Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 

Active or Passive 3D looking at 42" to 46"


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 25-05-2013, 17:55
sasker
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 717

Looking around for a new TV and can't decide between active or passive after looking today. Don't seem to be many cheap active sets around but had a look at a demo on a Sammy and it did look superb with the active glasses. Any recommendations people?
sasker is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 25-05-2013, 18:01
late8
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,030
Looking around for a new TV and can't decide between active or passive after looking today. Don't seem to be many cheap active sets around but had a look at a demo on a Sammy and it did look superb with the active glasses. Any recommendations people?
IMO Active is better. Its Full 1080p HD and doesn't suffer from as much crosstalk - especially off angle which is good for a family sitting around a TV. (Or standing playing a 3d game) Passive can go crosstalk crazy if your off angle or tilt your head lying on a couch.

Plasma also uses Active 3D and most LEDs use Passive. Plasma does still have the upper hand when it comes to overall picture quality. Better blacks and more responsive thicker cinematic picture. LED's are better in brighter rooms but still have issues with blacks, viewing angles and colours.

Its all scenareo dependant however. Active 3D glasses are expensive so if you have a family with 4+ people it will cost more (glasses are about 20-40 each and usually 2 come free or as part of a deal)
Active 3D is also better if you dont have daylight streaming in the room as the shutters can cause a flickering (not on the TV picture itself) The refresh needs to be set from default 100hz to 120hz to reduce flickering sometimes too.
Passive doesn't suffer from flicker but instead from crosstalk and pictures that aren't 1080p HD - you can also see the interlace lines from the different polerized pixels.

So Active if your into watching movies and want that reference/ enthusiasts picture quality from Plasma TVs.

Passive if you have a bright room (watch during the day or face west in evenings) want a LED TV and have lots of watchers.


I went for the best TV of 2012 - Panasonic Plasma with Active 3D and its stunning. But its also more reference and twitchy which means a bright sunny room or poor picture feed and bad things show up more.
late8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 18:16
sasker
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 717
Thanks for explaining all that

Can you provide your model so I can have a look at how much it is.

I have been thinking of plasma but have always been put off but a few people have said that they are worth considering especially as everyone seems to be going for the LED ones.

I only really want to spend around the 600 mark but might stretch to 700
sasker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 21:54
bobcar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 12,249
Thanks for explaining all that

Can you provide your model so I can have a look at how much it is.

I have been thinking of plasma but have always been put off but a few people have said that they are worth considering especially as everyone seems to be going for the LED ones.

I only really want to spend around the 600 mark but might stretch to 700
If you want to go plasma then you need to make sure your room isn't too bright. LCD is better at handling reflections.
bobcar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 22:06
sasker
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 717
It is fairly bright during the day but once evening comes that is when I would watch films / 3d stuff so it should be ok.

Just put off by the more I read about passive so think active is defo the way to go
sasker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 23:32
noise747
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Herefordshire
Posts: 17,257
I thought 3D was dying out to be honest, just a gimmick. a mate got a active 3d plasma, to me it just looks like a better quality picture, not really 3D as such.

I saw a passive one in currys a couple of years ago, looked no different to me. Maybe it is my eyes.

I am dreading the time when I have to replace my TV, even now getting a normal Tv with no gimmicks on is getting difficult. most of them now have what they call smart Tv, not smart really to be honest.
noise747 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-05-2013, 08:41
ironjade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London
Posts: 8,281
As far as broadcast 3D is concerned, there's no difference between active and passive. The active glasses are expensive to replace and require batteries, masking them a bit heavier to wear.
I have an LG passive 3D tv and it's excellent.
However, I have decided to dump Sky for several reasons, amongst them Sky 3D being a massive disappointment in terms of content.
ironjade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-05-2013, 09:51
call100
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 5,414
Save your money for a while. 3D is so passe........................Won't be too long before the 4K production begins to ramp up and prices drop.....
Sorry, just my opinion and a bit off topic.......I can't remember the last time we used 3D, admitted it's not the main TV. We went for passive just because the glasses would be easily replaced. It was OK but the novelty soon wore off and there are not enough decent films to make it a priority, in fact there's hardly any....
call100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-05-2013, 17:45
sasker
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 717
Save your money for a while. 3D is so passe........................Won't be too long before the 4K production begins to ramp up and prices drop.....
Sorry, just my opinion and a bit off topic.......I can't remember the last time we used 3D, admitted it's not the main TV. We went for passive just because the glasses would be easily replaced. It was OK but the novelty soon wore off and there are not enough decent films to make it a priority, in fact there's hardly any....
I know what your saying but 4k prices are gonna be through the roof and it will be silly money for a year or 2 until it becomes more popular.

