3D Glasses Group Test

[strapped for cash]

Since many active 3D glasses are now cross-manufacturer compatible, and prices vary by not inconsiderable margins, would What Hi-Fi consider a 3D specs group test for a future issue?

I've been comparing Panasonic's TY-ER3D4ME specs with the 3D3 A1112 Universal 3D glasses

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B007FNIP2U/ref=asc_df_B007FNIP2U12012156?smid=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&tag=googlecouk06-21&linkCode=asn&creative=22206&creativeASIN=B007FNIP2U

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1-Pair-3D3-A1112-Universal-3D-TV-Eyewear-Active-Shutter-RF-Glasses-/110951413734?pt=UK_Sound_Vision_3D_TV_Glasses_Accessories&hash=item19d53837e6

I think the 3D3 A1112s outperform Panasonic's TY-ER3D4ME in several regards, though you don't see much written about them (I bought them after reading positive user accounts on AV Forums).

They're also rechargeable (the Panasonic equivalent will cost you more). This takes half an hour; then they're good for 60 hours viewing. The 1112s are marginally cheaper. They also, in my view:

1. Allow slightly more light through the lenses, leading to brighter 3D viewing

2. Are better performers in terms of crosstalk (as a test, I repeatedly ran a few problematic scenes using each set of glasses)

3. Sit more comfortably on your nose, ears and the sides of your face

4. Block more ambient light due to their wider and deeper profile

The Panasonic glasses are marginally lighter, so may be better for younger viewers. In every other sense, the 1112s offer slightly better performance. For a while, I though images looked punchier through the Panasonic glasses, but I soon realised this was because the glasses made pictures look a shade darker, making colours seem bolder. Once I recalibrated by knocking the colour setting up a couple of notches, I realised the 1112s had the edge.

I can't recommend the 1112s highly enough for those seeking a subtle if worthwhile upgrade in 3D performance. It'd be great to see the mag put glasses from different manufacturers through their paces. They're an increasingly necessary accessory and I think a group test would make for useful reading.

 

[hugfds]

What about the sainsonic 3D glasses, I got a benQ1070 projector, so I am considering to buying a compatible 3D glasses and it seems that the sainsonic 3d glasses are not expensive, but i am not sure if it is durable.

http://www.sainsonic.com/3d-active-glasses/3d-for-dlp/sainsonic-144hz-rechargeable-active-shutter-3d-glasses-for-benq-w1070.html

 

[pioneer7]

Since many active 3D glasses are now cross-manufacturer compatible, and prices vary by not inconsiderable margins, would What Hi-Fi consider a 3D specs group test for a future issue?

I've been comparing Panasonic's TY-ER3D4ME specs with the 3D3 A1112 Universal 3D glasses

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B007FNIP2U/ref=asc_df_B007FNIP2U12012156?smid=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&tag=googlecouk06-21&linkCode=asn&creative=22206&creativeASIN=B007FNIP2U

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1-Pair-3D3-A1112-Universal-3D-TV-Eyewear-Active-Shutter-RF-Glasses-/110951413734?pt=UK_Sound_Vision_3D_TV_Glasses_Accessories&hash=item19d53837e6

I think the 3D3 A1112s outperform Panasonic's TY-ER3D4ME in several regards, though you don't see much written about them (I bought them after reading positive user accounts on AV Forums).

They're also rechargeable (the Panasonic equivalent will cost you more). This takes half an hour; then they're good for 60 hours viewing. The 1112s are marginally cheaper. They also, in my view:

1. Allow slightly more light through the lenses, leading to brighter 3D viewing

2. Are better performers in terms of crosstalk (as a test, I repeatedly ran a few problematic scenes using each set of glasses)

3. Sit more comfortably on your nose, ears and the sides of your face

4. Block more ambient light due to their wider and deeper profile

The Panasonic glasses are marginally lighter, so may be better for younger viewers. In every other sense, the 1112s offer slightly better performance. For a while, I though images looked punchier through the Panasonic glasses, but I soon realised this was because the glasses made pictures look a shade darker, making colours seem bolder. Once I recalibrated by knocking the colour setting up a couple of notches, I realised the 1112s had the edge.

I can't recommend the 1112s highly enough for those seeking a subtle if worthwhile upgrade in 3D performance. It'd be great to see the mag put glasses from different manufacturers through their paces. They're an increasingly necessary accessory and I think a group test would make for useful reading.

Who needs a review, you did a pretty good job there Strapped, but yes would be interesting, can you tell me where you got your 3D3s from I can not seem to find them any where which is a little concerning, or maybe iam not looking hard enough.

Might be an idea to put this thread up on the TVs section as well might get more support...just a thought. By the way just emailed Julian about calibration, so look forward to hearing from him, only thing is I am a long way.... down south.... 8)

 

[pioneer7]

YES YES What a T----r seen the link, iam very tired at the moment...

