Sony Bravia 3 50' (VA) vs SONY BRAVIA 3 II (XR35M2)

Interestingly, the 50-inch version of the Bravia 3 performs slightly better in terms of brightness than its larger variants. In measurements, it achieved around 370 nits, which still does not compete with top-tier televisions, but is sufficient to suggest a semblance of HDR effect. For some users, this level will be acceptable, while others will view it as typical for SDR content, where striking highlights or strong contrasts are not expected. It must be clearly stated that the Bravia 3 is not a television for those looking to extract the maximum quality from the most challenging film materials.

This does not mean, however, that everything performs averagely. Sony has equipped this model with an additional PFS filter, which works similarly to solutions used in QLED televisions. As a result, the coverage of the DCI-P3 colour gamut has increased to over 91 percent. In everyday use, this means more vivid, saturated colours and also a more pleasing image texture. Even though it lacks strong lighting effects, films and series can look significantly more appealing than with its predecessor, the X75WL.

Bravia 3 II is certainly not a TV that tries to impress with brightness. In our measurements it reached about 450 nits, so it falls well short of the brightest models on the market. That does not mean HDR is just a paper feature. Compared with ordinary SDR material, the brightest elements of the image can already come through noticeably, and reflections, highlights and stronger exposures have a bit more energy and stand out better from the rest of the scene. This is most obvious in simpler shots where the screen displays many bright elements. Then the Bravia 3 II can give a hint of a higher dynamic-range picture. The problem only begins with more demanding content, where much greater brightness headroom is required. There the TV quickly shows its limitations and instead of powerful, striking HDR we get only a competently rendered picture.

Colours

Bravia 3 II uses a QLED-type panel, although technically it does not use a classic quantum dot layer. Instead Sony has used a solution based on PFS phosphor, which performs a very similar role: it allows more saturated reds and greens and thus enables a much wider colour gamut. In measurements DCI-P3 coverage was around 94%, and the very wide BT.2020 around 74.4%. These are good results for this class of hardware, which mean the Bravia 3 II has no problem reproducing sufficiently saturated colours in HDR content. Colours do not look washed out, and more intense hues can look genuinely attractive.

Sony Bravia 3 was primarily tested in film mode, which immediately proved to be the best choice among the factory settings. It is not an ideal picture, but compared to the eco mode that the television offers right out of the box, the difference is clear and it is a positive one. In film mode, one can notice a certain issue: the image appears too warm, which results from the lack of blue in the white balance. Nevertheless, in SDR content, the final effect can still be regarded as quite decent and satisfying for everyday viewing. Much more serious errors occur 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 image in this mode. All of this means that HDR in the Bravia 3 edition is unconvincing and can spoil the impression left by a quite decent SDR content setup. Fortunately, this is not a hopeless situation. Various errors can be mitigated to some extent, and some can even be completely corrected through professional calibration. Therefore, we decided to check how the television would perform after such adjustments.

In Professional mode the Bravia 3 II already delivers a fairly good level of colour reproduction straight out of the box. In SDR the most noticeable issue is a slightly low gamma, which makes the midtones a little brighter. White balance isn't perfect either; as brightness increases the blue and red components become slightly lacking, so whites can at times take on a marginally warmer, faintly greenish tint. These are not faults that immediately catch the eye when watching a film. Average error values hover around 3, so the factory setting can be regarded as quite good. The situation is similar in HDR. Here too there is a slight lack of the blue component, so the image is marginally warmer than the reference, but the difference is not large enough to significantly interfere with normal viewing.

Calibration allowed us to extract significantly more from the ChooseTV 3 than we could have expected at first. Firstly, it was possible to address the lack of blue, which had previously caused a noticeable warming of the image. After a slight adjustment to the white balance, most of the errors in the Color Checker measurements for SDR content practically disappeared. The shades of white became more natural, and the brightness management in gamma stabilised to a nearly perfect level, not exceeding the threshold of human eye perception. Therefore, it can confidently be said that in SDR content, after a few adjustments in settings, the ChooseTV 3 performs really brilliantly. Much worse, although still definitely better than before calibration, are the HDR contents. The white balance was brought into order, 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 is also improved, although far from ideal – many errors still exceed the threshold of four, or even five delta E units, meaning they remain visible to the human eye. It was already clear earlier that the ChooseTV 3 is not a television designed to impress with HDR quality. Nonetheless, it is pleasing to note that in SDR content, after calibration, the image can look truly excellent, and in this category, the television positively surprised us.

After calibration, there is particularly a lot to be gained from SDR content. The white balance was set almost perfectly, the gamma practically matches the reference value, and the average colour errors fell from around 3 to about 1. That is already a level at which differences from the reference image are, in practice, very difficult to detect. The Bravia 3 II therefore shows that, despite its position in Sony’s lineup, it has quite a lot of potential for precise picture calibration. Improvements are also visible in HDR, although here it is no longer possible to avoid all the limitations of the TV itself. After evening out the colours, it is easier to notice that the EOTF curve in film content runs slightly below the reference value in places, so the Bravia 3 II gently darkens part of the image. This is not an ideal solution from a reference point of view, but in this particular TV it also has its benefits. With no local dimming and average black levels, this behaviour slightly reduces the visibility of the backlight in darker scenes and helps maintain a stronger impression of contrast. So you could say Sony partly masks the limitations of the panel this way, instead of trying at all costs to stick to the reference luminance.

