Sexy TV needed immediately - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 36 Old 05-22-2012, 10:20 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
letsgetsilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 43
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hello all,

I'm in the process of shopping for a new TV, which I need before my Sony KDS-A2020 blows up. However, I don't know if a TV that meets my requirements exists.

Requirements:

60" (or nearby)
3D technology: Passive glasses, 1080p resolution
2D technology: Needs to have fantastic picture quality. This is the most important.
Price range: Under $3000, preferably closer to $1500

I don't have a need for 3D right now, but it's my personal belief that I will not want to be without it over the next 3 years. Specifically for gaming on my HTPC along with possibly the next console. Naturally, 3D movies are included here.

The specific reason for passive glasses is just because they're cheaper, I can have a group of people watch 3d without issue, and I hear they cause less headaches.

I haven't found much in the way of TVs that fulfill these requirements. Any suggestions are greatly appreciated.
letsgetsilly is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 36 Old 05-22-2012, 10:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
chunon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Wilmington Ohio
Posts: 5,073
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 169 Post(s)
Liked: 494
Quote:
Originally Posted by letsgetsilly View Post

Hello all,

I'm in the process of shopping for a new TV, which I need before my Sony KDS-A2020 blows up. However, I don't know if a TV that meets my requirements exists.

Requirements:

60" (or nearby)
3D technology: Passive glasses, 1080p resolution
2D technology: Needs to have fantastic picture quality. This is the most important.
Price range: Under $3000, preferably closer to $1500

I don't have a need for 3D right now, but it's my personal belief that I will not want to be without it over the next 3 years. Specifically for gaming on my HTPC along with possibly the next console. Naturally, 3D movies are included here.

The specific reason for passive glasses is just because they're cheaper, I can have a group of people watch 3d without issue, and I hear they cause less headaches.

I haven't found much in the way of TVs that fulfill these requirements. Any suggestions are greatly appreciated.

Passive technology you probably want to look at LG and Vizio. You've eliminated all plasmas with the passive requirment, Sony makes some good sets but these use active technology.

65VT60
55ST60
Sony BDV-F7 3dbluray/soundbar
Calman Enthusiast
Dish Network with Hopper/Super Joey
chunon is offline  
post #3 of 36 Old 05-22-2012, 05:39 PM
Member
 
Collusion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Kuopio, Finland
Posts: 141
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Actually you've eliminated all displays since passive 3D technology with full 1080p resolution does not exist.
Collusion is offline  
post #4 of 36 Old 05-22-2012, 05:43 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
BillP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 13,705
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Collusion View Post

Actually you've eliminated all displays since passive 3D technology with full 1080p resolution does not exist.

+1
Passive 3D has less resolution than active 3D. I'd only go active 3D, and Panny plasma ST50 would be an excellent choice.
BillP is offline  
post #5 of 36 Old 05-22-2012, 08:17 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mailiang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Springsteen Country
Posts: 6,730
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 176 Post(s)
Liked: 329
How's this for a sexy TV?








Ian

The best way to succeed in life is to act on the advice you give to others

mailiang is offline  
post #6 of 36 Old 05-22-2012, 11:07 PM
Senior Member
 
CaTaSTrOphiK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 417
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillP View Post


+1
Passive 3D has less resolution than active 3D. I'd only go active 3D, and Panny plasma ST50 would be an excellent choice.

But if he wants SEXY wouldn't the gt50 fit the bill better or a 55" vt50..
CaTaSTrOphiK is offline  
post #7 of 36 Old 05-22-2012, 11:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JukeBox360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 6,654
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillP View Post


+1
Passive 3D has less resolution than active 3D. I'd only go active 3D, and Panny plasma ST50 would be an excellent choice.

Pretty sure he wants passive simply because it's a much better viewing experience then any active 3D display out there.
JukeBox360 is offline  
post #8 of 36 Old 05-29-2012, 09:49 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
letsgetsilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 43
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post

Pretty sure he wants passive simply because it's a much better viewing experience then any active 3D display out there.

That's pretty much what I'm going for.

I'm working under the assumption that sometime in the future, perhaps 1 or 2 years from now, I'm going to be in the position where I want to sit in front of the TV with several friends and enjoy 3D entertainment of some type, maybe gaming or movies.

It's my understanding that while potentially costing a **** ton to own, active 3D glasses also provide the benefit of being slightly annoying and even painful to use for extended periods of time as compared to passive 3D. Maybe I'm wrong in certain scenarios, but so far that is my understanding.

I'm really wondering if there are any TV sets that are possibly coming out soon that might fit my requirements regarding passive 3D. Does anyone have any insight on that?
letsgetsilly is offline  
post #9 of 36 Old 05-29-2012, 09:49 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
letsgetsilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 43
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by mailiang View Post

How's this for a sexy TV?





