I have noticed that the professional reviews of 3D-capable TVs have been completely lacking when it comes informing potential buyers about the 3D performance of these sets. In fact, you can almost count on that aspect of a particular model's performance being completely ignored or, as has become so fashionable these days, being dismissed by the reviewer as "not an important feature." The reviewers at CNET started this trend, and now it has become so widespread that it is practically impossible to find any professional reviews of recent models that don't include some sort of derogatory comment about the 3D format as a whole. I've even had one reviewer respond to my emails with the comment that they "don't have a universally-accepted way of testing 3D performance." I thought the whole purpose of a professional review was to provide an unbiased assessment of a TVs performance. Instead all you hear is the constant whining about the glasses ("too expensive, too uncomfortable, not included with the set, etc., etc."), or the de rigueur "I/We hate 3D so we're not even going to talk about it" nonsense. I don't know about the rest of you, but these people have lost what little credibility they had in my book. If they can't tell me how much crosstalk a set has, or how much viewing time I can expect from a pair of active 3D glasses, they can keep their opinions to themselves.
post #1 of 2
10/23/13 at 10:11am