3D is still not exactly well known yet to most people and only seems to be over the last year or so that more people are looking into it.

I've decided on this tv now

http://www.m.richersounds.com/produc...0v/lg-50ph660v

Can be had for between 575 and 600 and looks are cracking spec / buy. I only need 1 pair of glasses at the mo too.
Went to a place today to demo it and the active 3D was brilliant. the guy showed me the same clip on a passive set also LG and it looked average compared to it. I've always been put off with plasma but going bigger i think it's the right choice. Just fitted black out blinds so the room is gonna be nice and dark when I use it during the day.

Can't wait to get it now as its a hell of a jump from a 32" to a 50.
sasker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-05-2013, 19:33
sasker
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 717
[quote=noise747;66073373]I thought 3D was dying out to be honest, just a gimmick. a mate got a active 3d plasma, to me it just looks like a better quality picture, not really 3D as such.

Sounds like the 3D wasnt turned on as not sure what you mean. If a 3D bluray film or cartoon was on and you stick the glasses on 3D looks brilliant it instantly pops out at you. maybe it was just an upscale from a normal program in which case will not be as good as a true 3d film / program.
sasker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-05-2013, 19:37
Joel's dad
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,267
I prefer passive, the glasses are cheaper and more comfortable and as a general joe, i notice no difference picture quality wise
Joel's dad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-05-2013, 20:10
wakey
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,538
IMO Active is better. Its Full 1080p HD and doesn't suffer from as much crosstalk - especially off angle which is good for a family sitting around a TV. (Or standing playing a 3d game) Passive can go crosstalk crazy if your off angle or tilt your head lying on a couch.

Plasma also uses Active 3D and most LEDs use Passive. Plasma does still have the upper hand when it comes to overall picture quality. Better blacks and more responsive thicker cinematic picture. LED's are better in brighter rooms but still have issues with blacks, viewing angles and colours.

Its all scenareo dependant however. Active 3D glasses are expensive so if you have a family with 4+ people it will cost more (glasses are about 20-40 each and usually 2 come free or as part of a deal)
Active 3D is also better if you dont have daylight streaming in the room as the shutters can cause a flickering (not on the TV picture itself) The refresh needs to be set from default 100hz to 120hz to reduce flickering sometimes too.
Passive doesn't suffer from flicker but instead from crosstalk and pictures that aren't 1080p HD - you can also see the interlace lines from the different polerized pixels.

So Active if your into watching movies and want that reference/ enthusiasts picture quality from Plasma TVs.

Passive if you have a bright room (watch during the day or face west in evenings) want a LED TV and have lots of watchers.


I went for the best TV of 2012 - Panasonic Plasma with Active 3D and its stunning. But its also more reference and twitchy which means a bright sunny room or poor picture feed and bad things show up more.
Actually its widely held that Passive is less suspetiable to crosstalk and handles off centre viewing and viewing with a tilted head.

Additionally LG TV's from 2012 or 2013 are capable of 1080p to each eye.

With interlace lines its more a panel issue than the technology. Can be really bad on some but on others if it exists it isn't noticeable.

Something else is active can cause headaches and eye strain in many people so you really need to get those who will be watching to give it a full test before buying an active set.
wakey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-05-2013, 20:25
wakey
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,538
I thought 3D was dying out to be honest, just a gimmick. a mate got a active 3d plasma, to me it just looks like a better quality picture, not really 3D as such.

I saw a passive one in currys a couple of years ago, looked no different to me. Maybe it is my eyes.