Your posting was utterly useless and completely welcome.
letsgetsilly is offline  
post #10 of 36 Old 05-29-2012, 09:50 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
letsgetsilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 43
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillP View Post

+1
Passive 3D has less resolution than active 3D. I'd only go active 3D, and Panny plasma ST50 would be an excellent choice.

Why is it that you would only go Active 3D? For the extra resolution, or the overall experience? Please elaborate, as from what I can tell Active 3D is something I want to stay away from.
letsgetsilly is offline  
post #11 of 36 Old 05-29-2012, 09:51 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
letsgetsilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 43
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaTaSTrOphiK View Post

But if he wants SEXY wouldn't the gt50 fit the bill better or a 55" vt50..

In this case, "sexy" isn't really a requirement. It's just an invitation to have random internet people post creepy gifs in the thread.
letsgetsilly is offline  
post #12 of 36 Old 05-29-2012, 09:54 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JukeBox360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 6,654
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Bah, it'd take passive over active any day. Much more comfortable and enjoyable.
JukeBox360 is offline  
post #13 of 36 Old 05-29-2012, 04:22 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
BillP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 13,705
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by letsgetsilly View Post

Why is it that you would only go Active 3D? For the extra resolution, or the overall experience? Please elaborate, as from what I can tell Active 3D is something I want to stay away from.

For the better resolution. I don't watch much 3D content, so for the occasional 3D movie, I don't find the active glasses that heavy or uncomfortable. And I can't see buying a 1080p display and not being able to watch 1080p content. IMO, PQ is better with active, and the active displays such as the Panny ST50 or VT50 get the best reviews. But I can see the other point of view that the passive glasses are lighter and more comfortable. If you will be watching a lot of 3D, then passive may be better for you. If it's one 3D movie every few months (like me), then I'd go active. But nobody but you can determine which is better for you.
BillP is offline  
post #14 of 36 Old 05-29-2012, 04:27 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
BillP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 13,705
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post

Pretty sure he wants passive simply because it's a much better viewing experience then any active 3D display out there.

Better viewing experience? In what way? The best displays (based on reviews and shootouts) are the active ones (the VT50 won the recent VE shootout). IMO, the best viewing experience is the best PQ.
BillP is offline  
post #15 of 36 Old 05-29-2012, 05:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JukeBox360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 6,654
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillP View Post


Better viewing experience? In what way? The best displays (based on reviews and shootouts) are the active ones (the VT50 won the recent VE shootout). IMO, the best viewing experience is the best PQ.

Nothing better then flickering lights while watching tv. Passive is more comfortable 10-1. As for active 3D being better. It's only on places like AVS that people prefer active. Even then. It's just about numbers here. "Active can give full 1080P while passive can't." Who cares? 9/10 people wouldn't know that ti begin with. Passive is super lightweight. Cheap. No horrid flicker. Best viewing experience.
JukeBox360 is offline  
post #16 of 36 Old 05-29-2012, 06:28 PM
Senior Member
 
Robut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post

Nothing better then flickering lights while watching tv. Passive is more comfortable 10-1. As for active 3D being better. It's only on places like AVS that people prefer active. Even then. It's just about numbers here. "Active can give full 1080P while passive can't." Who cares? 9/10 people wouldn't know that ti begin with. Passive is super lightweight. Cheap. No horrid flicker. Best viewing experience.

Horrid flicker is so overblown. I don't see flicker from either my Samsung or Sony displays.

The way you say it, it sounds like people are being carried out on stretchers with flicker sickness. Lighten up!
Robut is offline  
post #17 of 36 Old 05-29-2012, 06:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JukeBox360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 6,654
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robut View Post

Horrid flicker is so overblown. I don't see flicker from either my Samsung or Sony displays.

The way you say it, it sounds like people are being carried out on stretchers with flicker sickness. Lighten up!

I don't watch TV in a pitch black room. As soon as you have random lights on the stupid flicker begins!
JukeBox360 is offline  
post #18 of 36 Old 05-29-2012, 07:25 PM
Senior Member
 
Robut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post

I don't watch TV in a pitch black room. As soon as you have random lights on the stupid flicker begins!

True, if you use fluorescent lights in your living room or home theater it flickers. If you living room looks like a Best Buy showroom you'll see flicker. Most people are able to dim the lights if they watch a movie. if you have a lot of kids or like to watch while doing other things, sure fine, flicker would be a problem.
Robut is offline  
post #19 of 36 Old 06-07-2012, 07:09 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
letsgetsilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 43
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
So, I've changed my requirements slightly based on the information provided in this thread:

60" TV
2D: Off the charts
3D: Passive

Also: Non-glossy finish for use in a room with windows. I prefer the glossy look in an all-black room, but the reality is that there's a gigantic window right where my TV sits and it needs to be at least watchable to a certain extent while that window is there.

