Samsung Q800T (QE65Q800T) 8K QLED TV Review & Comments

CaptainJames

Well-known Member
Utterly pointless (the TV, not the review). Who is going to take an 8K panel with DSE and banding over a 4K OLED with Dolby Vision and Atmos?
 

MikeTVMikeTV

Well-known Member
I'm guessing Samsung still has a lot of stock of 8K TVs to shift.

We saw this in Currys (yes I'm aware store conditions don't count) but it didn't look any better than any of the tvs around it, some costing a quarter of the price at the time and thats how people still decide..
 

Dean

Well-known Member
Great review Phil

Disappointing that Samsung doesn't even include the One Connect box at this price, which would be a must on my next TV.

Makes me glad I picked up my QE75Q7FN when they use to include it at more reasonable ranges.
 

GreyMutton

Active Member
Utterly pointless (the TV, not the review). Who is going to take an 8K panel with DSE and banding over a 4K OLED with Dolby Vision and Atmos?
Agree although some folk just see the bigger number and assume it's better. Or for silly bragging rights.

We still have countless channels on air in the UK broadcasting SD. In 2021.
Sometimes my other half leaves it (65" B9) on one and I end up thinking I need my eyes tested.

Outside of gaming (which is still a tenuous argument given not even a GTX3090 could run the latest games at 8k, maybe DLSS might unlock this in future) there's really no point in spending the money on these TVs right now. Can you imagine what SD channels must look like on an 8k set? 🤮🤮🤮
 

Coulson

Distinguished Member
I don't see how a TV of this price, 8k or not with as many picture issues as Phil found can be "Recommended" on an AV centric site. An LED TV with OLED brightness issues (without OLED infinite blacks), yellow tint, the usual Samsung EOTF tracking problems and black crush sounds pretty awful to me. That's before you even factor in the price.
 
Last edited:

bogart99

Well-known Member
Might warrant a recommended when calibrated but that then pushes the price up even more. For around £2.5k I would want somewhat better than this.
 

steve sph

Well-known Member
Good comprehensive review Phil.
So for the best part of four bags of sand the set needs further calibration, lacks DV and Atmos and there's next to nothing to watch in 8k anyway.
I think I'll pass.
 

Jason72

Active Member
Hi,
For me, This is why I'm going to stick with L.G. Oled.
I cannot recall this many negative points in a review.
Gregory
 

CaptainJames

Well-known Member
I don't see how a TV of this price, 8k or not with as many picture issues as Phil found can be "Recommended" on an AV centric site. An LED TV with OLED brightness issues (without OLED infinite blacks), yellow tint, the usual Samsung EOTF tracking problems and black crush sounds pretty awful to me. That's before you even factor in the price.

I think that's a very fair point to be honest.If someone is in the market for a bright FALD LCD, then there are plenty of 4K options that would do a better job. Why would any 8K panel be worthy of a recommendation (let alone one without DV and Atmos), if there is no real world 8K content?

I think it would be better to advise people not to buy an 8K panel at this time, as there is no benefit to be gained from it.
 

Phil Hinton

Editor
Staff member
I think that's a very fair point to be honest.If someone is in the market for a bright FALD LCD, then there are plenty of 4K options that would do a better job. Why would any 8K panel be worthy of a recommendation (let alone one without DV and Atmos), if there is no real world 8K content?

I think it would be better to advise people not to buy an 8K panel at this time, as there is no benefit to be gained from it.
All of those points are in the review. Plus, I have mentioned all of the issues that caused us some concern, so as a reader you can see if that will be an issue for you or not.

For some people, they will want an 8K TV, so in that respect with a price cut of around £1550 from new and the things this TV does well, it deserves a recommendation and I am specific about that in the conclusion.

We are all adults here and different people have different needs and expectations from a TV, so I try to be as balanced as I can be in the reviews so that everyone is informed with what we find that is good and bad.

You then decide if it is what you're looking for or not, which looking at the thread you have all been able to do from reading the review. Scores and recommendations are always difficult as each person is so different, so again I've been as balanced as I can be.
 

Coulson

Distinguished Member
You then decide if it is what you're looking for or not, which looking at the thread you have all been able to do from reading the review. Scores and recommendations are always difficult as each person is so different, so again I've been as balanced as I can be.
It's because your review is so comprehensive why we are even able to have this discussion. My only issue is that after reading the review is that the picture quality is debatable at best and because of that the price doesn't make sense either. I don't see how this TV could be "Recommended" to savvy AVForum readers.
 

HMTB

Well-known Member
This TV sounds faulty.

I should think that TVs that are faulty because they are visually defective and have problems such as banding and/or DSE (and/or backlight bleed for that matter) should not get a score or a recommendation (I'd end the review there).

Absence of faults/defects should be a base requirement for any set. Those things are pretty fundamental flaws in a screen which should not be there and are distracting when watching content.

Manufacturers, in my opinion, for too long have focussed on the wrong things (e.g. always thinner, brighter, more resolution etc), when they should be concentrating on producing screens which are fit for purpose and free from faults (i.e. no banding, no DSE, no backlight bleed etc). The primary focus should be on image quality.
 

Evinger

Distinguished Member
Thanks for the Review Phil. No Dolby Vision would on its own put me off.Then the SD problem... Not for me, that's for sure
 

Phil Hinton

Editor
Staff member
This TV sounds faulty.

I should think that TVs that are faulty because they are visually defective and have problems such as banding and/or DSE (and/or backlight bleed for that matter) should not get a score or a recommendation (I'd end the review there).

Absence of faults/defects should be a base requirement for any set. Those things are pretty fundamental flaws in a screen which should not be there and are distracting when watching content.

Manufacturers, in my opinion, for too long have focussed on the wrong things (e.g. always thinner, brighter, more resolution etc), when they should be concentrating on producing screens which are fit for purpose and free from faults (i.e. no banding, no DSE, no backlight bleed etc). The primary focus should be on image quality.
The TV is not faulty. It's an LCD TV which uses a FALD backlight so the fact it has DSE is not a surprise.

There is no such thing as a perfect TV, each technology has pitfalls and issues that have to be taken into account. There are no TVs that I have reviewed which have an absence of issues related to the technology used.
 

hankcharlie

Active Member
Guys, we have a faulty mid range Samsung 75" that needs replacement. Would you recommend going for the 4K 65" Q95T, 8K 65" Q800, 8K 65" Q700 or if I'm able to swap it, a Panasonic 65" HZ980 OLED? Opinions appreciated thanks!
 

HMTB

Well-known Member
The TV is not faulty. It's an LCD TV which uses a FALD backlight so the fact it has DSE is not a surprise.

There is no such thing as a perfect TV, each technology has pitfalls and issues that have to be taken into account. There are no TVs that I have reviewed which have an absence of issues related to the technology used.
That's pretty depressing. Is it a quality control/assurance issue? There must be (I would assume) units of TVs of any of these technologies without any of these distracting screen uniformity issues, hence the so called panel lottery?
 

bongo123

Active Member
Utterly pointless resolution: Check
Woefully overblown price: Check
Countless picture problems: Check
Inferior to pretty much every other telly in said price range: Check
Recommended badge: Check
Cheque in the post from Samsung: Check ;-)
 

c__w

Active Member
Not one to bash, but if it's "expected" a TV to have DSE/banding and therefore it's overlooked in critique then it's legitimising the manufacturers to continue to ignore these issues which are important to consumers IMO.

DSE is a major problem and as some TVs don't have it and some are so bad they get panels changed, it should be a priority to refine the technology to reduce this phenomenon. Nobody needs an 8K TV as there's no content, and instead I suspect a lot of people wish Samsung concentrated on manufacturing clean 4K LED panels tv with more dimming zones. For example I've got a 65Q80T and you can see DSE quite easily but as a gaming TV it's fine, and after cashback I only paid £1199 for it, which is obviously a good price, but atm they want about £1799 which is way too much when it has some flaws.
 

rustyk21

Active Member
Not one to bash, but if it's "expected" a TV to have DSE/banding and therefore it's overlooked in critique then it's legitimising the manufacturers to continue to ignore these issues which are important to consumers IMO.

DSE is a major problem and as some TVs don't have it and some are so bad they get panels changed, it should be a priority to refine the technology to reduce this phenomenon. Nobody needs an 8K TV as there's no content, and instead I suspect a lot of people wish Samsung concentrated on manufacturing clean 4K LED panels tv with more dimming zones. For example I've got a 65Q80T and you can see DSE quite easily but as a gaming TV it's fine, and after cashback I only paid £1199 for it, which is obviously a good price, but atm they want about £1799 which is way too much when it has some flaws.

This comes up a lot on monitor reviews too. People spending a lot of money want perfection, I get that, having gone through a slightly painful upgrade process myself recently.

My personal belief is that you can either have flawed panels that are affordable, or perfect panels that are unaffordable. It's kind of as simple as that IMHO. It all comes down to the cost of making a screen that is 'acceptable' and minimising wastage.

If any one manufacturer had come up with a manufacturing process which didn't have these issues, I think we would have heard of it by now. All that's different is that people become more discerning the more they pay for something.
 

MahaRaja

Member
Samsung has been the biggest proponent of 8K TV and it has had some paid promoters, who should be ashamed of themselves, in the AV Industry to promote and praise 'upscale' abilities of 8K TV.

As there is no 8K content and not likely in the next 5 years at least, their biggest selling point is upscaling HD and 4K to 8K resolution; bringing 'fantastic picture' of something that was not there during HD filming and now magically appearing in 8K screen. It's not a leap in technology, as increasing the res is very simple.

They just want you to dump your 4K TV and buy their crappy 8K sets, how else they could sell their TVs at a higher price and justify it?
 

The latest video from AVForums

Podcast: Trinnov Room Optimiser: A full explanation of Trinnov and its room optimiser technology
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Latest News

Netflix adds support for reduced theatrical release window
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Paradigm launches Founder speaker series
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
AVForums Podcast: 3rd March 2021
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
Music revenue in U.S. sees vinyl sales overtake CD
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom