Alright, after some more time with the set, I'll comment on my experiences with the 3D. First off, I received a 46" model as a Christmas gift from my dad, and when I informed him of the half res 3D issue, he was pretty upset. He told me that he definitely thought he was specifically buying a full res 3D set when he picked it out, and that he would have chosen another model had he known that this wasn't full res 3D. Since I didn't buy it myself, I don't have the sense of betrayal many of you other guys do, nor did I have the chance to see how misleading the advertising was in the store.
Anyway, I've stopped playing pc games in 3d. I find the 1920x1080 resolution more appealing than lower res 3d. The 3d isn't bad - actually quite interesting the first few plays when the novelty of it is still fresh. I'd just rather have 1920. Depending on your video card, the lower resolution 3d may max out your GPU anyway and make the whole issue moot. I don't play on consoles, so I have no idea if they output 3d or 1080p 3d or what.
I gave up on the 2d->3d conversion done by the set very quickly. I don't have anything to judge the performance against, but I didn't find it appealing. Certainly not worth wearing the glasses while watching. I spent a bit more time playing around with PC based 2D->3D conversion, but it ultimately failed my "is it worth wearing glasses?" test as well. Having to use a lower resolution setting to view my high resolution 2d movies in 3D was also a significant deterrent.
I've been using Toy Story 3 and Avatar as my main 3d bluray source materials for comparison. Aside from those two titles, I've maybe watched three other 3d movies, so take my 3D prowess for what it's worth. I viewed the two aforementioned disc on my 46" Samsung and a 55" Panny plasma at my dad's house (it was close to $5000 when he bought it last year, and I believe it is/was considered one of the "higher end" consumer sets without jumping up to ridiculous price points). No surprise, the Panny with full res 3D looked better. But not THAT much better. The Panny was (obviously) "crisper," smoother, had more depth, and more realistic textures/surfaces. But the Samsung was definitely watchable. The relatively small 46" screen probably played a significant factor. I found the 3D effects to be so subtle at 46" that I spent most of the viewings debating whether or not 3D movies were even worth watching on such a small screen (I also felt the 55" was too small to really get any fantastic 3D from).
Unfortunately, that's really the best feedback I can give on the half resolution 3D v. the full resolution. Yes, the full resolution was better, but - in my opinion - nowhere near a $1000+ price premium (I don't know the current prices, they may be significantly closer than that now). Overall, I actually decided that I much prefer a nice 1080p 2D image to 3D at any resolution - for the most part. If a new, heralded 3D title comes out, I'll most likely be heading over to my dad's house to watch it.
Someone asked about reflection/glare. Yes, the glare is definitely something to consider when buying/positioning this set. My old set had more of a matte finish, and I never had the late afternoon glare problems I get with the Samsung. The issue is easily remedied by a good drape/curtain on the window, though. And the glare only becomes problematic when the evening sun is coming through a window opposite the wall of the TV. During the day with two windows open and my overhead light on, the glare isn't too bad (but again, this is normally an easy to fix problem short of the set being in a sun room or similar).
Another issue raised was lip sync troubles. I haven't noticed any, but I'm playing all my content through my PC using ReClock, which I believe addresses most lip sync issues. I'm also doing as much video processing as I can on the PC rather than the TV, which may help negate any related issues (I'm no expert on such things). PC games do feel a little sluggish when reacting compared to my Visio set. I don't know the latency of the Samsung nor the previous Visio, but my guess is that the Samsung is slower. I haven't narrowed down all the causes of the apparent sluggishness in games, though, and am not (fully) blaming the Samsung until I can take the time to eliminate every other variable. I also recently downloaded a "Widescreen Fixer" application and plan to try using that while gaming to see if it fixes anything (haven't gotten around to actually testing it yet). Anyone have any experience with that app? I saw that its library comes with MW3 included, and that's one of the games I've really noticed the latency issues in.
For anyone out there wondering (it took me an embarrassing amount of time to figure out) the refresh rates the Samsung supports, they are: 1080p60, 1080p59, 1080p50, 1080p30, 1080p29, 1080p24, 1080p23. I went through a bit of trial and error resulting in "Incompatible Refresh Rate" black screens before I realized that the Nvidia Control Panel lists all the compatible refresh rates. Using my MPHC, MadVR, Reclock playback setup, the screen has no problem quickly jumping from one rate to another.
I initially calibrated the set with the settings linked to in one of the early post in this thread. Since then, I played around with CalPC, and fine tuned a few more settings. I don't really know how to use that software, however, and was unable to get it to work automatically, so I'm nowhere near a "real" calibration. I've found the the original linked settings give an enjoyable, quality picture, though, and recommend those to anyway looking for a quick base calibration. I have the sharpness at 0 to let the PC do that processing (I think that's how it works, if I'm mistaken, please let me know), and the only regular adjustments I make is the backlight setting to fit whatever ambient light situation I'm in.
Hopefully these comments will help somebody. If anyone sees anything I'm doing wrong, or any logic on my part that is incorrect, please let me know.