Samsung 3D Glasses SSG-3050 CR vs. SSG-3700 CR 2011 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 12 Old 12-08-2011, 05:45 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
hdbrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 105
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hi, just got my new 2011 Samsung 64" Plasma 8000 TV (PN64D8000FF)... So far so good... Picked up a couple of pairs of Samsung 3D glasses and wanted to see if anyone else had experience with these glasses as well.

I bought two pair of the $30 battery operated SSG-3050 CR and two pair of the $100+ SSG-3700 CR wireless rechargeable. I really assumed I'd love the more expensive, lighter, sleeker pair more, but I find there are a few differences...wondered if anyone else felt the same way?

1) Looking at the TV through the glasses, the 3050's have a more yellow tint...the 3700's have a more blue/cool tint.

2) The 3700's seem to make everything darker (probably due to this bluer tint) as opposed to the 3050's.

3) The 3700's seem to make everything "smoother" on the screen (again probably due to the cooler tint) which seems to strain my eyes more and makes the 3D harder to focus on...some things to seems as clear or as in focus, as they sort of darken the image's blacks, causing more shadows and hard to see images. Thus, I feel my eyes are working harder. I could brighten the levels of the TV, but I'd prefer not to resort to this...especially when the 3050's seem to provide little eye strain, a brighter picture (with the yellow tint), a more in focus picture and in general a more pleasurable 3D viewing experience.

4) The 3700's while seemingly more uncomfortable, I do find the 3D effect is a little more pronounced. Objects on the screen do seem to come out and go in farther. This could be negligible, but I think there's something to it.

Curious if anyone else has tried these... I'd rather have the nicer glasses, but not at the cost of a poor 3D viewing experience... Almost like Samsung is trying so hard to have lighter glasses, they're compensating on the quality of the lens?

Is there something about the differences in how these glasses are made that could be causing these issues that I'm unaware of? Ultimately, you'd think a lens is a lens, but there's no doubt, these are different, right down to the tint. I've also text both pairs of each model and they have the same effects comparatively.
hdbrew is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 12 Old 12-09-2011, 08:20 AM
Member
 
GAN818's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 22
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Interesting. My Samsung is showing up today and I ordered a pair of the 3050's just to get by, with plans to buy the more expensive 3100's later on. Now you have me thinking that maybe the 3050's will do. I appreciate your take. Thanks.
GAN818 is offline  
post #3 of 12 Old 12-09-2011, 10:22 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
hdbrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 105
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Yes, I would definitely test them out... I'm really surprised that they're different. I'm still holding on in the back of my head thinking, these more expensive ones MUST be better so I must just need to get used to them! But, for me, I find with the 3050's, it feels more like I'm putting on passive glasses that seem to have less eye strain... I'm guessing it's the "yellow" tint that reduces the feel of "flickering white light"...not sure how else to describe it...
hdbrew is offline  
post #4 of 12 Old 12-09-2011, 01:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Brian Hampton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 6,760
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 84 Post(s)
Liked: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAN818 View Post

Interesting. My Samsung is showing up today and I ordered a pair of the 3050's just to get by, with plans to buy the more expensive 3100's later on. Now you have me thinking that maybe the 3050's will do. I appreciate your take. Thanks.

3100 and 3050 cost the same here ($29.99@Best Buy)

I got four 3050's with my set and exchanged them for 3100's.

I should have kept one 3050 because I think they would stay on my 6 year old better.
Brian Hampton is offline  
post #5 of 12 Old 12-11-2011, 11:21 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
hdbrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 105
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Yes, the 3050's are the best for kids, hands down. My 4 year old has never kept a pair on for more than 10 minutes...then, we got the 3050's and she's watched entire movies...calls them "kid glasses" as the frames do look smaller but expand for any size head...happy about that...

Another note...watched with the 3700's at night...very low to no light in the room and they definitely seemed to funtion as well if not better than the 3050's... So, perhaps it's just TV settings and light in the room...but too bad if you're wearing different glasses, the tint is different and thus not everyone in the room gets the same great picture. Oh well.
hdbrew is offline  
post #6 of 12 Old 12-17-2011, 09:56 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
hdbrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 105
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Still annoyed with 3700's for genenal viewing... but, got the charging station (picked up after back-ordered) and it's too cool... So, have a pair of the 3300 (wireless charging able) and we'll see how these do...they look more like regular glasses, so I'm hoping they're great!
hdbrew is offline  
post #7 of 12 Old 12-21-2011, 12:06 PM
Member
 
rivlinm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Saint Petersburg, FL
Posts: 23
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have two pairs of 3500s that seem good to me. Could be tough for kids to keep on their head as mentioned. My eyes do get tired after watching sports for extended periods. I am waiting on two 3050s that I paid $20 each for.