I am dreading the time when I have to replace my TV, even now getting a normal Tv with no gimmicks on is getting difficult. most of them now have what they call smart Tv, not smart really to be honest.
Its not a gimmick when done correctly. Some of it really can be mind blowing and adds a real added dimension. Avatar, Owls of Ga'Hoole and Life of Pi for example are stunning.

Sadly too much 3D content isn't treated with any respect but rather as a cheap cash cow so its underwhelming which is what's harming it
wakey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-05-2013, 20:36
wakey
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,538
Save your money for a while. 3D is so passe........................Won't be too long before the 4K production begins to ramp up and prices drop.....
Sorry, just my opinion and a bit off topic.......I can't remember the last time we used 3D, admitted it's not the main TV. We went for passive just because the glasses would be easily replaced. It was OK but the novelty soon wore off and there are not enough decent films to make it a priority, in fact there's hardly any....
I just can't see 4k production ramping up enough to get the prices down imho. The most common sizes of TV in the UK are just too small for the improvement to really be noticeable. I think its more likely to take off in other markets like the US where 60" plus sets are more common.
wakey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-05-2013, 20:45
call100
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 5,414
I just can't see 4k production ramping up enough to get the prices down imho. The most common sizes of TV in the UK are just too small for the improvement to really be noticeable. I think its more likely to take off in other markets like the US where 60" plus sets are more common.
Sony already announced 55" at 4,000. It won't take long to drop once the factories are up and running and the competition starts.
The sizes in the UK have been on the increase slowly over the past 2 years as prices for larger TV's fell...
call100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-05-2013, 21:55
sasker
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 717
Actually its widely held that Passive is less suspetiable to crosstalk and handles off centre viewing and viewing with a tilted head.

Additionally LG TV's from 2012 or 2013 are capable of 1080p to each eye.

With interlace lines its more a panel issue than the technology. Can be really bad on some but on others if it exists it isn't noticeable.

Something else is active can cause headaches and eye strain in many people so you really need to get those who will be watching to give it a full test before buying an active set.
Read that passive does suffer with crosstalk and you have to be pretty much centre on to get best pic in 3D but with active you can be off centre and it doesn't affect the 3D viewing as much and of course no cross talk.

I seen a demo of both and active was far superior.

You mention 1080p to each eye? That's only active 2012 and 2013 TV's right?

It would be great to test before buying but people with families can't test it to see how their eyes are as you only get 5 mins in a shop but I know what you mean.

I'm going for the LG 50" ph660v plasma. Can't wait and only need 1 pair of specs so should get a set for 15 if I search Ebay!
sasker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-05-2013, 22:36
wakey
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,538
Read that passive does suffer with crosstalk and you have to be pretty much centre on to get best pic in 3D but with active you can be off centre and it doesn't affect the 3D viewing as much and of course no cross talk.

I seen a demo of both and active was far superior.

You mention 1080p to each eye? That's only active 2012 and 2013 TV's right?

It would be great to test before buying but people with families can't test it to see how their eyes are as you only get 5 mins in a shop but I know what you mean.

I'm going for the LG 50" ph660v plasma. Can't wait and only need 1 pair of specs so should get a set for 15 if I search Ebay!
All 3D sets can suffer crosstalk but one of the main causes is the shutter sync and without that your causes of crosstalk are reduced significantly as such Passive sets. There are obviously other factors such as the panels, the quality of the firmware and the other hardware but that's less a Active vs Passive issue as you can get widely different results between two different Active sets just like you can with Passive sets.

As for off centre viewing you are always going to lose some of the 3D because even a 2D image appears distorted off centre but again with active the problem is again with shutter sync being more of a problem from off centre.

Where personally I have found active does better is if the TV's placement is above or below eye level. With both you really need the TV at eye level (or if not I angled perfectly to offset it) but if not Thats where cross talk on passive seems worse and active handles a bit better. But tbh you wouldn't want to watch either from above or below he screen tbh.

As for 1080p to both eyes no its on 2012/13 LG passive screens. I'm not sure any of the ther passive screens can do this. Active have always sent the Full HD image.

