Best 3DTVs? (42"-47")

mcwildcard · 1 Mar 2013 at 12:03

My ol' faithful Hanspree finally popped it's clogs the other week, so now it's time for me to get a nice new shiny telly!
Ideally I'm after a 42" 1080p smart TV, with recording functions (can be through external HDD), but I'm particularly interested in one with excellent 3D. I've had a look around online, but reviews only seem to cover 3D functionality as a side thought, and really don't give much idea as to the quality (unless it's particularly bad).
Can anyone recommend some such TVs in the £600-£1000 bracket (excluding glasses cost), which would fit the bill? Or possibly even websites with reviews that actually give the 3D element some proper examination?

Please note, I'm not entering into any discussion as to the merits of 3D itself, I happen to like it and won't consider any non-3D TVs.

Thanks!

Martynt74 · 1 Mar 2013 at 12:30

I think the Panasonic 42" GT50 can be had around £800. Thats probably your best bet to be honest

Check out reviews on AV Forums as they are in depth and look at 3D performance to.

blairw · 1 Mar 2013 at 13:12

42" ST50 can be had for 599, not much at all between the ST and the GT

mcwildcard · 1 Mar 2013 at 13:33

Thanks guys, that range does look very decent.
I am little worried about the power consumption with plasma though, what non-plasma tvs would be comparable with the GT50, that also have decent 3D?

Destination · 1 Mar 2013 at 14:31

Samsung ue46es6800
Our 3d works nicely
2 free glasses

blairw · 1 Mar 2013 at 15:05

The difference in energy savings per year is going to be tiny, and well worth the extra for better picture quality

NotAGolf · 1 Mar 2013 at 16:28

I recently bought a Panasonic TX-L47ET5B for £779 (although it's gone up in price now). I've been impressed with the 3D.

Unfortunately I've not seen 3D on another set so have nothing to compare it to, but a lot of the reviews I read said the 3D was very good.

I'd definitely go for a 47" over a 42". The larger the screen the better the pop out effect, as when the object hits the edge of the screen, the 3D effect is effectively broken. Having said that, the best looking scenes are the ones where the scene appears to disappear behind you TV imo.

I was toying with the idea of a plasma (still am tbh!) including the ST50/GT50 but got put off by a few things:
- I wanted passive 3D instead of active
- My living room is very bright in the summer
- Extra energy consumption (my TV is on quite lot of the time)

Slam · 2 Mar 2013 at 00:23

I was hoping to get a 42" 3d tv late last year, but then our car broke down. The model I'm keen on is the LG 42LM670T

http://www.richersounds.com/product/tv---all/lg/42lm670t/lg-42lm670t

To my eyes, the passive 3d glasses system is much better than the active system

jamjar · 2 Mar 2013 at 10:29

Slam said:
I was hoping to get a 42" 3d tv late last year, but then our car broke down. The model I'm keen on is the LG 42LM670T

http://www.richersounds.com/product/tv---all/lg/42lm670t/lg-42lm670t

To my eyes, the passive 3d glasses system is much better than the active system

Thats a good t.v from what i,ve read, and i think there are pros and con for Active & Passive 3d , the first one being passive glasses are cheaper,and don,t give flicker , but some say active is the better of the two , guess its just how much you need 3d

jamjar · 2 Mar 2013 at 10:37

Also if anyone is interested you can get the Panasonic TX-L42ET5B 3d t.v for £527.00 inc p&p from a famous department store in London beginning with S and was owned by a Mr S

Pug · 2 Mar 2013 at 10:51

i moved from a Panny Plasma to a 3D (Passive) LG LCD (LED Backlit), and i have to say they perform very similarly, but the 3D (whilst limited) is great imo

it was the LG 55LM640T to be precise, and i am completely impressed.

I chose active over passive as the loss in resolution was worth the gain in brightness, lack of flicker and comfort of wearing - but ymmv, and i concede active has a higher res (but only with 3D BD which i cannot watch).

jamjar · 2 Mar 2013 at 10:59

Pug said:
i moved from a Panny Plasma to a 3D (Passive) LG LCD (LED Backlit), and i have to say they perform very similarly, but the 3D (whilst limited) is great imo

it was the LG 55LM640T to be precise, and i am completely impressed.

I chose active over passive as the loss in resolution was worth the gain in brightness, lack of flicker and comfort of wearing - but ymmv, and i concede active has a higher res (but only with 3D BD which i cannot watch).

interesting ,so your saying that Passive is as good as active in performance ? am i right in saying LG & Panasonic are the only makes to do passive 3d ? and Panny ,Samsung and Sony are active ?

