This TV had just about everything I was looking for: giant screen, 240Hz, 3D, Full HD, lots of inputs and the list goes on. While I was slightly more impressed with the Samsung picture quality, partially due to its glossy (versus the Sharp's matte) screen and overall picture brilliance, I quickly got over it because without having the two sets side-by-side, you quickly forget the differences. The picture is vibrant and highly adjustable. I borrowed some calibration settings someone posted on the interwebs and after eliminating some oversaturated factory-default reds, I think the picture looks gorgeous. HDMI 4 is MHL-compatible meaning that my separately purchased Roku stick can be controlled through the TV. However, it doesn't seem to work...but that's a separate issue -- in theory, the technology is there and should be capable of handling it. I haven't been able to get the ARC to function properly yet either whereby I have something plugged directly into the TV, but want the sound to come out of my receiver. It's a minor issue that really only affects a device I rarely use (though this could prove troublesome if/when I get my Roku stick to work).
Setup was easy, but I rarely use the built-in internet functions. I primarily use an AppleTV, Roku, TiVo, PC or PS3 for most web-based or streaming services -- especially given that the response time in loading and operating the TV's offerings can be quite slow.
I was slightly disappointed that Best Buy's model is the low-end version of this particular model. The main difference (Costco sells the slightly better version) is mostly the lack of Sharp's Quad-pixel-something-or-other technology. It's intended to improve the 3D quality as well as overall picture quality. Would it have made a massive difference...probably not, but I tend to like having the latest and greatest (except in the case where I'd have to wait 5 years to get an overly expensive 4K TV -- this will hold me over in the meantime).
The TV, despite having read that matte screens surprisingly do the opposite, performs really well in a sunny room right next to a window. I never have issues struggling to see the picture. In the store, next to the Samsung, the picture looked a little flat due to the screen, but again, in my home without anything to compare with side-by-side, I'd never know the difference.
3D playback is pretty impressive. Although we've seen the movie 50 times, Tangled in 3D was a revelation for my 4 year old daughter. I couldn't help but laugh aloud when she reached out to grab the floating lanterns. Given that the 3D glasses have to be purchased separately and that Universal glasses are not an option, we did struggle to get them to stay on her little face, but we made due. I do wish that there was an option for kids, haven't found one yet, as the switchable nosepiece they offer with the glasses made little difference. There is also a brightness enhacing option for 3D playback which seemed to make a difference in what can often be a dimmed experience with active lenses. There was some ghosting, but in extremely limited cases and I think it had to do more with the movie than the set or glassesd themselves. Animation tends to do fare better than live action, but after awhile you adjust. It's fun, but expensive to share with others given that each set of glasses is $50 and then you have to trust a child not to break them in some cases.
As mentioned, inputs are plentiful in the sense that the majority of my components run through either an HDMI switcher and/or the receiver itself...so in reality, I only really use one TV input. The sound that comes from the TV is surprisingly loud. On one or two occasions I was startled by the unexpected audio that came on when I switched sources. Needless to say though, it won't replace a quality receiver and surround speakers.
I've got an XBOX 360, PS3 and Wii U all hooked up and they look brilliant on the screen...even my wife a technophobe and non-gamer was impressed and wanted to get in on the action when I was playing.
Although I still feel that Samsung's picture quality is superior overall, for the price, you can't beat the size. I'm glad I decided to get the extra 10" of screen real estate over a perceived gain in picture quality. Given that I upgraded from a 60" rear-projection LCD Sony from 2003, I couldn't really go wrong -- anything was an upgrade. After taxes, etc, this ended up being a little more than I wanted to spend, but as something that I hope will last 6-7 years, I think I made a great choice that should carry me through to the next generation of televisions. I'm actually doing more watching on the TV again versus my tablet devices. It's an enjoyable experience to watch and makes television and gaming fun for me again.