Comments for Best 3D TV

Comment on 3D Option Not Available In Gran Turismo 5? by shane

shane — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 18:43:31 +0000

not true i plugged my high speed hdmi cable in to the ps3 and my 3d tv and the first thing i got was ” 3d tv detected would you like to view in 3d”

Comment on 3D Option Not Available In Gran Turismo 5? by admin

admin — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 19:10:01 +0000

No its not, the Panasonics are great TVs but the active 3D effect from them falls quite a way behind the latest LG passive tvs. If you are looking for the best TV that happens to have 3D available then you can’t really beat one of the very expensive, top of the range Samsungs, but again, the 3d on them isn’t as good as the passive LG.

Comment on 3D Option Not Available In Gran Turismo 5? by tan

tan — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 12:08:00 +0000

the best 3D TV is actually the panasonic.. Samsung , LG and Sony are not as good

Comment on Active vs Passive 3D by admin

admin — Sun, 08 Jan 2012 19:55:07 +0000

Hi,

I honestly wouldn’t consider a 3D TV for 2D to 3D conversion only, none of them work very well, at the very best you get a very shallow looking 3D effect. At worst you end up with a blury mess of rubbishness!

In terms of proper 3D the 5700 features passive Cinema 3D tech which for my money is the best example of 3D you can buy right now.

Comment on Active vs Passive 3D by hatem

hatem — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 14:52:48 +0000

i want an advice because i want buy either LG 5700 3d or samsung 40UA6400. i want to know which is better in 2d to 3d conversion???????????

Comment on Active vs Passive 3D by Shadow

Shadow — Tue, 03 Jan 2012 06:01:56 +0000

Happy new year everyone!!

Hello there Admin, by “Philips Easy 3D” you mean that you get a 7000 series TV right ? im interesting for Philips 21:9 50″ Cinema Gold. Have you seen this model ?? I really want to know how the 3D effect (passive) is display on a 21:9 TV before i make a purchase. i’ve already seen some LG’s cinema TVs on the stores here in my country and i really like the passive tech. i have the Samsung LE40C750 3D TV and i find the passive 3D better in my eyes (less crosstalk, more brigther) plus cheap glasses and battery free. Also i cant spot the lower resolution unless if i seat really close infront of the TV (less than a meter)

PS: soz for my bad english.. xD

Comment on Active vs Passive 3D by admin

admin — Sun, 01 Jan 2012 09:54:34 +0000

Hi John, the 650 models are last years (I can say that now ) and have been available for quite a while. In fact when I looked at the 3D performance I made it my “best 3D TV money can buy”. The vertical limits are there on all passive sets that I’ve seen to date and if there was a way around it I imagine it would have been sorted for the pubs first.

There have been numerous tests on the resolution difference with passive and like so many things it’s not being seen by large numbers of test groups. Text is as clear if not clearer with the latest LG models compared to active 3D. I’m just about to test one of the new Philips Easy 3D TVs which use an LG panel with Philips (for my money anyway much bettter) processing in the background.

Comment on Active vs Passive 3D by John

John — Sat, 31 Dec 2011 17:26:55 +0000

The new LG 650 range (December 2011) is looking good – 200Hz LED passive 3D. So far only seen a demo in Currys (UK).

One ‘feature’ of these TVs is a sharp cut off in the 3D effect in the veritical angle of view. So looking down at the TV eg standing when the TV is on a normal TV table, there is no 3D – just the fuzzy double image you get without the glasses. This means that you would need the TV more or less at head height when viewing 3D or tilt it backwards slightly (don’t know if that’s possible on the TVs own stand) for best 3D effect. Then it is really good! In the shop they do tilt the demo TV back for viewing when standing to avoid this problem. Wonder if this is an issue with passive 3D TVs generally.

Does passive 3D mean that the effective horizontal resolution is reduced to 860? Perhaps someone who knows could answer that. If so how is normal 2D viewing affected?

I have discounted active 3D completely because of the glasses problem but wanting to find out if normal 2D viewing is compromised by the light polarisation in passive 3D before taking the plunge.

Comment on Active vs Passive 3D by admin

admin — Tue, 27 Dec 2011 10:18:37 +0000

Maxon, that’s a great summary. I’ve just invested in a new Philips Easy 3d (passive) which uses the LG display with Philips processing, review to follow soon.

Comment on Active vs Passive 3D by maxon

maxon — Mon, 26 Dec 2011 17:14:31 +0000

I was big on active 3d and tried the demos and thought they all were pretty good. I did notice flickering and tad blurryness from Panasonic and Samsung 7000 series. I herd how passive having lower resolution etc but thought I would just try it. Wow! Not only was it more vibrant but had zero flicker and no crosstalk (at eye level). I was amazed how the 3d effect seemed more natural and much more effective, maybe because I had no flicker distracting me I don’t know but it was brilliant, so much so that I looked into both tech.
I read that yes active has full HD to both eyes but showed noticeable flicker, ghosting and far less viewing angles which lead to much more crosstalk/blurryness. I found that because active shutters flicker each lens in sync with the movie I read that although some people didn’t notice flickering, they still experience headaches. So I read that flickering to have to be seen to have an effect, its called subliminal flickering.
So it seems that for higher res on active, you don’t actually achieve this due to the effects mentioned.
With passive you have half the resolution to each eye but your brain puts these together to create full HD. Alot of reviews I found misleading about passive being not full HD and read an article about some test carried out on both 3d tech. They claimed to prove passive is full HD and done this by viewing text on both active and passive. It was said that active was clear and readable. Passive now if wasn’t full HD wouldn’t display text that was readable but infact text on passive was not only pin sharp and more then readable but appeared sharper then active. So this to me made it clear that passive was the way to go.
I have also read that with passive LG TV’s that their is input lag with gaming and that its been fixed with a firmware update, can anyone confirm this?.
Another pro for passive is being able to convert the glasses so you can play 2 player games on full screen.
So with many pros for passive, I’m planning on getting the LG 42LW650T. I was gonna wait for 2012 models but they not gonna be priced at £699 like the LG is lol.

Thanks