Pug · 2 Mar 2013 at 11:07

I'm saying it's subjective, and both have strengths and weaknesses. Your primary choice should be 2D quality, as there is little good 3D content (though this is increasing).

Passive, overall, gives a lower resolution picture but this seems somehow less noticeable with 3D than it does 2D in my experience. LG do passive (but only on their LCD - all Plasmas are active) and i think they supply some screens to others e.g panny.

If your 3D content comes from any source other than 3D BD then i do not think the resolution issue will even register. It is only 3D BDs that can do frame sequencing 3D, all other content - sky, virgin, the web *cough*) all use Side-by-Side or Over-Under, at which point all video will be half res anyway.

For me, that along with the risk of headaches from shutter glasses, the cost of replacing them when i sit on them, and made the decision of passive easy. But not all will agree.

Whilst i wouldn't normally give too much credence to CNETs "tech" articles, i think this one was quite useful when i was buying.

http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57437344-221/active-3d-vs-passive-3d-whats-better/

jamjar · 2 Mar 2013 at 11:13

Pug said:
I'm saying it's subjective, and both have strengths and weaknesses. Your primary choice should be 2D quality, as there is little good 3D content (though this is increasing).

Passive, overall, gives a lower resolution picture but this seems somehow less noticeable with 3D than it does 2D in my experience. LG do passive (but only on their LCD - all Plasmas are active) and i think they supply some screens to others e.g panny.

If your 3D content comes from any source other than 3D BD then i do not think the resolution issue will even register. It is only 3D BDs that can do frame sequencing 3D, all other content - sky, virgin, the web *cough*) all use Side-by-Side or Over-Under, at which point all video will be half res anyway.

For me, that along with the risk of headaches from shutter glasses, the cost of replacing them when i sit on them, and made the decision of passive easy. But not all will agree.

Whilst i wouldn't normally give too much credence to CNETs "tech" articles, i think this one was quite useful when i was buying.

http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57437344-221/active-3d-vs-passive-3d-whats-better/

thanks i,ll take a read,and i agree about the 3d side of the t.v , and the glasses of active are stupid prices too

Slam · 2 Mar 2013 at 12:16

Pug said:
i moved from a Panny Plasma to a 3D (Passive) LG LCD (LED Backlit), and i have to say they perform very similarly, but the 3D (whilst limited) is great imo

it was the LG 55LM640T to be precise, and i am completely impressed.

I chose active over passive as the loss in resolution was worth the gain in brightness, lack of flicker and comfort of wearing - but ymmv, and i concede active has a higher res (but only with 3D BD which i cannot watch).

Don't you mean passive over active?!

I find the loss in resolution far less noticeable than the flicker of active glasses. I noticed it only when I was looking for it. Also the passive glasses are cheaper, several come with the TV so you can have people over and watch 3d at the same time. My friend bought a (generally excellent) Samsung tv and when he showed off the 3d to us we had to take turns with the glasses, kind of took the fun out of it.

jamjar · 2 Mar 2013 at 13:29

Slam said:
Don't you mean passive over active?!

I find the loss in resolution far less noticeable than the flicker of active glasses. I noticed it only when I was looking for it. Also the passive glasses are cheaper, several come with the TV so you can have people over and watch 3d at the same time. My friend bought a (generally excellent) Samsung tv and when he showed off the 3d to us we had to take turns with the glasses, kind of took the fun out of it.

yes i think your right the flicker is more noticable than the res

and also right it does kind of ruin the 3d effect when you have to share the glasses with active 3d! buy a panasonic passive 3d t.v you get glasses with it and can get 2 free pairs on there website

Pug · 2 Mar 2013 at 14:08

Sorry yes I chose passive!

plasma though as suggested in this thread are always active.

jamjar · 2 Mar 2013 at 14:56

Pug said:
Sorry yes I chose passive!

plasma though as suggested in this thread are always active.

I knew what you meant Pug ha! and from what i,ve seen both the LG & Panny passive 3d t.v sets are great pictures in both 2d and 3d

its all amatter of which make you decide is for you

blairw · 4 Mar 2013 at 13:48

I got my 42ST50 the other day and have been running it in with some blu ray content on True Cinema mode... its brilliant and a complete step above the old LCD we have and some of my friends 'LED' TV's.

Couldn't recommend it more

aardvark · 1 Apr 2013 at 21:18

blairw said:
I got my 42ST50 the other day and have been running it in with some blu ray content on True Cinema mode... its brilliant and a complete step above the old LCD we have and some of my friends 'LED' TV's.

Couldn't recommend it more

i was thinking of getting one of those - how much was it?