Top critical review
Flawed by design.
Reviewed in the United States on September 13, 2015
This television has a wonderful display, but it is plagued with disastrous design flaws.
I bought this television because its specs met all of my criteria:
It supports 4k/60p at 4:4:4 color.
It supports ARC and CEC.
It supports HDCP 2.2.
It has passive 3D.
This is a case of the product ticking off all of the requirements, but once you get the product you discover it is implemented in such a way that using one feature precludes using others.
So the television arrives, in good shape, and I find the 1st design flaw: 4k/60p 4:4:4 is only on HDMI port 3, ARC and CEC are only on HDMI port 2, and HDCP is only on HDMI port 1.
Ok, I'll just connect my computer to port 3, my receiver to port 2, and my future 4k Blue Ray player to port 1. The user interface for switching inputs is pretty good on this television, unlike many I have used. So I get this set up with my playstation3 standing in for the future blue ray 4k player, and I discover the second design flaw: I can only get stereo out of the computer and the PS3 through the ARC channel, even though television is coming through at 5.1 channels. This television only supports stereo on its HDMI inputs! This means in order to get the high quality surround sound out of my blue-ray player, and my PC, and any other HDMI device, they MUST be routed through my receiver. Since I want my computer to display using 4k/60p 4:4:4, I must connect the receiver to HDMI port 3, and I therefore can't use the ARC, or CEC, nor can I attach a future 4k blue-ray to the system without having to move the HDMI cable to watch different sources.
The next thing I noticed is that the edge of my picture was being chopped off, even though I had properly set the video mode to "Just Scan". It took me a while to figure out what was going on. The image layer of this display is a few mm in front of the back light, and the back light has a mask exactly the size of the display. Since this monitor has a much higher resolution, one must sit a lot closer to be able to use it as a computer display, so I sit at about 3'. This means I'm looking at the edges of the display at about a 15 degree angle, and the edges of the imaging layer appear to be outside the edges of the back light. So the edges of the display look black, and I loose about 3mm of image around the entire display. I can see what is there if I move my head to look directly at the edge of the display, but most times, it looks like half of all the icons in my bottom menu are off screen.
Now we get to 3D. It appears that the filters for the 3D display are a bit in front of the imaging layer. a passive 3D display has alternate horizontal rows of pixels rotationally polarized in opposite directions. This apparently worked fine for 1080 displays, but this display has twice the vertical resolution, so its pixels are half as tall. This means the vertical viewing angle only needs to be half as much to see the wrong row of pixels as on the 1080 display. So if you sit too close, you will get a double image at the top and bottom of the display due to parallax. But with this display, too close is twice as far away as with a 1080 display of the same size. In order to not see the ghosting on the top & bottom of the display, I had do be more than 10' away from the television, far enough away that it would be impossible to tell the difference between 1080 and 720. This defeats the purpose of having a 4k display.
I have a thumb drive with 1384 pictures and videos. The television was unable to access all of the pictures for a slide show. It did better than my mothers Viseo television from about 5 years ago, bit it still can't access all of them.
If I use my computer to display my pictures, they look great. It is nice to finally have a display that comes close to the resolution of the cameras I'm using.
I have discovered that 49" is not too big for a computer display.