I'm interested in hearing what brands and models people would recommend for these adjusted requirements. Thanks for all the help so far, I appreciate it.
letsgetsilly is offline  
post #20 of 36 Old 06-07-2012, 12:18 PM
Member
 
toby1015's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 27
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Flicker free or flicker argument is pointless. The problem is passive 3D in 60". LG, Vizio, and Toshiba are the only higher performing sets that do passive 3D. Reviews on LG and Vizio LED tv's for 2D picture have been fairly mediocre because of poor black levels and shadow detail. Besides as far as i can tell they're only made in 65". Have yet to see a review on Toshiba's new cinema series but it is on my sales floor and from what i see it won't perform much better if at all. Yes panasonic or samsung D7000 or 8000 plasmas will smoke passive LED's in 2D PQ will still handling a brighter room quite well (ie. Louver filters). So you need to decide if passive 3D or 2D PQ is more important. You can find a pana TCP60ST50 for under 2k which would be my choice. Btw samsung LED's are available in 60" as well with again better 2D PQ than most LED's but again they use active glasses.
toby1015 is offline  
post #21 of 36 Old 06-07-2012, 01:29 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
letsgetsilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 43
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
At this point I think that 2D picture quality is more important, but it hurts to say that.

In reality 2D will be the 90% use of this TV. However, I'm really excited about the potential 3D applications, especially in the near future when more content is available.

Maybe at this point it makes more sense to go with mediocre 3D, high-quality 2D at a decent price (around $1500). Then I can potentially upgrade in the future to a better 3D set.

I still don't know what models I should be looking for with these specs. I'll put in a few price alerts on televisions once I know what to look for. As far as I can tell, LG, Samsung, and Sony are the manufacturers to look at in terms of quality. Any suggestions for particular models is welcome.

Thanks for your help!
letsgetsilly is offline  
post #22 of 36 Old 06-07-2012, 06:11 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
BillP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 13,705
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by letsgetsilly View Post

As far as I can tell, LG, Samsung, and Sony are the manufacturers to look at in terms of quality. Any suggestions for particular models is welcome.
Thanks for your help!
Not sure most would agree with that statement. IMO, Panasonic has best quality/reliability. ST50 is a great display to consider.
BillP is offline  
post #23 of 36 Old 06-07-2012, 08:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mailiang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Springsteen Country
Posts: 6,730
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 176 Post(s)
Liked: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillP View Post

Not sure most would agree with that statement. IMO, Panasonic has best quality/reliability. ST50 is a great display to consider.


+1.

I use to rep many product lines when I was in the car audio/video industry. My most reliable products were from Pioneer and Panasonic.
Sony was the least reliable. For years Consumer Reports listed Panasonic as one of the most reliable brands and from my own
personal and professional experience, I have found that they offer great quality.



Ian wink.gif

The best way to succeed in life is to act on the advice you give to others

mailiang is offline  
post #24 of 36 Old 06-08-2012, 06:50 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
letsgetsilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 43
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Panasonic, eh? Good to know! Thanks for the info smile.gif
letsgetsilly is offline  
post #25 of 36 Old 06-08-2012, 09:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,578
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post

Nothing better then flickering lights while watching tv. Passive is more comfortable 10-1. As for active 3D being better. It's only on places like AVS that people prefer active. Even then. It's just about numbers here. "Active can give full 1080P while passive can't." Who cares? 9/10 people wouldn't know that ti begin with. Passive is super lightweight. Cheap. No horrid flicker. Best viewing experience.
Actually, flickering lights with active glasses is not a given. Sony's active shutter glasses work by switching polarization so that only the display gets shuttered, rather than the entire eye being blocked: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yo5cuhM_aAQ#t=1m16s&hd=1

Never had a problem with the weight of Sony's 3D glasses over the course of 3 or 4 hours (a couple of films) because they distributed the weight very well. I have had lighter pairs of glasses (nothing to do with 3D) that were less comfortable for that length of time.

Both forms of 3D are a huge compromise right now though. Even if the room lights aren't flickering, the display does, you have lots of crosstalk, and I definitely find my eyes strained after a while of using active 3D.
Passive 3D is much more comfortable, but the resolution is terribly low, and you have horrible interlacing in the image. There's still plenty of crosstalk as well. (there may actually be more in some cases, but it can be less distracting)

Personally, after owning a 3DTV for a year and a half, I have zero interest in 3D right now. I spent a while the first week or so after getting the TV, trying out a lot of different 3D sources, and the trade-offs just weren't worth it in my opinion. I've tried it again every so often and my opinion hasn't changed at all. I've yet to see any pre-recorded 3D content (films, TV, web clips etc.) that has impressed me, and I find it to be particularly distracting when watching films.

