What are your thoughts on 3D entertainment?

[d21lewis]

Lafiel said:

d21lewis said:

Anyway, I was able to secure a 42 inch Active 3D HDTV for about $650.  It's pretty sweet (480 hertz, with five HDMI ports, 4 USB 2.0 ports, internet which I don't even use, 3D--of course, Blue Tooth remote which works with my PS3, and a soundbar quality audio system).  Thing is, I didn't know there was such a thing as passive 3D until I already had the active.  Many sites have been doing comparisons and saying that passive 3D is the way to go.  Maybe that's the reason my active 3D set is but a third of the retail price.  Anybody have any personal experience with both?

Nope, your set was that cheap because it's a plasma (I can tell by the "480Hz" buzz number). Plasma's just not that popular anymore (among the normal consumers - video quality wise it's still prefered by some people), because it's still quite prone to burn in (although much better than before) and ofcourse it's power consumption is way higher than LCDs, especially those with LED backlight.

Passive 3D has the problem that it's resolution is halved (not 1080p per eye but 1920x540 per eye), which is pretty obvious if the set is big enough, so while I do prefer passive to active (shutter) glasses, I'm still wating for the quad-HD passive 3DTVs to buy one.

Nah.  It's an LED.  Here's the one I got 42 inch model, though:

It's a Vizio but it's awesome.  They say 240hertz but the box and the bottom of the TV say 480hertz, clearly.  Maybe they mean when you have the 3D up and running.  Still, it's a fraction of the retail cost and the image quality is superb.

*edit* actually, that's not the one I have.  I have the Vizio XVT3d424sv.  Same TV but newer and in 3D.