.
 

michaelmoravian

Established Member
Sorry but that's false information, no way does the NU8000 hit 1000 nits, it's got no local dimming either so it's pretty poor for HDR overall, you need something like the XF90 or Q series from Samsung, or an OLED like the LG B8.

For Dolby Vision it's 4000 nits to be represented properly.

Yes, the NU8000 is far from ideal, and I don't know of any TV that actually achieves the nits quoted by the manufacturer. But for the kind of price most people are willing to pay for a TV it is one of the better ones, and I thought that was the point of this thread. The Sony is better but is also considerably more money.
 

mrtickleuk

Prominent Member
10% paper numbers are not what you should be looking out for. 500 nits in 'real scene' peak brightness is a much more useful number: Peak Brightness of TVs: Max luminosity and HDR highlights The NU8000 is probably the best budget HDR model you can get ... (and yes the OLED has spoilt you so you should let your friends judge :p; the KS7000 doesn't even have > 500 nits in real scene peak brightness, for reference)

Very useful link, thanks! :)

My KS7000 blew me away and most of my friends who saw it. You are right about paper numbers. I wanted to have some threshold where I could be certain that my excited claim "HDR will knock your socks off!" won't turn out to be a damp squib.

The R-Tings website has always been a good stats-fest, as long as you remember to factor in a margin of error (eg their results for C8, B8 and E8 are all different because of panel variances in the particular samples they tested - and cannot be because of any other factor - since we know they all have the same panels).

So, their "real scene" peak brightness for the KS8000 (the American version of the KS7000) is 453nits, and 10% window is 1431nits, they claim. Odd since I got 800nits (10% window, measured) out of mine after calibration, and it was very bright indeed for general HDR content. So I have to "scale my internal thoughts" on this.

The friend has gone quiet on the subject. I'm half-expecting him to rock up and excitedly tell me he's bought a 65" Samsung NU7100 with its "real scene" peak brightness of 261nits, 10% window of 165nits, and it'll be crap.
 

desinho

Prominent Member
Very useful link, thanks! :)

My KS7000 blew me away and most of my friends who saw it. You are right about paper numbers. I wanted to have some threshold where I could be certain that my excited claim "HDR will knock your socks off!" won't turn out to be a damp squib.

The R-Tings website has always been a good stats-fest, as long as you remember to factor in a margin of error (eg their results for C8, B8 and E8 are all different because of panel variances in the particular samples they tested - and cannot be because of any other factor - since we know they all have the same panels).

So, their "real scene" peak brightness for the KS8000 (the American version of the KS7000) is 453nits, and 10% window is 1431nits, they claim. Odd since I got 800nits (10% window, measured) out of mine after calibration, and it was very bright indeed for general HDR content. So I have to "scale my internal thoughts" on this.

The friend has gone quiet on the subject. I'm half-expecting him to rock up and excitedly tell me he's bought a 65" Samsung NU7100 with its "real scene" peak brightness of 261nits, 10% window of 165nits, and it'll be crap.
Here are some other real world examples for the KS7000 and NU8000:
Samsung KS7000 (UE55KS7000) Test – najtańszy SUHD z Ultra HD Premium
Samsung NU8002, NU8042, NU8072 | TEST | Telewizor LCD Ultra HD z HDR (2018) i systemem Tizen
The Flatpanels reviews are also attempting to produce a 'real world' peak brightness number by measuring it on an ANSI pattern (besides the 10% window) and results are pretty much in the Rtings real scene peak brightness ballpark.
[I was sure I had seen an Nu8000 review there but can't seem to find it or perhaps it was in Danish only; edit it was for the MU7000]
 
Last edited:

michaelmoravian

Established Member
There is a review of the nu8000 on HDTV test.
 

The latest video from AVForums

SVS Prime Wireless Pro Powered Speakers - Review Coming Soon
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom