Features - QOTW: Did you buy a 3DTV?

[Percy1983]

In my case they TV is amazing in 2d and has no comprise to get 3d in there.

Out of interest those who suffer headaches, have you tried a passive 3d display, active gave me headaches as I could see the flicker, where passive just works (and glasses only cost 80p)

[pp05]

Time will tell.

If it didn't have 3d functionality I wouldn't miss it at present.

[keithwalton]

Yes but like many others I didn't buy the tv because it was 3d, more it hit the picture quality / smart features / price ratio first. Passive 3d was just a bonus

[wasabi]

Nope. 3D is rubbish at the cinema and have no desire to recreate that at home. Get back to me when it doesn't suck goat sausage and I'll consider it.

[Slystuff]

Yeah, thank you Mr. James Cameron.
I bought a Panasonic P50ST50 a year ago but I only used its 3D functionality about 4-5 times for testing. I hate 3D, I bought it because of its great PQ.

Much like petrucius I bought a Panasonic P50GT50 purely for the picture quality, the fact that it has 3D is neither here nor there for me.

[pollaxe]

I've bought two and never used the 3D functionality on either of them - I really don't much care for the effect, I find it more like a pop-up book than immersive reality and I think it was a gimmick that the industry tried to force on everyone.

I bought each of them because they were good sets, not based on their 3D performance; the fact that they had it was incidental to me...

[weta]

I'm sticking with my 29" CRT energy guzzler until 4K televisions become more affordable.

[jonah]

never having seen anything in 3d that was better than 2d, no I didn't buy a 3d tv.

[cheesemp]

Nope. My old 37" LCD tv does the job and 3d is just a gimmick. Wouldn't mind an LED tv next when this one dies but 3d won't be a feature I'll be looking for.

[bobharvey]

Good lord no.
Would not dream of it.

[kingpotnoodle]

I have a 2012 42" LG TV in the living room.

It was bought mostly on the strength of reviews about the picture quality and as it otherwise was a 50/50 choice between it and the equivalent Samsung model the styling of the stand/bezel and because it has passive 3D rather than active shutter.

It came with 4 pairs of passive glasses, I prefer passive 3D because I'm quite short sighted and active shutter with contact lenses in the evening sounded like a literal headache to me. There is a chance I might one day use it for a film or game, but so far only watched a demo video of some whales and there is quite a few bits of demo content to access, which was fun and I'm sure kids would love it longer but it was only a short lived "oooh" moment for me, I'm not sure the added dimension is worth wearing clip on dark lenses for and it's pretty naff from the wrong angle especially when you sit further back.

I couldn't really give a monkey's if 3D content disappears completely, I'd still have bought the same TV as in order to get the best screens and you pretty much have to buy one with 3D and smart features - there isn't a "top screen, slim bezel, no fluff" model from any of the big manufacturers that I could find (would have bought it if I'd found it).

The smart features are an OK extra but as I still have a full PC attached it's far from essential (OpenElec, Plex, XBMC, whatever you use it's all generally smarter than the TV is), the BBC iPlayer app is the only one thats really been used (shame it doesn't have ITV/C4/C5 apps which the Samsung does but I watch far less of those channels). I might use the DLNA features and the Plex integration when I get around to configuring the other end of that equation...

The disappointing thing about the smart stuff is that it can't really be turned off and will start to look slow and old fashioned which is quite a saved up annoyance for 2014-2015... it's already a touch slower than the 2013 model in the kitchen that cost half as much.

[Alexreve]

I recently bought an LG 3DTV. The difference in TV experience was huge anyways cause my previous one was a very old model. But I consider it a good investment because of the 3D movies I'm able to watch comfortably on my couch.

[dannyboy75]

I bought a Panasonic 3D TV last year, not because it was 3D but because it was rated as one of the best at its price point for its 2D picture quality (both SD and HD), and because Amazon were doing a good discount on it because it was end of line. I would have bought it whether or not it had 3D, so the fact that it did was an added bonus. Admittedly we only use the 3D occasionally, as we can't afford Sky 3D, but will get more use out of it when we can buy a 3D blu-ray player.

[Lil-Diabo]

Didn't buy a 3D TV.
But I can imagine myself picking up one later down the line.
It seems almost all decent TV's these days come with 3D so it's going to be hard to avoid (when I eventually buy a new one)

[wesleyaldred]

I have a LG 47" 3D TV and i do enjoy watching 3D blu ray movies, I have watched certain BBC programs in 3D and to be honest not that convinced, in fact i switched over to normal viewing half way though, so it's no surprise the BBC is dumping it, but for movies the effects can be really good, so am i upset that broadcasting is ceasing, not at all because i prefer to use it with movies in any case.

[abirawlinson]

I did not get a 3d tv but did get a Sony VPL-HW30ES projector the end of last year love it for movies tried 3d gaming but headaches killed that idear