I currently have a 26" non full HD TV and I am looking to upgrade to a Full HD TV around 40 inches.
I don’t care about network connectivity, USB and the like because I have a Zotac Z-BOX mini PC running Windows 7 connected to the TV (I am actually writing this post from the TV right now).
So my main concern right now is this: should I buy a 2D or 3D tv? I understand there are several different 3D technologies and some look like crap, others can give you headaches etc but some look actually good.
Should I go for 3D and if so, which TV (specific brand-model) should I buy? I am looking to spend around 800-1000€, maybe a little more if it is worth it.
I ended up with a 3-D set (60" Samsung plasma) sort of by default. The set I liked just happened to have 3-D capabilities even though I never intended to get a 3-D set. I never intended to use the 3-D but they also threw in a couple free pairs of the glasses and when I bought a new blu-ray player there wasn’t much price difference in getting one with 3-D.
I’ve got a few 3-D discs (Tron, Coraline, How To Train Your Dragon) but they are more a novelty than anything and something to show guests.
There’s plenty of discs I have that were available in 3-D but I didn’t care enough to get them in that format (Transformers3, Captain America, ToyStory3).
The effect is best when I stand directly in front of the set about 6’ away. Go further out around 8-10’ and the effect is less impressive (and that’s on a 60" set).
Like I said, it’s an all right novelty but nothing I’d spend a bunch more money on to have.
My experience is similar to Hampshire’s, a 58" 3D Panasonic Viera plasma that I only use for 2D viewing. I’ve got the BluRay, glasses, etc but just don’t care to watch anything in 3D. I bought it because they put the best electronics/engine in the 3D and the price differential was negligible.
I would not make it a requirement of a new TV, if there is a TV that I like that has 3D I may consider it, but not because of the 3d, just because I would like that TV. 3D seems also a evolving technology which may make current 3d sets obsolete or at least awkward to use as some are working on no glasses 3d, which would certainly be desirable.
I wouldn’t buy a set just for 3D, but if one that I liked anyways just happened to have it, it wouldn’t change my opinion. If I ever do get a 3D TV, it will almost certainly be under the same circumstnaces Hampshire and lieu have described.
I would say not worth it, or at least put it way down the list of features you’re looking for. What country are you buying this TV in, if you don’t mind me asking (I saw you quoted your price range in EUR)? The USD equivalent of those amounts would get you a fully featured TV from a major brand in the 55-60 inch range pretty easily, but I believe prices are much higher on your side of the pond, and even then vary quite a bit from location to location…
A 60" plasma is cheaper than a 47" lcd, but since it is going to double as a computer monitor I prefer the lcd
At 40 inches, you should be able to find decent sets that don’t have 3D.
We’re TV-shopping right now, and if you want to go larger than 46 or so inches LCD, it’s hard to find one that doesn’t have 3D built in. Which of course bumps up the price accordingly. At least, this is what I’ve found with the LED-lit sets, I haven’t looked at the regular LCDs. Basically, anything larger than 46 or 47 inches comes with a steep increase in price, both because of the size and the additional 3D feature. So we’d wind up having to pay for that feature (which we don’t care about). It’s a big part of why we’re looking at 46 inches vs. 55 inches.
I still don’t see any reason to get shutter 3D, but passive polarization would be hard to pass by. I may not like the current trend of 3D movies, since it changes the medium too much, but, assuming it doesn’t give you headaches, 3D gaming is awesome. As long as you don’t have to have your glasses plugged into the TV so you can use a 3D technology used by the Sega Master system.