3D Televisions

My old 50" flat screen TV bit the dust so I am looking to upgrade to a newer better 3-D TV in the 50 to 55" size range.

I am no expert when it comes to new technology so I am looking for some advice from anyone in the know.

Some questions that come to mind are the following.

 

The 3 D glasses which are better active or passive / pros and cons.

Plasma, LED or LED

Internet smart TV's are these just like a computer or are you limited to certain sites? IE: Can I pull up LPower on my living room TV

Accessories??? Blue ray player and other items that are worth having??

 

Thanks in advance Vic

Samsung 8000 series are pretty phenominal. I recently picked up a Sharp 60LE835 and not a bad word to say about it either, it's tits for the price.

 

Step up to a 60, it's a huge difference from a 50 in viewing area.

I have the same Sharp 60LE835 and it's fantastic. I called Sharp and got an Extended 4 year FULL replacement warranty for $150, as opposed to the stores $400 warranty.

 

I like the Samsung also, but the 55" is about $900 more than the 60" Sharp. Can't argue with the price break, and quality is there with both.

 

Best

I gotta go with samsung because they are the pioneers for most newer panel technology, and produce it. Best colors, good components, great panels.

 

Internet enabled, I personally have an Apple TV because the UI and experience on the factory "apps" suck and are limited. No need for that feature imo, but most TVs come with it anyway. They don't have web browsers, so no, its mainly for accessing netflix, mlb tv, etc. you won't be able to browse. SOME have browsers, but they suck anyway. Too hard to use with a tv remote. For this, I just hook up my computer via HDMI or use airplay.

 

For 3-D, I don't know too much about that, but I've heard that Sony is the top dog in that category. Heavily invested in the tech, and their glasses work better. Looks much better, Ive tried out a sony 3d tv and want one! Can't complain about Sony either, their stuff is usually tits.

 

LED all the way. slimmer, better contrast, sharper picture, better on energy, last a long time.

 

Accessories, just Apple tv, srs. Stream your stuff, rent movies in HD, imo there is no longer a need for blu ray, the newer compressed files which are streamed are nearly identical to blue ray. Physical media is dying.

 

 

Agreed on Samsung 8000. Just bought one a couple months back and love it.

I have the same Sharp 60LE835 and it's fantastic. I called Sharp and got an Extended 4 year FULL replacement warranty for $150, as opposed to the stores $400 warranty.

 

How did you swing that warranty deal for $150? I'll be all over that one!

 

 

 

Emanon - https://sharp.yourserviceplan.com/presentat...layer/Home.aspx It's $50/mo for 3 months.

 

You can also call Sharp Aquos Advantage number for no waiting and they will send you to the above linked line.

 

Best

Sony & Samsung I think are the best for quality. Though I would wait another year or so for a 3D TV, no real reason other then I think they'd improve more, become cheaper since they are still new and have limited use personally I see no rush.

 

Accessories: PS3. Thats it imo. DVD/Blu-ray, web, apps, games, netflix, unlimited storage for low upgrade cost, connect it to your home network/server if you have, and if you have a techie friend you could buy a pre-slim PS3 and have them install linux on it and then you have a full computer as well attached to your tv still all in a single device.

First, all manufacturers are solid. Samsung isn't any better than Sharp, who isn't any better than Sony, who isn't any better than Toshiba.

 

Everything today is pretty damn good, and no one is vastly superior to anyone else in terms of a "which is the better brand" routine.

 

Second, 'passive' 3D is bullshit. It's not full resolution, it's basically a cheat. It's not "the same as in movie theaters" simply because both sets of glasses are passive. Far from it.

 

Not going to get into it here, you can Google it for all the details. If you want the full clarity and resolution you paid for, stick with active LCD shutter-based systems only, no matter what you read, no matter what you hear from chucklehead friends, etc. Listen to Uncle Mako.

 

Now that being said, you need to spend some time trying active 3D out before buying, as approximately 25% of the population has real issues with it, including:

 

1. Not being able to perceive any 3D image at all (poor bastards)

2. Headaches

3. Eye fatigue from the lower refresh rate (60Hz) of the glasses

 

Again, it's only 25% or so, but you'll want to spend at least 30 minutes watching a demo if you're really into it and using it as a purchase qualifier.

