[samoanpride79]

Hey guys
I got a Samsung 3D TV (UN7000 model) a week ago and I am totally returning it. I paid almost $2000 for this and it turns out I was totally ripped off. First of all, those 3D glasses are not worth paying $150 for. I like to lie down on my sofa when I watch television but those stupid glasses keep blacking out whenever I lie down. I realized that I have to sit up straight and stay that way throughout the entire movie if I want to watch it uninterrupted. Second of all, are active 3D TVs ever going to be flicker-free? I don’t know if it’s all active 3D TVs, just Samsung 3D TVs, or just my TV, but the flickers are just unbearable. And WHY DOESN’T SAMSUNG OFFER ANY SPECIAL DEAL ON 3D CONTENTS? I already paid big bucks for the TV AND the glasses separately, yet they still don’t give me any benefit when purchasing 3D contents. I heard other 3D TV makers like LG or Panasonic offer exclusive deals on contents and movies. I’m so returning this TV but I do want a 3D TV. I was thinking maybe exchanging it for a passive 3D TV- possibly a LG Cinema 3D series. Any LG Cinema 3D owner here? Please help me out! I don’t want to be disappointed again. Thanks!

[waldojim]

I think LG is having problems selling TV's. So many new accounts bad mouthing great technology, and talking up LG sets.

How desperate can LG really be?

[coastie65]

I have both a Toshiba ( 60hz and thus non 3-D ) and an LG which is 3-D. So far, my LG has outclassed anything else I've seen. I haven't tried the 3-D as yet ( heck I haven't even gotten any glasses yet ). I do have a 26" Samsung HDTV ( non 3-D ) that is good as is this Samsung Monitor, but the LG HDTV I have is some kind of nice.

[LincolnSpector]

samoanpride79, on 18 September 2011 - 11:30 PM, said:

Hey guys
I got a Samsung 3D TV (UN7000 model) a week ago and I am totally returning it. I paid almost $2000 for this and it turns out I was totally ripped off. First of all, those 3D glasses are not worth paying $150 for. I like to lie down on my sofa when I watch television but those stupid glasses keep blacking out whenever I lie down. I realized that I have to sit up straight and stay that way throughout the entire movie if I want to watch it uninterrupted. Second of all, are active 3D TVs ever going to be flicker-free? I don’t know if it’s all active 3D TVs, just Samsung 3D TVs, or just my TV, but the flickers are just unbearable. And WHY DOESN’T SAMSUNG OFFER ANY SPECIAL DEAL ON 3D CONTENTS? I already paid big bucks for the TV AND the glasses separately, yet they still don’t give me any benefit when purchasing 3D contents. I heard other 3D TV makers like LG or Panasonic offer exclusive deals on contents and movies. I’m so returning this TV but I do want a 3D TV. I was thinking maybe exchanging it for a passive 3D TV- possibly a LG Cinema 3D series. Any LG Cinema 3D owner here? Please help me out! I don’t want to be disappointed again. Thanks!

I recently reviewed another Samsung set for PC World. I noticed a flicker when I turned my head away from the TV, but not when I was watching it.

At the time I wrote it, Samsung was doing a promotion--with no planned ending--that included two pairs of glasses and I think five 3D Blu-ray discs (and no, you didn't get to choose the titles).

Lincoln

[MLStrand56]

samoanpride79, on 18 September 2011 - 11:30 PM, said:

Hey guys
I got a Samsung 3D TV (UN7000 model) a week ago and I am totally returning it.

Does that Samsung 3D TV a 240Hz refresh rate model? I read a PCW article that said that for 3D you should get a 240Hz refresh TV. Reason is that for 3D the TV draws the right eye signal, then draws the left eye signal. So a 120Hz refresh rate 3D TV is actually a 60Hz Right Eye refresh + 60Hz Left Eye refresh. That's suppose to be equal to the analog NTSC TV signal which is 60Hz refresh, which ='s 30Hz Even line refresh + 30Hz Odd line refresh.

I wish I could find that PCW article, because a Lot of people ask me about 3D TV.

MLStrand56

[waldojim]

You realize that NONE of the current 120hz, 240hz, etc tvs actually accept signals at those rates right?

Meaning that there really is no such thing as a 240hz TV. Or 120Hz for that matter.

The fastest rate they accept is 60fps - for 3D modes. This results in 30fps each eye - max.

[LincolnSpector]

waldojim, on 22 January 2012 - 03:50 PM, said:

You realize that NONE of the current 120hz, 240hz, etc tvs actually accept signals at those rates right?

Meaning that there really is no such thing as a 240hz TV. Or 120Hz for that matter.

The fastest rate they accept is 60fps - for 3D modes. This results in 30fps each eye - max.

Actually, that's not quite true. A 3D HDTV signal that did not originate on film is sending a separate 60fps signal to each eye. That's 120hz.

However, with 2D, a 120hz signal is better than a 60hz signal. There's some debate as to why. I go with the theory that the 120hz sets can better handle film-originated 24fps content, since 120 divides evenly into 24.

A 240hz signal has no advantage over a 120hz one in 2D.

But since 3D essentially requires twice the refresh rate, 240hz should be an improvement.

However, everything I've heard about LG's 120hz 3D HDTVs have been positive (I haven't tested one myself). There's more to judging a TV's image quality than cold specs.

Lincoln

[waldojim]

LincolnSpector, on 23 January 2012 - 08:57 AM, said:

Actually, that's not quite true. A 3D HDTV signal that did not originate on film is sending a separate 60fps signal to each eye. That's 120hz.

However, with 2D, a 120hz signal is better than a 60hz signal. There's some debate as to why. I go with the theory that the 120hz sets can better handle film-originated 24fps content, since 120 divides evenly into 24.

A 240hz signal has no advantage over a 120hz one in 2D.

But since 3D essentially requires twice the refresh rate, 240hz should be an improvement.

However, everything I've heard about LG's 120hz 3D HDTVs have been positive (I haven't tested one myself). There's more to judging a TV's image quality than cold specs.

Lincoln

There are currently two known setups that use true 120hz signals. The first includes Nvidia 3d monitors. The second is DLP 3d.

The HDMI standard used for 3DTV calls for very specific frame sizes and frame rates. As such - HDMI does NOT support 120fps. Hence, no TRUE 120hz signal can even be sent to the display.

There is no question of weather or not a 120Hz signal is better than 60hz or not. This was proven many years ago with CRTs that could actually take said signal, AND display the native 120Hz signal. However, what you are seeing today is NOT a 120hz signal. You are seeing a 30hz signal running frame multiplying. This is NOT the same thing. Subtle details may actually be changing between frame 101 and 105. Those details are completely gone because of the signal being sent, and yet the TV manufacturers CLAIMS make it sound like you should be seeing all those details.

I don't know what you are doing to get it stuck in your head that multiplying frames is a good thing, but it really isn't. Look into the manufacturers that tried 600hz or higher. Look into the negative reviews they caused because of the odd effects those sets created. More fake frames does NOT help the image.

What the "120hz" sets were designed to do, was SMOOTH OUT frame rates. In particular, because it is easier to cheat than do it correctly. Manufacturers would rather use very cheap logic to send every frame of a 24.97fps content to a TV 5 times, OR a 29.97FPS content 4 times to an LCD panel running the same 120hz refresh rate than deal with CHANGING the rate of the panel to match the signal. That is the entire reason for the change. As 3d content sits in the refresh rates that are easily divded into 120, then NO moving to 240 does NOT CHANGE A THING.

Also, did you not consider that they 3d glasses CANNOT react quick enough for 240hz refresh rates? They have a hard time maintaining decent enough contrast at 120hz.

EDIT: For what it is worth - cold specs are great for one thing: KNOWING when the manufacturer is lying to you. Go check the specs for HDMI 1.4. There is NO SPEC for a 120hz signal. NONE. So how does it receive this signal, if HDMI cannot even carry it?

This post has been edited by waldojim: 23 January 2012 - 10:55 AM