Will update once I get a good feel for them. Likely after the LSU-Alabama game.....

I thought I would be disappointed by cutting cost and settling for the 3050s, but could be interesting to have choices.
rivlinm is offline  
post #8 of 12 Old 12-21-2011, 06:47 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
hdbrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 105
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by rivlinm View Post

I have two pairs of 3500s that seem good to me. Could be tough for kids to keep on their head as mentioned. My eyes do get tired after watching sports for extended periods. I am waiting on two 3050s that I paid $20 each for.

Will update once I get a good feel for them. Likely after the LSU-Alabama game.....

I thought I would be disappointed by cutting cost and settling for the 3050s, but could be interesting to have choices.

Yes, I think you'll like the 3050's... I think by cutting corners in the skinnier, sleeker glasses, they sacrifice quality... Everyone wants these skinny light active glasses, but I think they cut corners. That being said, the 3050's seem the most comfortable all around...and they weigh the same as the 3700's...1 ounce.

I just got a pair of the 3300's as well and they're going back...too heavy, too big and too tight...no wonder they're hard to find. Picture quality, lens quality was the best, but not worth a huge headache while watching TV.

Just got two sets of 3100's with a starter kit, found on eBay. The 3100's look the worst, but they provide an excellent picture quality and feel comfortable, plus block excess light. I'm not sure they're as comfortable on the eyes, where the 3050's really produce no eye strain, but the overall picture quality of the 3100's is probably a bit greater, so worth it. The 3700's produced so much eye strain, it was terrible, blurry images, flashing light, couldn't watch.

So, the 3300 and 3700's are going back...sticking with the 3100's and 3050's for now. Now, I'm hoping something great comes out for 2012...that's compatible with the 2011 TVs and wireless charger...then we're in business. It's too bad the "3D" isn't "perfect" with so much going into hyping it...but it will do for now I guess...
hdbrew is offline  
post #9 of 12 Old 01-03-2012, 11:13 AM
Member
 
rivlinm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Saint Petersburg, FL
Posts: 23
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I am going to have to agree with others' opinions.

I now have used the 3500s and the 3050s and I feel the comfort of the 3050 is much nicer. The size of the eye piece may be a bit smaller and have a larger rim, but it didn't seem to bother me. In watching the Rose Parade and an ESPN 3D football game yesterday I did notice a different tint of colors between the two. Watched in daylight if that matters.

If you have a large head maybe you want the 3500-3700 models, but for my average sized head, I had an easier time keeping the 3050 on. I'll have to see how long the replaceable batteries actually last. Claim 150hrs, but if heard more like 70. A 5 pk of replacements is very cheap however.
rivlinm is offline  
post #10 of 12 Old 01-03-2012, 08:03 PM
Advanced Member
 
DavidEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Wichita, KS, USA
Posts: 817
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Here is a list of the different model of , SAMSUNG 3D ACTIVE GLASSES
SSG-3050GB
SSG-3100GB
SSG-3300GR
SSG-3500CR
SSG-3700CR
SSG-P3100M

I own the 3050, 3100, and 3500CR

I don't notice the difference in lens tint that has been suggested??
(When watching the same movie, I have noticed if a color difference if a CFL bulb is on in the room or an older style bulb is on.)
The only difference that I have noticed is the fit to the head... larger heads like the 3100 wrap-a-round shape, while smaller heads like the 3050 / 3500 style... and since I have yet to replace batteries, I don't know if the extra cost of the rechargeable frames were worth the almost twice the cost.

I read in another forum about placing a light source behind the set made the image brighter when viewed with the active glasses, and all I can say is this little trick does make the screen in my viewing room almost 25% brighter. (I started off with a 60watt bulb but found that as small as 25watt bulb did just as good a job, don't have a smaller bulb to test with. It has been suggested that a 'red' colored bulb works the best, but have not tried anything other than basic white.)
DavidEC is offline  
post #11 of 12 Old 01-04-2012, 10:47 AM
Newbie
 
drant0n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Do you have any links of where we could buy either the 3050 or the 3100?
drant0n is offline  
post #12 of 12 Old 01-05-2012, 09:14 PM
Advanced Member
 
DavidEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Wichita, KS, USA
Posts: 817
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by drant0n View Post

Do you have any links of where we could buy either the 3050 or the 3100?

I found them by doing a search on eBay and Amazon.com...

I was really lucky with my Amazon purchase as a "store" was selling a returned starter kit with 4@ 3100's, Megamind 3D & The Complete Shrek 3D for only... hold on to your hat.. $40.00 shipping paid ..!! And as far as I could tell the shrink wrap was the only thing missing as the disc's were still sealed and none of the glasses had the battery installed.

So all I can suggest is to do searches and be ready to jump on a sale item!!
DavidEC is offline  
Reply 3D Displays

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


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