Who as gone 3D then?

Rybo89

Rybo89

Rybo89

Soldato
Joined
13 Jun 2007
Posts
13,951
Location
Chesterfield
I am deciding whether to get a 3D TV or not?

There's some cracking prices at the moment, £800 for the 'Samsung PS50C680 50" Full HD Plasma 3D TV'.

Are they really worth it though? I have never experienced a 3D TV in action and from some of the reviews i have been reading, people are saying they are just as good as cinema viewing.

What are your guys views on 3D TV's then? Worth it or not?

Will be used for Blurays and PS3 games.

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Most defiantly a no from me. How many 3d films did you see at the cinema this year? How many did you come out wondering why it was 3d in the first place bcos if your anything like me it would have been all but avatar. Alice,tron even meatballs have the most pathetic excuse for 3d ever.....and it's all so they can charge you more money.

Given that there's very few blurays out at the moment too further hampers the problem.

As for games, it's another no. Go and demo gt5 in 3d somewhere your be really under underwhelmed after 20mins, same for motor storm and wipeout - it cuts frame rates and doesn't add a lot in the process.

I'd wait really, do you already own a flatscreen? If so burning £800 is a massive ripoff.
If u don't then you can pick up Led TVs for less than £400 now, which is money better spent.

Oh and finAlly don't forget that when you go 3d you have to account for any extra glasses you need £100 a pop and the side effects of headaches,eye strain etc...
 
Last edited:
iamtheoneneo said:
Most defiantly a no from me. How many 3d films didbyou see at the cinema this year? How many did you come out wondering why it was 3d in the first place bcos your anything like me it would have been all but avatar. Alice,tron even meatballs have the most pathetic excuse for 3d ever.....and it's all so they can charge you more money.

Given that there's very few blurays out at the moment too further hampers the problem.

As for games, it's another no. Go and demo gt5 in 3d somewhere your be really under underwhelmed after 20mins, same for motor storm and wipeout - it cuts frame rates and doesn't add a lot in the process.

I'd wait really, do you already own a flatscreen? If so burning £800 is a massive ripoff.
If u don't then you can pick up Led TVs for less than £400 now, which is money better spent.

Oh and finAlly don't forget that when you go 3d you have to account for any extra glasses you need £100 a pop and the side effects of headaches,eye strain etc...
Click to expand...

Agree ^^, wait until 3D is at the stage where you don't need to wear glasses to watch a film.

It wont be long until this happens > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11467352
 
My advice would be make picture quality your number 1 choice. If the TV can also offer 3D then consider that a bonus.

I've a panny 3D TV. It was the first flat screen TV I owned and I bought it mainly for the picture quality rather than its 3D capabilities. So far I'm delighted with its picture quality - especially on SD.

As far as its 3D performance goes - well, I like having it as an option. As I've said in previous posts, it won't make or break a programme but can enhance it.

The main criticism I'd level against it is that glasses aren't perfect. I find them a touch uncomfortable, prone to pick up reflections from other light sources, and you are at times, aware of a little flickering. They can also cause a little eye-strain.

However, I would describe these criticisms as minor rather than major and now find that if I have the option of watching a programme in 2D or 3D I'll choose 3D as it does give a sense of depth and realism to suitable scenes that continually WOW me!

But, there is limited content on Sky's 3D channel.

So, go for picture quality first, because that way you'll have fewer regrets if the 3d performance disappoints you!
 
Last edited:
iamtheoneneo said:
snip
Click to expand...

I was kind of expecting this reply.

I have to admit as well, the only film we was both shocked with the 'brilliance' of 3D, was Avatar.

We are wanting to upgrade are 42" to a 50"+, now there seems to be a lot of really good deals about. So it had made me wonder if its worth a punt at a 3D TV.

So guess it gives me a few options to think about, size , quality, 3D or not, ect ect. Think tops i would spend is around £800 as we do only really use the tv to watch films and play games.

Thanks all
 
Last edited:
for now I would sit on the fence and let 3D become more common and mainstream in both gaming, films and 3dtv.
go for LED although most are backlight/edge LED
 
I've bought a 3d tv, blu ray player and surround sound system just for it. I personally love it and everyone who has come round and seen it now wants to buy one.

Just look at the cinema, pretty much nearly every film at the moment is going 3d and the line up for releases next year is going to be a hefty amount.

Yes Avatar looks amazing and still does at home, but a Christmas carol, Legend Of The Guardians, Coraline, Ice Age, Polar express etc they all look amazing.

I'm a big sports fan and that's the main reason I got it, watching the footy in 3d adds more so much more dimension and feels like you're right in the crowd with the right setup.

As for going for it, it's entirely up to you. All these people saying wait for 3d without glasses well that is still going to be another 2/3 years away until they have actual proper 50" + size tv's.

My suggestion to you would to be to visit a proper dealer where it's setup in a professional environment. Don't know if you have a Richer Sounds near you, but the one in Reading has a perfect setup for viewing 3d.
 
Been using a Panny vt20 for the past couple of weeks and its fantastic bit of kit for both 3d and 2d,

Hooked up to Sky 3d and sports and the PS3 for films. :)
 
Stick with a good solid tv, plasma of course rather than the gimmicky and fail edge lit LCDs :)

Watched the sky 3D demo the other week and it looked horrible to be frank. Like a pop up book rather than immersive 3D.
 
I'm getting a Samsung PS50C680 (£770 from a certain sound shop) purely because it's a brilliant TV for the money, i'm not even that interested in 3D but will check it out. There is a big thread about the PS50C680 on AVforums which i've been going through and it is a very highly rated TV, especially after you have given it a good 200 hours. A lot of people are saying it is as good, if not better, than many Panasonic plasmas, even the VT20! Unfortunately though our car is too small to pick it up and the drive is too steep and snowy for any deliveries :(

http://www.avforums.com/forums/3d-plasma-tvs/
 
marl said:
My advice would be make picture quality your number 1 choice. If the TV can also offer 3D then consider that a bonus.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I did, I have a Sony 52HX903 and I am very pleased with it.
 
personally i feel 3D in the home is a gimmic, works in cinema as screen is big enough to fill all vision fields but at home the screen is just to small.
 
milkinc13 said:
personally i feel 3D in the home is a gimmic, works in cinema as screen is big enough to fill all vision fields but at home the screen is just to small.
Click to expand...

Its not a gimmick. With appropriate material it can enhance your viewing experience by adding a sense of depth to images which 2D cannot do.
 
Hard to find any movies in 3D and even harder to find ones with decent 3D rather than rubbish post-processed 3D and then a small (under 60inch) TV doing 3D just isn't really that impressive - using my projector for it (100" wallsized image) or at the cinema with the massive screen is a whole lot better and different.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom