VIZIO'S 2011 LED-LCD Models = EPIC FAIL with NO Cosumer Choice - AVS | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the Watchuseek.com newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!


Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-08-2011, 09:28 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
zla21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 23
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Passive only for all 2011 TV's is stupid on A MONUMENTAL SCALE.


For each model or at least for the XVT and Cinema Wide - why not give us a choice or just Active Shutter.


Since active shutter, even with its faults, produces a better and actual Full
3D resolution.


Way to give higher end customers who may buy your TV's (your 2 highest end Models) THE BIG MIDDLE FINGER.


Also, there is no need for 40+ models of TV's to be released, all that will do is confuse consumers and reduce Vizio's sales, for each size of TV make 3 Models only - except the ones that are in inches 16 19 22 26


1 Razor with Edge Lighting - 1 Passive 3D with Full Lighting - 1 Active with Full Lighting = (EXCEPT LISTED BELOW) = 22 Models


16x9
-16 = Razor + Passive Only
-19 = Razor + Passive Only
-22 = Razor + Passive Only
-26 = Razor + Passive Only
-32
-27
-42
-47
-55


CINEMA = 1 Model Each - Active Shutter 3D Only + Full Lighting
-50
-58
-72


When can make FULL LED Lighting across the whole screen, then go RAZOR THIN ONLY (With FULL LED Lighting).
zla21 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 01-08-2011, 09:35 AM
Member
 
HairyPinkElephan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 62
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Ummmm

No.
HairyPinkElephan is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 09:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
serialmike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,745
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by zla21 View Post

Passive only for all 2011 tv's is stupid on a monumental scale.


For each model or at least for the xvt and cinema wide - why not give us a choice or just active shutter.


Since active shutter, even with its faults, produces a better and actual full 3d resolution.


Way to give higher end customers who may buy your TV's (your 2 highest end models) The Big Biddle Finger.


Also, there is no need for 40+ models of TV's to be released, all that will do is confuse consumers and lessen Vizio sales, for each size of TV make 3 models only.


1 Razor with Edge Lighting - 1 Passive 3D with Full Lighting - 1 Active with Full Lighting = 27 SETS


Screen Size in Inches
16
19
22
26
32
27
42
47
55

You are aware that passive glasses allowing the tv to do the 3d is the way its done in the theater and that its better than active shutter crap 3d. Active shutter 3d is near 30 yr old tech and is why everything looks like a cardboard cutout on current 3d sets. The end of active shutter is a blessing.
serialmike is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 09:47 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
zla21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 23
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by serialmike View Post

You are aware that passive glasses allowing the tv to do the 3d is the way its done in the theater and that its better than active shutter crap 3d. Active shutter 3d is near 30 yr old tech and is why everything looks like a cardboard cutout on current 3d sets. The end of active shutter is a blessing.

Wrong, with Passive you do not get full 1080p with either Image, that is not something I am willing to give up.

The reason the theater do passive is because having 500 or more 100 dollar glasses is cost prohibitive for them (because most theater goers would break them and/or the staff would not take proper care of them) + they do not care we are not getting the FULL 3D that only ACTIVE SHUTTER and/or Glasses free can offer.

I at home want better picture then I get at the crappy theater.

I know Vizio wants to appear cheaper at the price points, but giving the consumer no choice in their 2 High End models is a major MIDDLE FINGER by VIZIO to the consumer.

And what you quoted is wrong, look at my post.
zla21 is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 10:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
topr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,627
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Active shudder is on it's way out the door, you might as well make your peace with it. This time next year there will probably be more passive 3D displays introduced at CES than active shudder.
topr is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 10:34 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
zla21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 23
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by topr View Post

Active shudder is on it's way out the door, you might as well make your peace with it. This time next year there will probably be more passive 3D displays introduced at CES than active shudder.

So the elite decided they only want the best ACTIVE FULL RESOLUTION 3D GLASSES.

So they decide to give the masses the INFERIOR TECHNOLOGY known as PASSIVE GLASSES (HALF RESOLUTION) 3D.

GLASSES FREE 3D (1080p per eye) can not come fast enough then.
zla21 is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 10:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
serialmike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,745
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by zla21 View Post

So the elite decided they only want the best ACTIVE FULL RESOLUTION 3D GLASSES.

So they decide to give the masses the INFERIOR TECHNOLOGY known as PASSIVE GLASSES (HALF RESOLUTION) 3D.

GLASSES FREE 3D (1080p per eye) can not come fast enough then.

Technology comes in steps. You dont have to buy every one of them.
serialmike is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 10:43 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
zla21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 23
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by serialmike View Post

Technology comes in steps. You dont have to buy every one of them.

Yeah, but is SUPPOSED to get better as time goes on, instead of worse.

Examples, build quality of TV'S today are inferior from 30 years ago... what I mean is the strength of componets, thickness of parts and etc, not the resolution.

With 3D we went from those red green glasses, to ACTIVE SHUTTER to PASSIVE SHUTTER (as majority of 3D can be viewed) to HOPEFULLY GLASSES FREE 3D - so went from - 4th best - 2nd best - 3rd best - 1st best

NOT the wat it is supposed to go - it is supposed to go

4th best - 3rd best - 2nd best - 1st best - the way it IS supposed to go
zla21 is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 10:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
EscapeVelocity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 6,059
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 301 Post(s)
Liked: 181
Im still pissed that Matte Screen LCD sets were abandoned.

Best to bone up on your Active Shutter Glasses sets and buy while you can.

The used market is a bitch.

As for me, I hope 3D goes away totally. What an obscene fad.

Panasonic AX-200u / Optoma Graywolf 92" / Draper Luma 92"
Samsung 51F8500 Plasma / Vizio M422i LCD / Vizio GV42LF LCD / Vizio VP322 Plasma
Sony S790 BD / Panasonic BDT220 BD / Roku 2 XS & HD-XR / PlayStation 3
Oppo 983H Anchor Bay VRS / Denon 2930CI Silicon Optix Reon / Panasonic S97 Faroudja Genesis / Oppo 970HD Mediatek
Panasonic LX-900 Laserdisc / Aiwa MX100 Multi-region VCR / JVC S7600 S-VHS
EscapeVelocity is online now  
Old 01-08-2011, 10:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
serialmike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,745
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by zla21 View Post

Yeah, but is SUPPOSED to get better as time goes on, instead of worse.

Examples, build quality of TV'S today are inferior from 30 years ago... what I mean is the strength of componets, thickness of parts and etc, not the resolution.

With 3D we went from those red green glasses, to ACTIVE SHUTTER to PASSIVE SHUTTER (as majority of 3D can be viewed) to HOPEFULLY GLASSES FREE 3D - so went from - 4th best - 2nd best - 3rd best - 1st best

NOT the wat it is supposed to go - it is supposed to go

4th best - 3rd best - 2nd best - 1st best - the way it IS supposed to go

Passive is a leap forward, you might not like the sacrifice made for price as of this year but make no mistake its a leap forward.
serialmike is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 10:50 AM
AVS Special Member
 
EscapeVelocity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 6,059
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 301 Post(s)
Liked: 181
PS, I prefer passive glasses 3D.

Panasonic AX-200u / Optoma Graywolf 92" / Draper Luma 92"
Samsung 51F8500 Plasma / Vizio M422i LCD / Vizio GV42LF LCD / Vizio VP322 Plasma
Sony S790 BD / Panasonic BDT220 BD / Roku 2 XS & HD-XR / PlayStation 3
Oppo 983H Anchor Bay VRS / Denon 2930CI Silicon Optix Reon / Panasonic S97 Faroudja Genesis / Oppo 970HD Mediatek
Panasonic LX-900 Laserdisc / Aiwa MX100 Multi-region VCR / JVC S7600 S-VHS
EscapeVelocity is online now  
Old 01-08-2011, 11:44 AM
AVS Special Member
 
davyo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: las vegas nevada
Posts: 4,303
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by zla21 View Post

Passive only for all 2011 TV's is stupid on A MONUMENTAL SCALE.

For each model or at least for the XVT and Cinema Wide - why not give us a choice or just Active Shutter.

Since active shutter, even with its faults, produces a better and actual Full
3D resolution.

Way to give higher end customers who may buy your TV's (your 2 highest end Models) THE BIG MIDDLE FINGER.

Also, there is no need for 40+ models of TV's to be released, all that will do is confuse consumers and reduce Vizio's sales, for each size of TV make 3 Models only - except the ones that are in inches 16 19 22 26

1 Razor with Edge Lighting - 1 Passive 3D with Full Lighting - 1 Active with Full Lighting = (EXCEPT LISTED BELOW) = 22 Models

16x9
-16 = Razor + Passive Only
-19 = Razor + Passive Only
-22 = Razor + Passive Only
-26 = Razor + Passive Only
-32
-27
-42
-47
-55

CINEMA = 1 Model Each - Active Shutter 3D Only + Full Lighting
-50
-58
-72

When can make FULL LED Lighting across the whole screen, then go RAZOR THIN ONLY (With FULL LED Lighting).

So do tell,,, what passive panels have you spent time with to be able to support "your" claim that active is better ???????

Could you list the models and what material you viewed ?????

To claim one tech is better than a another tech without even seeing it would be very unfair to say the least,,, would'nt you agree with that ?????

Well, lucky for me I live in Vegas and am going to CES today,,,, while there I will make sure to check out you "claims" that active is better than passive,,,, I will also be at the Vizio booth and will check out your claim that the consumer has no good choice's.

Cheers
Davyo
davyo is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 12:07 PM
 
suzook11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Medford LI NY
Posts: 303
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I think glasses 3d will be dead in a few years. DONT buy a tv TODAY for its 3D! Its still in its growing phase.
suzook11 is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 01:50 PM
Senior Member
 
henbone11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 322
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by zla21 View Post

Wrong, with Passive you do not get full 1080p with either Image, that is not something I am willing to give up.

The reason the theater do passive is because having 500 or more 100 dollar glasses is cost prohibitive for them (because most theater goers would break them and/or the staff would not take proper care of them) + they do not care we are not getting the FULL 3D that only ACTIVE SHUTTER and/or Glasses free can offer.

I at home want better picture then I get at the crappy theater.

I know Vizio wants to appear cheaper at the price points, but giving the consumer no choice in their 2 High End models is a major MIDDLE FINGER by VIZIO to the consumer.

And what you quoted is wrong, look at my post.

have you even seen a passive 3d tv in person? or are you just hearing and regurgitating facts about resolution? there are more manufacturers this year with passive 3d than vizio. unless you have seen one in person I dont see how you can be so adamant about it.
henbone11 is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 05:55 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
zla21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 23
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by serialmike View Post

Passive is a leap forward, you might not like the sacrifice made for price as of this year but make no mistake its a leap forward.

Bargain TV manufacturer that it is, Vizio has decided to go the passive route with its 3D TV displays this year, and while the company hasn't announced pricing for its new 3D TVs yet, the glasses should be dirt cheap as in $10 or so, with some Vizio sets shipping with four pairs of shades.

But trade-offs are the name of the game when it comes to 3D TV, and passive-glasses technology doesn't get a pass.

Vizio's passive 3D TVs work by interlacing the left and right 3D images together on the screen, at the same time â take the glasses off, and the screen image will look a little jagged, akin to the interlaced SD pictures on older tube TVs.

With the glasses on, pow everything's in 3D, and the 3D effect looks pretty cool, as advertised. The only problem is that you're effectively seeing only half the resolution that you'd normally see in a 2D HD image, and on Vizio's bigger 3D TV sets (in the 50-inch range), horizontal scan lines are clearly visible. It's not exactly the best way to watch, say, the gorgeous 3D effects in "Avatar."

On the other hand, there's no distracting flicker at all a great upside, if you ask me and it's a comparative joy wearing a light pair of polarized 3D glasses rather than the bulky active-shutter models.

One thing to consider, though, is that the half-resolution 3D problem becomes less of a factor with smaller displays. I tried out Vizio's 32-inch 3D set and came away quite pleased with the image; I could barely make out the horizontal scan lines, and again, no flicker to speak of.
zla21 is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 05:55 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
zla21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 23
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by davyo View Post

So do tell,,, what passive panels have you spent time with to be able to support "your" claim that active is better ???????

Could you list the models and what material you viewed ?????

To claim one tech is better than a another tech without even seeing it would be very unfair to say the least,,, would'nt you agree with that ?????

Well, lucky for me I live in Vegas and am going to CES today,,,, while there I will make sure to check out you "claims" that active is better than passive,,,, I will also be at the Vizio booth and will check out your claim that the consumer has no good choice's.

Cheers
Davyo

Bargain TV manufacturer that it is, Vizio has decided to go the passive route with its 3D TV displays this year, and while the company hasn't announced pricing for its new 3D TVs yet, the glasses should be dirt cheap as in $10 or so, with some Vizio sets shipping with four pairs of shades.

But trade-offs are the name of the game when it comes to 3D TV, and passive-glasses technology doesn't get a pass.

Vizio's passive 3D TVs work by interlacing the left and right 3D images together on the screen, at the same time â take the glasses off, and the screen image will look a little jagged, akin to the interlaced SD pictures on older tube TVs.

With the glasses on, pow everything's in 3D, and the 3D effect looks pretty cool, as advertised. The only problem is that you're effectively seeing only half the resolution that you'd normally see in a 2D HD image, and on Vizio's bigger 3D TV sets (in the 50-inch range), horizontal scan lines are clearly visible. It's not exactly the best way to watch, say, the gorgeous 3D effects in "Avatar."

On the other hand, there's no distracting flicker at all a great upside, if you ask me and it's a comparative joy wearing a light pair of polarized 3D glasses rather than the bulky active-shutter models.

One thing to consider, though, is that the half-resolution 3D problem becomes less of a factor with smaller displays. I tried out Vizio's 32-inch 3D set and came away quite pleased with the image; I could barely make out the horizontal scan lines, and again, no flicker to speak of.
zla21 is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 06:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
davyo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: las vegas nevada
Posts: 4,303
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by davyo View Post

So do tell,,, what passive panels have you spent time with to be able to support "your" claim that active is better ???????

Could you list the models and what material you viewed ?????

To claim one tech is better than a another tech without even seeing it would be very unfair to say the least,,, would'nt you agree with that ?????

Well, lucky for me I live in Vegas and am going to CES today,,,, while there I will make sure to check out you "claims" that active is better than passive,,,, I will also be at the Vizio booth and will check out your claim that the consumer has no good choice's.

Cheers
Davyo

Well zla21, I noticed you did not answer my questions (see above).

Anyhow,,, I just back from CES and spent the day looking at passive and active 3D panels,,, that was great fun as I have NEVER seen a passive panel in person yet, until today.

My opinion after seeing passive 3D,,,, passive wins !!!!!

I have spent some time with the 3D active Panasonic VT25 (a friend has one that I have watched a lot),,, after seeing all the passive 3D panel's today I can now have an actual real life opinion instead of reading a bunch of crap and guessing by people that have never even seen a passive display.

Between active and passive did one technology look better than the other, I would say thats a draw,, as far as picture quality, the active looked brighter, crisper and much more colorfull,,,,, to me, after seeing both in person, passive is the clear winner.

EDIT: I meant to say PASSIVE looked brighter, crisper, and much more colorfull,,,,,, sorry for the typo and any confussion.

Cheers
Davyo
davyo is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 07:03 PM
Senior Member
 
henbone11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 322
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 10
davyo, just curious, but if active is brighter, crisper and much more colorful, how can passive be the clear winner? just curious how you arrived at that assessment after basically saying that active looked better.
henbone11 is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 07:14 PM
Advanced Member
 
preludejtstyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Springboro, Oh 45066
Posts: 663
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 21
thats like saying that you hate LED-edgelit TV's because they are a cost effective solution between CCFL and full backlit. Just don't buy it.

It isn't a step backwards, just sideways....until the better technology can perfect itself.

What's your choice today?
Follow the Rules

preludejtstyle is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 07:40 PM
Member
 
bryanpog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by topr View Post

Active shudder is on it's way out the door, you might as well make your peace with it. This time next year there will probably be more passive 3D displays introduced at CES than active shudder.

Amen. Preach it sir!
bryanpog is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 07:41 PM
Member
 
Ant99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 127
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by henbone11 View Post

davyo, just curious, but if active is brighter, crisper and much more colorful, how can passive be the clear winner? just curious how you arrived at that assessment after basically saying that active looked better.

That is a great question and I too would like to know that.

If active looked brighter, crisper and much more colorful what advantages did passive had?
Ant99 is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 07:47 PM
Member
 
bryanpog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Good night active. Good morning passive. Give it time it will improve. The manufactures know active will never be a accepted standard with glasses at $150 a piece. Family of 4 = $600 in active shutter glasses. The majority of families won't swing that.
bryanpog is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 07:58 PM
Member
 
cridlon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kuna, Id
Posts: 26
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I don't see a gun held to anyone's head saying buy a Vizio or LG passive 3D set. I work at Costco and have been playing with the new 65" XVT with passive glasses. I'll tell you the picture looks damn good. The 3D is viewable at a wider angle then most active sets and it does look brighter without the active shutters. I will tell you, the majority of people I talk to like the idea of getting extra glasses at the theater or for $10 rather then $150 for active glasses.

If you like Active Shutters then get a set with actives. Stop whining about sets that don't.

Clif
cridlon is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 11:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
davyo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: las vegas nevada
Posts: 4,303
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by henbone11 View Post

davyo, just curious, but if active is brighter, crisper and much more colorful, how can passive be the clear winner? just curious how you arrived at that assessment after basically saying that active looked better.

Oppps,,, sorry for the typo,,,,,I meant to say PASSIVE looked brighter, crisper, and much more colorfull,,,,,, sorry for the typo and any confussion.

I need to proof read before I post.

Cheers
Davyo
davyo is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 11:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
davyo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: las vegas nevada
Posts: 4,303
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by zla21 View Post

So the elite decided they only want the best ACTIVE FULL RESOLUTION 3D GLASSES.

So they decide to give the masses the INFERIOR TECHNOLOGY known as PASSIVE GLASSES (HALF RESOLUTION) 3D.

GLASSES FREE 3D (1080p per eye) can not come fast enough then.

zla21, Sorry to rain on your passive sucks ranting but I just got back from spending ALL DAY at CES comparing active to passive 3D and PASSIVE was the clear winner.

I asked you a few posting's ago which passive panels you have seen and viewed to make your "claim" that active is better than passive,,,, you never answered that question,,,,, so I will ask again,,,,, what passive 3D panels have you spent time with and viewed in person ??????

As I stated before,, to judge a technology until you have seen it in person would be very unfair to say the least,,,,, would you not agree with that zla21 ???????

Cheers
Davyo
davyo is offline  
Old 01-09-2011, 08:24 AM
Senior Member
 
henbone11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 322
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by davyo View Post

Oppps,,, sorry for the typo,,,,,I meant to say PASSIVE looked brighter, crisper, and much more colorfull,,,,,, sorry for the typo and any confussion.

I need to proof read before I post.

Cheers
Davyo

its cool Davyo, just clarifying. thanks for your input, much appreciated. how were the LG sets in particular? 2d PQ? I was pretty set on a vizio but after seeing LG's offerings I think thats the direction I want to go. I know this thread is for vizio and I am not trying to hijack it. just a few quick words would satisfy me. or even post your impressions in the 2011 LG thread if you will.
henbone11 is offline  
Old 01-09-2011, 08:32 AM
Senior Member
 
Holy bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 394
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Correct me if I'm wrong......

It seems that not all LG 3D tvs use passive 3D glasses , only its middle range tvs use them , LG's high end sets still use active shutter glasses , if the passive glasses are really as good as LG claims , why not use them in the high end sets as well ?

Sony is dead.
Holy bear is offline  
Old 01-09-2011, 09:09 AM
AVS Special Member
 
topr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,627
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holy bear View Post

Correct me if I'm wrong......

It seems that not all LG 3D tvs use passive 3D glasses , only its middle range tvs use them , LG's high end sets still use active shutter glasses , if the passive glasses are really as good as LG claims , why not use them in the high end sets as well ?

To me that says this years high end sets are a hybrid from last years technology. It's possible LG had fair amount vested in last years flagship which was a super nice dispaly and didn't want a complete do-over.
topr is offline  
Old 01-09-2011, 09:38 AM
Newbie
 
Rich Nv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 13
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have to agree with Davyo.
I swung by CES on Thursday specifically to see some 60"+ new panels.
The 65" LG 3D passive set looked fantastic. It was bright and maintained 3D from off axis, close and far. It may be half the vertical resolution in 3D but it was not noticeable to me in their demo material. The 3D demo clips of vertical take off fighter jets on a carrier looked very realistic and didn't have the cardboard cutout 3D look of other material I've seen.

One thing about the LG compared to the new Vizio passive is that the LG is a 240 HZ panel whereas the Vizio is 120 Hz. Not sure how that impacts performance in real world.

When I asked if the retail was north or south of $4K, the guy on the booth indicated lower.

Rich
Rich Nv is offline  
Old 01-09-2011, 09:43 AM
AVS Special Member
 
topr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,627
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 18
It will interesting to see with the amount of 65" displays introduced if the 65" Vizio that is currently on shelves makes it to the sub 3k price point?
topr is offline  
 
Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off