John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
Anybody bought one recently/looking at them?
I want a Samsung D8000 but it's £2200 which is a lot of money for a TV, the 7000 I can have for£1950 but nowhere has them in stock, only Costco have the 8000.
LG (opinions barndoor?) have a new passive one with a £400 quid cashback deal from sky, so would end up being 1600, which is a considerable amount cheaper.
Opinions, experiences?
[Edited on 07-04-2011 by John]
|
Matty SRi
Member
Registered: 3rd Dec 08
Location: Stockton-on-Tees Drives: Mk3 Golf GTi
User status: Offline
|
Why the hell would you want to spend nearly 2k on a tv? Does it do the washing up or something ?
|
Adam_B
Member
Registered: 13th Dec 00
Location: Lancashire
User status: Offline
|
i bought a 32in LG from argos with freeview HD for £300. I can watch tv and play xbox on it, perfect  
[Edited on 08-04-2011 by Adam_B]
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Matty SRi
Why the hell would you want to spend nearly 2k on a tv?
Because it looks good and I want one 
|
Sam
Moderator
Premium Member
Registered: 24th Dec 99
Location: West Midlands
User status: Offline
|
A friend of ours has a 50" Samsung LCD, I have to admit the screen quality is amazing! Most things look like they are in 3D (it's not a 3D TV in case you were wondering)!
But £2k on a TV? Seems a bit daft IMO.
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
Don't really want to debate whether I should buy it or not, I'm looking for experiences of 2 specific TV's and in a broader scope active vs passive 3D.
|
pow
Premium Member
Registered: 11th Sep 06
Location: Hazlemere, Buckinghamshire
User status: Offline
|
|
noshua
Member
Registered: 19th Nov 08
User status: Offline
|
AVF?
|
Hammer
Member
Registered: 11th Feb 04
User status: Offline
|
I'm throwing out my old 18 inch CTR with built in VCR, I'll give you that and you can save yourself 2 grand.
#logic.
|
Steve
Premium Member
Registered: 30th Mar 02
Location: Worcestershire Drives: Defender
User status: Offline
|
i personally would not bother with 3d, for a while anyway, i personally think it will die a death, but even if it doesnt the technology still isnt quite there to warrant spending big bucks on it
|
A2H GO
Member
Registered: 14th Sep 04
Location: Stoke
User status: Offline
|
Nobody on here will give you advice or will have had experience of a £2000 TV. Go on AV Forums.
|
Hammer
Member
Registered: 11th Feb 04
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by A2H GO
Nobody on here will give you advice or will have had experience of a £2000 TV. Go on AV Forums.
Better phone up Barnshaw's employers and tell him he's no use then 
|
Nath
Member
Registered: 3rd Apr 02
Location: MK
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Steve
i personally would not bother with 3d, for a while anyway, i personally think it will die a death, but even if it doesnt the technology still isnt quite there to warrant spending big bucks on it
You said that about Blu Ray, so John, do the exact opposite of the above and you'll be onto a winner.
|
Steve
Premium Member
Registered: 30th Mar 02
Location: Worcestershire Drives: Defender
User status: Offline
|
fine dont listen to me, listen to the lovely people over on avforums
quote:
There will be a point where 3D is possible without the glasses at a price that makes it possible to be a mainstream product, 5 years is a possibility, but in 5 years there will be something new anyway.
Active Shutter is currently the way to go and the effect is really very good, I would recommend taking a look at the sets being demo'd by various stores and decide. I do however think waiting for a technology that is at least 5 years away from the mainstream probably isn't worth it, as in 5 years there will be something to wait for another 5 years for.
quote:
You could look at how things have adapted with HDTV. A couple of years down the line and yes there are a few HD channels but as a percentage of overall programming? Not everything's even widescreen yet. It's easy to shoot things in HD now, but it seems only the shows with higher funding get the HD treatment.
Shooting and editing in 3D is a lot more tricky and expensive and I'd be surprised if there was more than 20 hours a week of original 3D shot shows/films on sky or whatever this time next year. That's not including sports, but I could be wrong, things could shoot off that way but I honestly don't see the point. For the extra hassle it costs, do you really want Eastenders in 3D?
