Samsung Q8F vs SONY BRAVIA 3

In terms of brightness, the Samsung Q8F performs surprisingly well for a TV without local dimming. It measures up to 500 nits, which in practice means that most movie and series scenes look pleasant, and it cannot be faulted for lacking the "HDR effect." In films like Life of Pi or The Meg, the screen can burst with bright light, delivering a level of lighting effect that is satisfying. It struggles more in challenging moments—such as dark scenes with single bright points. The global dimming used causes the TV to darken the image to maintain deep blacks, but at the expense of detail brightness. This is clearly visible in the scene from Sicario 2, where the brightness of the helicopter lights dropped to around 200 nits. This is a deliberate design choice that gives the impression of deeper blacks but takes some shine away from individual elements, and one should simply keep that in mind. Regarding colour reproduction, the Q8F uses quantum dot technology, which expands the colour gamut. A coverage of the DCI-P3 palette at 91% can be considered a decent result, although it is not a record-breaking figure compared to other QLEDs.

Bravia 3 does not hide the fact that it belongs to a group of TVs that are rather modest in terms of brightness. Our measurements showed around 370 nits, which is a value balancing on the brink where any HDR effect can still be discussed. For some, this is an acceptable level, while for others it is more typical for SDR materials, where spectacular flashes or vivid contrasts are not expected. The impression is that this is not a TV for those focused on the highest image quality in demanding film content. However, this does not mean that there are no advantages to be found here. Compared to its predecessor, the X75WL, the Bravia 3 has gained an additional PFS filter, which works similarly to solutions known from QLED technology. Thanks to this, the DCI-P3 color gamut has been significantly expanded, reaching over 91 percent, which in practice results in more saturated colours and a more pleasing texture of the image. As a result, even everyday content looks a bit more vibrant, and films and series can surprise with their colourful presentation, despite limitations in brightness itself.

We decided to check out the Filmmaker mode because right out of the box it gave us the best picture. However, that doesn't mean it was perfect. The white balance had too much of a blue and red tint, causing the whites to lean towards a slight purple-pink hue. Such imbalance affected the visibility of virtually all colours, which is clearly seen in the comparison photo below. The brightness characteristics in SDR content were quite well calibrated, although in HDR materials we noticed that the TV didn't always handle its global dimming well — at times the screen was too dim, while at other times it could suddenly brighten up. Fortunately, issues related to colours can be effectively corrected with calibration tools, so we decided to get to work.

We primarily tested the Sony Bravia 3 in movie mode, which immediately turned out to be the best choice among the factory settings. It's not a perfect picture, but compared to the eco mode that the TV suggests straight out of the box, the difference is evident and definitely better. In movie mode, there is a noticeable issue: the picture seems too warm, which is due to the lack of blue colour in the white balance. Nevertheless, in SDR content, the final effect can still be considered quite decent and satisfactory for everyday viewing. Much more serious errors arise in HDR materials. The Color Checker analysis showed significant deviations, and poor brightness management, combined with limited colour gamut coverage, further exposes the shortcomings of the picture in this mode. All of this makes HDR on the Bravia 3 look unconvincing and can ruin the impression left by the otherwise quite decent SDR content settings. Fortunately, it’s not a hopeless situation. Various errors can be somewhat mitigated, and some can even be completely corrected through professional calibration. That's why we decided to check how the TV would perform after such adjustments.

After calibration, we managed to correct the white balance to almost perfection. Older SDR content looks fantastic — most errors are within a value of 2, which is definitely below the threshold of human perceptibility. In HDR, we also brought the white balance to an acceptable level, but a different problem arises here. So why are there still relatively large errors in colour reproduction? This is mainly due to the limited colour palette and the way the television manages brightness. The global dimming technique used does not give the user control in the settings, so analysing the EOTF curve in HDR films, it's clear that the Q8F can modify luminance on its own. This can be seen as a limitation, but still, the image after calibration is much more enjoyable to watch than in the factory version.

Calibration allowed us to extract significantly more from ChooseTV 3 than we could have expected at the beginning. First and foremost, it managed to address the deficiency of blue, which previously caused a noticeable warming of the image. After a slight adjustment in white balance, most errors in the Color Checker measurements for SDR content practically disappeared. The whites took on a natural tone, and brightness management in gamma stabilised to an almost ideal level, not exceeding the threshold of what the human eye can perceive. So it is safe to say that in SDR content, after a few adjustments in the settings, ChooseTV 3 performs really well. It fares much worse, although still definitely better than before calibration, when it comes to HDR content. The white balance has been brought in line, but the limitations of the IPS panel are insurmountable. The lack of local dimming means that even the smallest elements can be overexposed, which is immediately noticeable. Colour-wise, the effect has also improved, although it is far from perfect – many errors still exceed the threshold of four, and even five delta E units, remaining visible to the human eye. It was already clear earlier that ChooseTV 3 is not a television designed to impress with HDR quality. Nevertheless, it is pleasing that in SDR content, after calibration, the picture can look really great and in this category, the television pleasantly surprised us.