 

For me personally, I own a Sharp 70LE735 (70" main), a Sharp 60LE632 (60" xbox/game room), and am now tracking the long-rumored Sharp 90LE835 (90" LCD) that is supposedly planned for a Christmas launch this year. Praying that it's actually real, as the 80" units that just deployed aren't enough of a jump over my current 70" set to make the leap. But 90"....droooooool...

 

Anyway, I'm a fan of 3D as it works currently, a fan of buying as big an LCD as manufactuerers will produce, and happy with Sharp so far as a whole.

 

As far as the 'Smart TV' routine, all I can speak to are the apps in the Sharp units, and they work ok for the most part. They're definitely not PCs, but you can surf sites like L-Power and the like.

I have a Sony Bravia 55" 3D, won't ever buy another.

This may not be try anymore since they've been out a while, but when these things were new.

DVD's like $70ea oh and if there is the slightest scratch on it, it does some weird stuff.

I got 2 pair of 3D glasses but you'll need more

$150ea

If you wear glasses the 3D shades over your glasses they are heavy. Batteries last about 2.5 movies.

To really get the 3D effect it has to be dark.

I really got upsold cause the best buy guy said they were coming out with a box that would turn every show 3D some how, never happened.

Used it a couple time and really lost interest in it.

 

GT4 is pretty bad ass in 3D mode

 

There is another thread about 3D tv's on here.

I have a Sony Bravia 55" 3D, won't ever buy another.

This may not be try anymore since they've been out a while, but when these things were new.

DVD's like $70ea oh and if there is the slightest scratch on it, it does some weird stuff.

I got 2 pair of 3D glasses but you'll need more

$150ea

If you wear glasses the 3D shades over your glasses they are heavy. Batteries last about 2.5 movies.

To really get the 3D effect it has to be dark.

I really got upsold cause the best buy guy said they were coming out with a box that would turn every show 3D some how, never happened.

Used it a couple time and really lost interest in it.

 

GT4 is pretty bad ass in 3D mode

 

There is another thread about 3D tv's on here.

 

Sucks, hate hearing stories like these. Dumbass sales drones trying to meet their "points quota" or whatever the fcuk incentive the shop doles out for them (it's 'points' because most big-box retailers do NOT use commission as incentive anymore...god no, that would hurt the bottom line! lol).

 

As for the concerns, here are my experiences with the Sharp TVs:

 

"DVD's like $70ea oh and if there is the slightest scratch on it, it does some weird stuff."

 

Have never paid more than $30 for a Blu-Ray DVD, even brand new day one releases. Plenty of online retailers offering deep discounts.

 

"I got 2 pair of 3D glasses but you'll need more, $150ea"

 

A lot of the sets come with the glasses for free, my Sharp 70" had them included at no charge. Be sure to look for holiday deals Vic.

 

"If you wear glasses the 3D shades over your glasses they are heavy. Batteries last about 2.5 movies."

 

We're on our 15th 3D movie and are still on the original batteries in both of our glasses. Could be some mfg differences there, Sony should look into that if true.

 

"To really get the 3D effect it has to be dark."

 

Ours looks the same pretty much in daylight or night, but again this could be due to the natural differences between how each person's brain actively processes 3D images.

 

"I really got upsold cause the best buy guy said they were coming out with a box that would turn every show 3D some how, never happened."

 

Any time a sales drone or product brochure says "upconvert"...run. Feel for you there, no such thing in any sort of way that actually works WELL exists, either now or in the future.

 

"GT4 is pretty bad ass in 3D mode"

 

Hell yes it does, definitely agree. Already looking forward to the next Xbox and PS3, which are due within 18 months, simply because they'll both have processing upgrades that allow better graphics and fidelity in 3D. Love it.

My old 50" flat screen TV bit the dust so I am looking to upgrade to a newer better 3-D TV in the 50 to 55" size range.

I am no expert when it comes to new technology so I am looking for some advice from anyone in the know.

Some questions that come to mind are the following.

 

The 3 D glasses which are better active or passive / pros and cons.

Plasma, LED or LED

Internet smart TV's are these just like a computer or are you limited to certain sites? IE: Can I pull up LPower on my living room TV

Accessories??? Blue ray player and other items that are worth having??

 

Thanks in advance Vic

Glasses:

Active glasses will give you the best quality, as there is no loss in image quality. TV's with passive glasses suffers a reduction in quality since the image for both eyes are displayed at the same time in 1080p (so the quality is halved), while active glasses alternate between eyes in 1080p. The difference is very noticeable if you compare the two.

