or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › News Forum › Latest Industry News › Zeiss 3D Cinemizer Head-Mounted OLED Heads to Stores
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Zeiss 3D Cinemizer Head-Mounted OLED Heads to Stores

post #1 of 18
Thread Starter 
After a long development period, the Cinemizer OLED hits the store shelves.


Quote:
Zeiss must be doing well in the lens business, as it hasn't exactly been in a rush to get its Cinemizer OLED on to shelves. Still, we're happy to say that the head-mounted display is at last slipping into retailers: Amazon partners are now carrying the regular 870 x 500 version for $749 in the US (German titling aside) and £578 in the UK. It doesn't look to be the version with head tracking that we tried earlier this year, but you'll still get a 3D image through HDMI 1.4 in addition to 2D through either the HDMI link or analog input. The price makes it a tempting alternative to the more advanced but costlier Sony HMZ-T2 -- and for those who'd like something slightly more discreet-looking while they zone out with a good movie.

Look cool to you?

[Source]
Edited by TeddyP - 10/15/12 at 10:22pm
post #2 of 18
I truly believe this emerging technology is the future of gaming too. The console interphase will be the cell phones & tablets...connected to the cloud. And it will eventually be all about gaming in Vitual Reality/holographic gameworlds via goggles like this. Because they can deliver the visual equivalent of nearly a 200" Imaxx type experience in a very small footprint. I won't early adopt. But as technology, pricing, quality and selection improves...I will be all over it.
post #3 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by barrelbelly View Post

Because they can deliver the visual equivalent of nearly a 200" Imaxx type experience in a very small footprint.

200" equivalence at what viewing distance? And how good would that 200" screen look at 870x500 resolution?
post #4 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitviper33 View Post

200" equivalence at what viewing distance? And how good would that 200" screen look at 870x500 resolution?

I'm talking perception of size because of the close proximity of the OLED displays. This was talked about very extensively in the Sony version of this product on a few threads on this forum. 200" is probably a stretch. But the Sony folks claimed a perception of scale at 150". I just attempted to account for the wrap around (IMAXX) type aspect of the newer design prototypes.
post #5 of 18
I understand that it's not a literal 200". The relevant factor is how much of your field of view the image occupies. The whole wraparound concept is just a less expensive way to fill more of your view. Giving only a diagonal measurement equivalence fails to convey that information. Either a viewing distance for the equivalency needs to accompany that number, or a different metric should be used.

The real strength of a head mounted display is just how much of your field of view the display is capable of filling. But an image that fills a huge portion of your view with under half a megapixel resolution does not sound like it will look very good.
post #6 of 18
I have the Vuzix and they are not bad but really bulky, its nice to see it streamlined, now I know Vuzix released a 720p resolution headset so thats a step in the right direction
post #7 of 18
Given the resolution of the newest I pads and phones 870x500 seems a tad low
post #8 of 18
Thread Starter 
I would love to check it out. Either way, it's a good sign that the tech in improving.
post #9 of 18
I've always thought that this is the best way for 3D anyway. Since you have to wear glasses anyway, why have them and a seperate display sitting across the room.

Art
post #10 of 18
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post

I've always thought that this is the best way for 3D anyway. Since you have to wear glasses anyway, why have them and a seperate display sitting across the room.
Art
That is actually a great point.
post #11 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post

I've always thought that this is the best way for 3D anyway. Since you have to wear glasses anyway, why have them and a seperate display sitting across the room.
Art

have fun spending nearly 1k a headset for each of your friends that come over wanting to watch the same 3d movie with you...
post #12 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Chaves View Post

have fun spending nearly 1k a headset for each of your friends that come over wanting to watch the same 3d movie with you...

Well here is a time it would be an advantage that 3D is not for everybody.
post #13 of 18
I'd definitely like to try this out. Very interesting.
post #14 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post

I've always thought that this is the best way for 3D anyway. Since you have to wear glasses anyway, why have them and a seperate display sitting across the room.

To keep the image from not moving along when you move your head.

(Which does not mean that I can't see a use for these glasses anyway.)
post #15 of 18
I have heard cinemizer OLED ist available taxfree somewhere. Does anybody know where?
post #16 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post

I've always thought that this is the best way for 3D anyway. Since you have to wear glasses anyway, why have them and a seperate display sitting across the room.
Art

An interesting point. But one I can't agree with. I experienced 3D in this order. Analglyph - passive at theater - active plasma - passive led. And passive is by far my favorite after seeing them all. A very natural strain free and full 3D experience. And the glasses are cheap, lightweight, and barely noticable. There is definitely a difference between a huge bulky headset system and a pair of cheap plastic passive 3D glasses.

Having said that though. I might be an early adopter of this. It sounds really cool and as long as I can get a well reviewed one under 1k I am seriously thinking about biting on this one.
post #17 of 18
yeah wearing glasses is great and dandy for those with 20/20 vision not so much for those who have to wear prescription glasses... thus why I like glasses free 3d tech then I can wear my glasses and still enjoy everything, at the big theaters its not a problem the picture is so big I dont have to wear my glasses and can wear the real D but in a home situation it sucks unless I want to spend a small fortune for custom made 3d glasses with my script in them.
post #18 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Chaves View Post

yeah wearing glasses is great and dandy for those with 20/20 vision not so much for those who have to wear prescription glasses... thus why I like glasses free 3d tech then I can wear my glasses and still enjoy everything, at the big theaters its not a problem the picture is so big I dont have to wear my glasses and can wear the real D but in a home situation it sucks unless I want to spend a small fortune for custom made 3d glasses with my script in them.

have you tried a panasonic 3D tv? Both the Plasma active one I own and the LED passive one I brought back. Both of them panasonic specifically are built for prescription glasses room underneath. I NEED glasses, I'm a bit nearsighted so when I sit 10' away from my 67" and 6' away from my 50" I am surely missing some of the vibrant detail but I just don't like wearing glasses because the edge of my right eye always waters when I do. I have to constantly wipe it every few minutes even when wearing passive 3D glasses. It's worth it for a 3D movie but as you can imagine I don't want to go through that all day, every day of my life.

I'm not sure what vision problems you have, but if it was nearsighted only ofcourse these aren't going to give you problems since the screen is so close to your eye.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Latest Industry News
AVS › AVS Forum › News Forum › Latest Industry News › Zeiss 3D Cinemizer Head-Mounted OLED Heads to Stores