Bravia 3 brings something more than just a shared name to the Sony television family. It stands out primarily for its ability to enhance the quality of inferior materials thanks to the processor used. Of course, we won't find the advanced XR chip known from more expensive models here, but nevertheless, it's worth noting that the image at lower resolutions looked surprisingly good. The upscaling worked effectively, and most parts of the screen were free from the typical excessive edge tearing characteristic of budget constructions. The feature enhancing the smoothness of tonal transitions is also noteworthy. In the high setting, it performs really well, effectively masking gradation imperfections without significant loss of detail. It does happen, however, that the algorithm overly smooths elements that should remain sharp – for example, faces – but overall, the effect is beneficial. The best results were achieved precisely at the highest setting, and this option could be recommended to those watching lower-quality content.

The Bravia 3 II is Sony's first TV to use the new MediaTek Pentonic 800 chipset, and there are a few changes in image processing. Starting with the basics. The upscaling itself is adequate. The TV can sensibly pull up lower-resolution material and does not have a strong tendency to over-emphasise jagged edges or other source imperfections. With regular broadcast TV or weaker streaming material the picture therefore remains quite pleasing. We have more reservations about the digital image processing. In this model Sony has replaced the well-known "Smooth Gradation" function with a new setting called "Digital Noise Reduction". Its role is essentially very similar: it is supposed to smooth unpleasant tonal transitions and artefacts resulting from heavy signal compression. Unfortunately, this function performs noticeably worse than before. At the "High" setting (the only one that had any visible effect) the TV can smooth away too many elements of the image at once, causing film grain to disappear and the texture of objects or even skin to start looking unnatural. Worse still, the effect is not particularly stable. When a scene contains more motion, the function's effect clearly weakens and at times it looks as if the TV stops intervening in the picture altogether. For everyday viewing we therefore would not recommend using it at a high level. It can help on a static shot, but the price is often an excessive loss of detail.

The fluidity of motion has never been a strong point of televisions equipped with 60 Hz panels, and the Bravia 3 is no exception. Nevertheless, Sony has added something that may appeal to those more sensitive to the way images are displayed. This refers to the proprietary motion smoother, Motion Flow, which offers users a considerable amount of adjustment options. With it, one can make the image smoother, even theatrical, or stick to a more cinematic style with the characteristic judder that many associate with a filmic atmosphere. These functions work with content shot at lower frame rates, such as films and series recorded at 24 or 30 frames per second, which is the kind of material we encounter daily. It is precisely at this point that the motion smoother turns out to be one of the most important features in everyday use of the television, and here the Bravia 3 performs quite well.

Motion handling is definitely one of the Bravia 3 II's strongest points. The TV uses a 120Hz VA panel, a solution that, by nature, despite the high refresh rate, does not always cope well with motion blur. Here, however, Sony has managed to keep that problem very well under control. Fast-moving objects remain crisp, and the characteristic trails and blurring are reduced to a very low level, if not to zero. It is one of the least motion-blur-prone LCD TVs we have tested. Interestingly, in this respect the Bravia 3 II can even outperform the much more expensive True RGB flagship series, the Bravia 9 II.

Bravia 3 is not a device 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 puts an end to that discussion before it can even begin. This is a television for casual gamers who, after work, will fire up FIFA or racing games, not for someone who measures every frame in a spreadsheet. Nevertheless, Sony has included a few nice extras so that it isn't all so bare. ALLM works as it should, automatically switching the television to game mode (low latency). There's even a simple Game Bar, which is clear and straightforward. However, the biggest curiosity here is the PlayStation Portal app. Thanks to it, you can launch games from the PS5 wirelessly and see them immediately on the television screen. It sounds great, but it only takes a few minutes to feel significant delays. In our opinion, it is more of a showcase of capabilities than something you can use on a daily basis. If someone really wants to play, it is better to connect the console with an HDMI cable and forget about wireless issues.

Sony Bravia 3 II is a very good TV for gamers, although not everything has been implemented exactly as we would like. The biggest change concerns the connectors. For the first time in a Sony TV we get as many as four full HDMI 2.1 ports with 48 Gb/s bandwidth, thanks to the new MediaTek Pentonic 800 chipset. That removes one of the issues that has plagued this manufacturer’s TVs for years. We can connect several devices at once and on each input use the device’s full capabilities, for example VRR or ALLM. There is also a simple Game Bar that lets you view key signal parameters and change a few useful settings, such as black level, when you want to improve visibility in darker parts of a game. However, there are two limitations worth knowing. The first is the lack of support for 1440p at 120 Hz. That will not be a problem for everyone, but people using that resolution on a console or PC, for example to get higher frame rates in certain games, will have to choose 1080p. We have more reservations about HGiG support. Sony does not allow you to disable the TV’s tone mapping on the Bravia 3 II, so the screen is always processing HDR content even when you would prefer to leave that task to the console. This is most obvious during HDR setup — the checkerboard pattern does not disappear at the point that corresponds to the TV’s actual capabilities. That does not mean HDR in games will look bad. You just need to approach the setup a little differently and, instead of relying on the pattern, manually set the peak brightness to around 450 nits. The issue can be worked around, but you should know about it before you start setting up the console.