As for the demo the problem is Active sets are on the whole more expensive and harder to sell due to the cost of the glasses but the glasses also give then more high value accessories to sell so you need to be careful of instore tests as there is more incentive to make Actve look better. I don't think in terms of 3D image you would notice a difference in actual 3D effect between a good quality LCD Active and a LCD Passive.

You will obviously notice a difference between a plasma and LCD but that's a whole new debate outside of 3D on the merits of plasma vs LCD based on your viewing habits
wakey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-05-2013, 23:03
sasker
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 717

You will obviously notice a difference between a plasma and LCD but that's a whole new debate outside of 3D on the merits of plasma vs LCD based on your viewing habits
In your opinion then do you rate Plasma's? I can't get over that I can pick up the 50" LG Plasma much cheaper than the equivalent LED?

The 50PH660V only came out a few weeks ago yet it's under 600 on some sites. Do you think this is due to it being Plasma and the active 3D costing more for the glasses. My budget if I was to get an LED would prob only get me a good 37" or poss 42" hence my choice of the LG plasma.
sasker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-05-2013, 00:34
jjne
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,152
Active is known to give some people headaches due to flicker (myself included), and active is a pain if you wear glasses (you can't use the little clip-on polarised lenses with active).
jjne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-05-2013, 00:35
sasker
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 717
Actually just seen this one now which has 2 pairs of glasses with it and only 15 each pair of genuine Samsung, LG ones are, 30 for genuine ones so think I could be getting this one now.

What do people think

http://www.directtvs.co.uk/Samsung_P...in&affid=69394

or

http://www.directtvs.co.uk/LG_50PH66...0V/version.asp
sasker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-05-2013, 01:07
wakey
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,538
In your opinion then do you rate Plasma's? I can't get over that I can pick up the 50" LG Plasma much cheaper than the equivalent LED?

The 50PH660V only came out a few weeks ago yet it's under 600 on some sites. Do you think this is due to it being Plasma and the active 3D costing more for the glasses. My budget if I was to get an LED would prob only get me a good 37" or poss 42" hence my choice of the LG plasma.
It all depends really. You get deeper blacks, better colour saturation, no motion blur (all LCD/LED screens have some motion blur but to varying degrees, some its barely noticeable others its very noticeable) and better viewing angles before colour distortion (although most modern LCD/LED screens are almost as good)

However Plasmas use 2 times the power of a LCD and 3 times a LED (which is really a LCD screen backlit by LED bulbs rather than a normal fluorescent lamp), they can get fairly warm, they are more susiceptible to Screen Burn (although they are much better now). BUT the most important issue is they don't perform that well in bright rooms so for most people who put their TV in the living room which will usually be a fairly bright room they may not be ideal.
wakey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-05-2013, 01:20
wakey
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,538
Active is known to give some people headaches due to flicker (myself included), and active is a pain if you wear glasses (you can't use the little clip-on polarised lenses with active).
Even for people who don't need to wear glasses they are more of a pain as they are bulkier and you need to always make sure they have enough power as its a pain when they run out of juice half way through a movie or at a vital time in a game.

Actually just seen this one now which has 2 pairs of glasses with it and only 15 each pair of genuine Samsung, LG ones are, 30 for genuine ones so think I could be getting this one now.

What do people think

http://www.directtvs.co.uk/Samsung_P...in&affid=69394

or

http://www.directtvs.co.uk/LG_50PH66...0V/version.asp
That's another one of the problems with Active, you are generally tied into buying specific glasses for your TV where as Passives don't have that issue. For example you can use the ones you get from the cinema.

As for the two TV's I'm not sure about either and can't really find any reviews on the LG but I had a Samsung before and it was nothing but trouble so wouldn't personally buy one again. Replaced it with an LG LED which has been perfect and much prefer the picture quality. However there are many that swear by Samsung TV's so maybe I was unlucky (although do have a relative who's Samsung TV which was a different model developed the same collection of problems as mine)

However the price difference doesn't seem worth I if its jus to get the free glasses
wakey is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:01.