Let's see how the Q8F handles older content, which often has poor quality. Starting with the positives: the upscaling works really well. The TV performs nicely with both classic television and materials from YouTube, not giving the impression that we're dealing with something completely unattractive. It struggles more with content in very low resolutions, such as 576p — the image can be cropped, and unfortunately, the overscan phenomenon cannot be disabled. Moreover, the digital processing does not look great either. The noise reduction feature, instead of removing unwanted artefacts, smooths out almost everything: film grain (which many viewers desire) disappears along with the texture of the image, and actors' faces start to resemble characters from cheap Turkish soap operas. It's hard to consider this option useful — it's best left completely off. Perhaps Samsung will refine the function’s performance in updates, but for now, it’s difficult to view it as anything other than an unnecessary addition.

Bravia 3 brings something more to the Sony television family than just a shared name. It stands out primarily for its ability to enhance the quality of weaker materials thanks to the processor used. Of course, we won’t find the advanced XR chip known from more expensive models here, but nonetheless, it must be said that the image in lower resolution looked surprisingly good. The scaling worked effectively, and most areas of the screen were free from the typical excessive edge roughness found in budget constructions.

Also worthy of attention is the function that improves the smoothness of tonal transitions. In high setting, it works really well, effectively masking gradation imperfections without significant loss of detail. It does happen that the algorithm overzealously smooths elements that should remain sharp – for example, faces – however, in the overall assessment, the effect is beneficial. The best results were achieved precisely at the highest setting, and this is the option we could recommend to those watching lower-quality content.

Due to the applied 60 Hz panel, it's hard to call the Q8F a television made for gaming or watching sports. The panel isn't particularly fast, making motion blur clearly visible. If you were expecting a spectacular, almost 'stadium-like' experience during broadcasts, you might feel a bit disappointed. Fortunately, for movies and series, Samsung hasn't given up on the motion smoothing function. It's nothing more than a smoother that allows for improved fluidity of productions recorded at 24 or 30 frames per second. This way, you can decide for yourself whether you prefer a more fluid, 'television-like' image or to retain the cinematic character. It all depends on the viewer's preferences, and the ability to adjust this parameter is undoubtedly a plus.

Motion smoothness has never been a strong point of televisions equipped with 60 Hz panels, and the Bravia 3 is no exception. Nevertheless, Sony has included something that may appeal to those more sensitive to the way images are displayed. I'm talking about the proprietary motion smoother, Motion Flow, which gives the user plenty of adjustment options. With it, one can make the image smoother, almost theatrical, or stick to a more cinematic style with characteristic judder that many people simply associate with a filmic atmosphere. These functions work with content at lower frame rates, such as films and series recorded at 24 or 30 frames per second, which is the material we deal with on a daily basis. This is precisely where the motion smoother proves to be one of the most important features in everyday TV usage, and here, the Bravia 3 performs really decently.

It's not entirely clear what Samsung has messed up this year with its TVs, but the Q8F isn't free from all the confusion with updates and shortcomings. While its older cousin, the Q67D, could still be recommended with a clear conscience to casual gamers, it's hard to find a reason to do so here. Aside from the automatic game mode and the attractively designed Game Bar, we get practically nothing that could appeal to gamers. The lack of proper HGiG implementation is a major issue, especially since the feature simply disappeared after the 1126 update. The situation with VRR is even worse. Even though it appears in the manufacturer's brochures and shows up in the Game Bar, we couldn't get it to work. The Xbox Series X console wouldn't allow it to be activated at all, and the option remained greyed out and inactive. It's difficult to praise such a TV even to casual gamers, which is a shame because Samsung has had a strong selling point in the gaming segment for years.

Bravia 3 is not gear for e-sports enthusiasts or fans of late-night marathons with a controller in hand. The lack of 120 Hz refresh rate and HDMI 2.1 ports shuts down the conversation before it even gets started. This is a TV for casual gamers who, after work, will fire up FIFA or racing games, not for someone who measures every frame in a spreadsheet. Nonetheless, Sony has thrown in a few nice additions so it’s not completely sparse. ALLM works as it should, automatically switching the TV to game mode (low latency). We even find a simple Game Bar here, which is clear and intuitive. However, the biggest curiosity here is the PlayStation Portal app. Thanks to this, you can launch PS5 games wirelessly and see them right on the TV screen. It sounds great, but it only takes a few minutes to feel significant lag. In our opinion, it's more of a showcase of capabilities than something that can be used day-to-day. If someone really wants to game, it's better to plug the console in with an HDMI cable and forget about wireless issues.