3D has a lot of potential with games, but with the current HDMI specs, we are limited to full 720p60 or 1080p SBS resolution when gaming, and crosstalk is a significant issue.

The only time I have been impressed with 3D at all was using Sony's HMZ-T1 head-mounted display for PC gaming. It uses 720p native OLED display panels, so images are displayed with 1:1 mapping, and because each eye has its own display, there's zero 3D crosstalk. It's by far the most natural and impressive 3D I've ever seen. Unfortunately, the image was small, the optics are poor quality, contrast wasn't great, and the ergonomics of that device are terrible, so I didn't keep it.


Until we either have 4K native panels with passive 3D that allow for full 1080p resolution 3D, or new HMDs that have better optics and are comfortable for long periods of time, I've completely lost interest in 3D.
Maybe I'm wrong, but it sounds like your priority is 2D content, with you theoretically maybe wanting to use 3D some time in the future. In that case, I wouldn't pay any attention to how the set achieves 3D and focus on getting the best 2D display you can find to suit your needs. (not necessarily 2D only, but you're making big compromises on 2D if you buy any of the current passive 3D displays)
Quote:
Originally Posted by letsgetsilly View Post

So, I've changed my requirements slightly based on the information provided in this thread:
60" TV
2D: Off the charts
3D: Passive
Also: Non-glossy finish for use in a room with windows. I prefer the glossy look in an all-black room, but the reality is that there's a gigantic window right where my TV sits and it needs to be at least watchable to a certain extent while that window is there.
I'm interested in hearing what brands and models people would recommend for these adjusted requirements. Thanks for all the help so far, I appreciate it.
Actually, a glossy finish is better than a matte screen in a bright environment. A matte screen diffuses the light, creating large patches that you can't see, and completely washes out the display. A modern display with a good AR coating and glossy finish will display crisp reflections, but avoids glare, maintaining high contrast, and if you position the display correctly, you can avoid most/all direct reflections.

See here for an example: http://www.avsforum.com/t/1353234/lcd-matte-glare-advantage-i-dont-think-so-pics/0_100#post_20823935 The Samsung is not even a display that I'd consider to have a very good coating, but look at how much better it is in a bright room compared to the Sharp with a matte finish.


As for ranking manufacturers of flat panels, today I would probably put it as:
  1. Panasonic / Sony
  2. Samsung
  3. Sharp / Toshiba
  4. LG
  5. Other

Toshiba actually have some very interesting models at the high end, but they're a bit strange on their availability. The best models they make tend to stay in Japan, or sometimes make it out to Europe, but I don't think they ever really took off in America. Similar to how Mitsubishi has been selling projection displays in America for years, but pulled out of Europe years ago, I suppose.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #26 of 36 Old 06-08-2012, 01:56 PM
Member
 
toby1015's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 27
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I agree with BillP. Panasonic plasmas are excellent. I have two myself. Especially this years models. They are brighter than any plasma has ever been and have a very effective anti reflective filter. CNET reviews the vt50 as this years best tv and the st50 as the third best tv for PQ. The vt50 won the ve shootout and the st50 got an excellent review in hometheater magazine this month. The reviews are rather overwhelming.
toby1015 is offline  
post #27 of 36 Old 07-11-2012, 11:26 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
letsgetsilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 43
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I was all ready to go with the Panasonic st50 60" or 65". It looked like everything I had hoped for. Great picture, great price, etc. Then I started reading about its Image Retention (IR) problems.

After reading through almost the entire owner's thread, the st50 doesn't look to be a suitable option. I don't think I could possibly overlook a burned-in image of some type on my screen. I plan on using it exclusively as an HTPC monitor, and I know one day somehow I'll leave it on without a proper screen saver and the icons on the desktop will all be burned in.

I can't believe that's a possibility with a brand new TV, but according to my readings, it is and more. Some people report being able to see images after just switching video sources.

So, I'm on to find my #2 pick. I'm not sure what that is, but if there are any additional helpful suggestions out there, I'd be happy to hear them.

Thanks again for all your help.
letsgetsilly is offline  
post #28 of 36 Old 07-11-2012, 01:54 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
BillP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 13,705
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 38
In that case, plasma is not for you. Go with LED.
BillP is offline  
post #29 of 36 Old 07-11-2012, 02:15 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
letsgetsilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 43
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Do you have any LED set recommendations? I'm not sure who is the leader in the ~$1500 category.
letsgetsilly is offline  
post #30 of 36 Old 07-11-2012, 06:15 PM
Member
 
Ace1965's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 103
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
active 3d is horrid to watch. passive 3d is better. Sony, vizio are good one!
Ace1965 is offline  
Reply OLED Technology and Flat Panels General

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