Passive glasses have some pros though; they are a lot cheaper, work from any angle, lighter (some find active glasses heavy and uncomfortable), does not reduce brightness and they are less likely to induce headaches due to flickering for those who are sensitive to that.

That being said though, the image quality of active glasses trumps all the cons imo. Due note that cheap active glasses usually also feels flimsy and low quality.

 

TV:

Unless you are really close to the TV, anything less that 55" is useless for 3D imo. Most of the 3D effect vanishes on a smaller TV.

Most people look at plasma as "old tech", and while it is old, it is still being developed and holds a lot of benefits over LED and LCD, especially when it comes to 3D:

Response rate in the microsecond range instead of milliseconds. This reduces crosstalk/ghosting (left and right image bleeding into the other)

Contrast in the millions:1 versus thousands:1 on LED

A lot better display of dark/black colors

Better viewing angle

Cheaper

 

LED pros (don't buy LCD):

Consumes less power

Thinner displays

Brighter

Usually a matte finish versus gloss finish on plasma = less reflections from surrounding light. If you have a window opposite of your TV (or a lot of windows in general) a glossy display is definitely a no go.

 

These are just some general pros and cons, it will all vary on the make and model of course.

 

When it comes to "apps" on the TV such as youtube etc, as MrDoctor said it's mostly crap and useless.

Excellent post flaccid, perfect explanation of the tech differences.

A lot of the sets come with the glasses for free, my Sharp 70" had them included at no charge. Be sure to look for holiday deals Vic.

 

Ours looks the same pretty much in daylight or night, but again this could be due to the natural differences between how each person's brain actively processes 3D images.

 

It was a combo deal 55", PS3 w/ little big planet, 2DVD's, 2 glasses.

I'm fine with the TV, love it. Just the 3D aspect.

 

I got 2 pair of glasses. I meant you'll need more. If you turn that thing on in 3D everyone wants to watch it!

 

Thats a really good point!! I'm the only one who has that problem, now that I think about it.

Also heard some people get headaches after an hour or so. But I've never had that problem.

 

Just an FYI for you people with Sharp 3D tvs. I like the Sharp glasses and they retail for $100 where I am. You can buy the active 3D glasses made by Playstation for $49.99 at Best Buy and online. There is absolutely no quality difference in them at all. Just minor design differences and how you have to charge them.

 

Best

Just an FYI for you people with Sharp 3D tvs. I like the Sharp glasses and they retail for $100 where I am. You can buy the active 3D glasses made by Playstation for $49.99 at Best Buy and online. There is absolutely no quality difference in them at all. Just minor design differences and how you have to charge them.

 

Best

 

Ha, that is awesome, great find.

While we are on the subject; If you're gonna watch a 3D movie, make sure it's native 3D and not converted 3D. A horrible trend in 2010 and 2011 was to convert movies to 3D just because of the hype. And it ALWAYS sucks, the 3D effect is so poor and annoying you might as well stick a fork in your eye and swirl it around. The only exception to this might be Titanic, considering Cameron spent some $85 million on the conversion (I haven't seen it yet, just guessing). Seems like the trend is going away in 2012, all though some big movies like The Avengers are converted.

 

Here's a great list of 3D movies and their source format (native or converted 3D):

 

http://www.3dmovielist.com/3ddvds.html

While we are on the subject; If you're gonna watch a 3D movie, make sure it's native 3D and not converted 3D. A horrible trend in 2010 and 2011 was to convert movies to 3D just because of the hype. And it ALWAYS sucks, the 3D effect is so poor and annoying you might as well stick a fork in your eye and swirl it around. The only exception to this might be Titanic, considering Cameron spent some $85 million on the conversion (I haven't seen it yet, just guessing). Seems like the trend is going away for 2012 though.

 

Here's a great list of 3D movies and their source format (native or converted 3D):

 

http://www.3dmovielist.com/3ddvds.html

 

Correct, and it applies to new releases moving forward as well because the 'convert' trend isn't going away.

 

It's done for economic reasons as shooting native 3D on set is prohibitively more expensive (and a good many directors haven't yet 'taught' themselves how to shoot native 3D as the lighting is different, the setup is different, the depth of field is different, etc, etc, etc).