I'm going to wait at least 2 years before I make the jump to 3D television. I honestly reckon a lot of the company bigwigs are sniggering up their sleeves at people already buying into 3D. But I do hope I'm wrong.
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
I've obviously been looking on avforums, I've got access to the internet.
Can we not ask anything on here anymore? should we go to a specific forum?
I'll probably watch just about nothing in 3D tbh, I want to have the best version of it if I ever do happen to though.
somebody find me a £300 55" TV with a 10mm bezel and I'll take 5.
|
adiohead
Member
Registered: 28th Sep 01
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by John
I've got access to the internet.
Don't believe you. LIES 
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
I'm not sure if barnshaw frequents avforums either so not sure he'd have seen me posting on there.
|
BarnshaW
Member
Registered: 25th Oct 06
User status: Offline
|
i have had a look at the new LG LW550T cinema 3D and its fricking awesome (not form a biast point of view)
brightness fluctuation and crosstalk is alsmost non existent on 3D mode and is a massive improvement, as you say they are doing some cashback deals on Sky 3D
the new big thing is going to be the smart TV's with apps etc which personally we dont think will pick up, they are also releasing smart boxes which you can connect to normal tv's to have all the smart features on normal LCD and older tv's.
personally would wait a bit as they will drop massively in price soon enough, although the sky deal is defo worth having with the cashback.
|
BarnshaW
Member
Registered: 25th Oct 06
User status: Offline
|
brb lunch until 2pm
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
What's the score with the resolution of the passive 3D, the amazing avforums doesn't know and it seems reviewers don't know either, does it half it to enable the polarized 3D?
Has anybody sat watching an active 3D tv for any length of time, I've only tried in the shops and it was tiring my eyes out quite quickly because I could see the flicker.
It's not amazing sitting in the pictures with the passive one's but doesn't seem as bad
|
BarnshaW
Member
Registered: 25th Oct 06
User status: Offline
|
what model are you referring to regarding the resolution? i can get you an official figure if you want
i have sat and watched active 3d for a long period of time, its not amazingly good and is quite tiring and straining on the eyes
the passive 3d unit was MUCH better in my opinion and for some reason had more depth, as a 2d TV they are faultless and the picture quality is superb.
had a few moments on the newer passive 3d where you jump because it does actually seem like its coming out at you (even though its not designed to do that)
|
Nath
Member
Registered: 3rd Apr 02
Location: MK
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Steve
fine dont listen to me, listen to the lovely people over on avforums
quote:
There will be a point where 3D is possible without the glasses at a price that makes it possible to be a mainstream product, 5 years is a possibility, but in 5 years there will be something new anyway.
Active Shutter is currently the way to go and the effect is really very good, I would recommend taking a look at the sets being demo'd by various stores and decide. I do however think waiting for a technology that is at least 5 years away from the mainstream probably isn't worth it, as in 5 years there will be something to wait for another 5 years for.
quote:
You could look at how things have adapted with HDTV. A couple of years down the line and yes there are a few HD channels but as a percentage of overall programming? Not everything's even widescreen yet. It's easy to shoot things in HD now, but it seems only the shows with higher funding get the HD treatment.
Shooting and editing in 3D is a lot more tricky and expensive and I'd be surprised if there was more than 20 hours a week of original 3D shot shows/films on sky or whatever this time next year. That's not including sports, but I could be wrong, things could shoot off that way but I honestly don't see the point. For the extra hassle it costs, do you really want Eastenders in 3D?
I'm going to wait at least 2 years before I make the jump to 3D television. I honestly reckon a lot of the company bigwigs are sniggering up their sleeves at people already buying into 3D. But I do hope I'm wrong.
So you copied and pasted the OPINIONS of two people?
I'm convinced.
JOHN DON'T DO IT!!!!
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
Thanks guys, I'm off to Argos to get a BUSH.
The 55LW550T in this case barnshaw.
Why can the LG not have a smaller bezel like the samsung
|
BarnshaW
Member
Registered: 25th Oct 06
User status: Offline
|
check your hotmail john
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
|