 

I recall Michael Bay joking that he had to "go to James Cameron's 3D finishing school" before beginning the last Transformers shoot due to the complexity of learning how to shoot in 3D properly.

 

So studios are still doing conversions for the most part, which as Flaccid said is god-awful, and something you want to avoid paying for both at the theater and when they arrive on blu-ray.

I just want to know when I can watch them without the glasses.

how to shoot native 3D as the lighting is different

After I read an interview with the Saw 3D director where he makes a point of the problem with reflections and 3D (different light reflection for left and right eye), I see it everywhere and it's fcuking annoying

I just want to know when I can watch them without the glasses.

 

You'll be able to go to passive glasses without dropping any resolution once 4K becomes the standard. It's a ways away from being commerically viable, if I had to guess I'd say 3-5 years minimum.

 

Anything you're seeing that's prior to 4k (as with recent CES, Cedia, and other trade show demos of exotic hardware that have occurred) is either a technology that is currently far too expensive for actual production, or has other drawbacks that make active glasses still the best choice for most.

 

Going to be a while.

 

I don't mind the active glasses at all personally, they recreate 90%+ of the experience of a top line current 3D projection theater. Crosstalk is down, as are other distracting flaws in home 3D, so for me we've already arrived at a place where I don't feel any desire to wait for what comes next.

 

Which reminds me that we haven't watched our Hugo 3D disc yet, need to get around to that this week...

After I read an interview with the Saw 3D director where he makes a point of the problem with reflections and 3D (different light reflection for left and right eye), I see it everywhere and it's fcuking annoying

 

That reminds me of why I try to actually stay away from the AVS forum now for that exact reason.

 

You've got nerds pouring over every pixel of a display or projection pointing out its flaws, and once I know they're there I always see them 100% of the time.

 

Now I'm blissfully ignorant and enjoying every second.

First, all manufacturers are solid. Samsung isn't any better than Sharp, who isn't any better than Sony, who isn't any better than Toshiba.

 

Maybe, maybe not. Depends on what you're buying and which technology. Panasonic has always have really awesome plasma sets while Samsung has excelled in LCD/LED. Sony doesn't manufacture displays and as such their stuff could come from numerous places. Different technologies offer different benefits. All manufacturers could in theory be equal and offer the same quality stuff, but they simply don't.

 

As always -- it depends.

 

OP, I wouldn't base my buying decision on 3D performance if I were you. Even though you want specifically a good 3D set, the vast majority of usage will still be 2D. Being able to watch Titanic in 3D isn't going to seem so cool when you have to put up with poor black levels and color accuracy in Game of Thrones. Personally I think the vast majority of 3D is shit, a fad, and does nothing to improve the experience -- just a way to get you to pay more.

 

Yes, even a mediocre set today will probably beat whatever old set you are happy with now, but that's not really an excuse for buying a poor performing set by modern standards.

 

You should go to AVSForum and do some research. You'll find tons, if not overwhelming amounts of information from owners of just about any set/line out there.

This was true five years ago, but not anymore.

 

Black level performance across the board is excellent as a whole, refresh rates are solid, pixel lag is all but abolished, and even 3D crosstalk is down significantly.

 

Just about every other metric that people tend to harp on when evaluating these sets is within an acceptable range from all of the brands we've mentioned, and it's night and day versus tvs and LCDs from just a few years ago in terms of the variance.

 

The reason that uniformity has occurred in recent years is due to consolidation, essentially most LCD panels among all of the bigger brands are manufactured by one of three total suppliers worldwide. Yes there are differences, no shit Brian, but the differences are minute and noticeable only to those who specifically look for issues.

 

99% of the population would have no problems whatsoever with any new set today, even if not ISF calibrated at all.

 

As far as the anti-3D sentiments, the OP wasn't asking for an opinion on 3D as a whole, he seems interested in it and wants details regarding the differences between the options available.

 

Personally, I find 3D to be excellent, an absolute game-changer, and I'm not too cool for school to admit it as a lot of the elitists of home theater seem to be at the moment.

 

When the content is shot for it specifically, and done the right way, it's immersive and enveloping. Particularly with a great 7.1 system.

 

Would never buy a new TV without it, I enjoy it that much.

Got the Samsung 8000, love it.

 

Wouldn't bother with the 3d glasses though.