 

[bigboss]

http://3d3.co.uk/home.php

 

[pioneer7]

Thanks for the link, some good info...supprised only two outlets though, anyway just to confirm excact model number and I will order a pair, hopfully worth the £40 out lay....we will see 8)

 

[strapped for cash]

Blimey, it took six months to get a response to my original post!

Judging by the delay, I'm guessing nobody is interested in 3D specs' relative performance. (Even less so since several broadcasters pulled the plug on 3D.)

I'd be interested to know how, say, the 3D3s compare with cheaper third party glasses, and indeed with manufacturers' own 3D glasses. I'm probably in a small minority, though

 

[pioneer7]

Strapped I to think it would be good to have a 3Dglasses group test, its not like its a masive out lay if any, I dont think I have seen any other reviews/group test on 3D-specs, so if any what hifi guys.girls reading this, what do you say.... 8)

 

[Deleted member 2457]

Strapped I to think it would be good to have a 3Dglasses group test, its not like its a masive out lay if any, I dont think I have seen any other reviews/group test on 3D-specs, so if any what hifi guys.girls reading this, what do you say.... 8)

Sounds a good idea to me.

 

[camac]

Since many active 3D glasses are now cross-manufacturer compatible, and prices vary by not inconsiderable margins, would What Hi-Fi consider a 3D specs group test for a future issue?

I've been comparing Panasonic's TY-ER3D4ME specs with the 3D3 A1112 Universal 3D glasses

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B007FNIP2U/ref=asc_df_B007FNIP2U12012156?smid=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&tag=googlecouk06-21&linkCode=asn&creative=22206&creativeASIN=B007FNIP2U

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1-Pair-3D3-A1112-Universal-3D-TV-Eyewear-Active-Shutter-RF-Glasses-/110951413734?pt=UK_Sound_Vision_3D_TV_Glasses_Accessories&hash=item19d53837e6

I think the 3D3 A1112s outperform Panasonic's TY-ER3D4ME in several regards, though you don't see much written about them (I bought them after reading positive user accounts on AV Forums).

They're also rechargeable (the Panasonic equivalent will cost you more). This takes half an hour; then they're good for 60 hours viewing. The 1112s are marginally cheaper. They also, in my view:

1. Allow slightly more light through the lenses, leading to brighter 3D viewing

2. Are better performers in terms of crosstalk (as a test, I repeatedly ran a few problematic scenes using each set of glasses)

3. Sit more comfortably on your nose, ears and the sides of your face

4. Block more ambient light due to their wider and deeper profile

The Panasonic glasses are marginally lighter, so may be better for younger viewers. In every other sense, the 1112s offer slightly better performance. For a while, I though images looked punchier through the Panasonic glasses, but I soon realised this was because the glasses made pictures look a shade darker, making colours seem bolder. Once I recalibrated by knocking the colour setting up a couple of notches, I realised the 1112s had the edge.
I can't recommend the 1112s highly enough for those seeking a subtle if worthwhile upgrade in 3D performance. It'd be great to see the mag put glasses from different manufacturers through their paces. They're an increasingly necessary accessory and I think a group test would make for useful reading.

Strapped,

Any idea if the 3D3 A112`s would be compatible with my Sony 55hx853 ?

Thanks.

 

[camac]

Since many active 3D glasses are now cross-manufacturer compatible, and prices vary by not inconsiderable margins, would What Hi-Fi consider a 3D specs group test for a future issue?

I've been comparing Panasonic's TY-ER3D4ME specs with the 3D3 A1112 Universal 3D glasses

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B007FNIP2U/ref=asc_df_B007FNIP2U12012156?smid=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&tag=googlecouk06-21&linkCode=asn&creative=22206&creativeASIN=B007FNIP2U

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1-Pair-3D3-A1112-Universal-3D-TV-Eyewear-Active-Shutter-RF-Glasses-/110951413734?pt=UK_Sound_Vision_3D_TV_Glasses_Accessories&hash=item19d53837e6

I think the 3D3 A1112s outperform Panasonic's TY-ER3D4ME in several regards, though you don't see much written about them (I bought them after reading positive user accounts on AV Forums).

They're also rechargeable (the Panasonic equivalent will cost you more). This takes half an hour; then they're good for 60 hours viewing. The 1112s are marginally cheaper. They also, in my view:

1. Allow slightly more light through the lenses, leading to brighter 3D viewing

2. Are better performers in terms of crosstalk (as a test, I repeatedly ran a few problematic scenes using each set of glasses)

3. Sit more comfortably on your nose, ears and the sides of your face

4. Block more ambient light due to their wider and deeper profile

The Panasonic glasses are marginally lighter, so may be better for younger viewers. In every other sense, the 1112s offer slightly better performance. For a while, I though images looked punchier through the Panasonic glasses, but I soon realised this was because the glasses made pictures look a shade darker, making colours seem bolder. Once I recalibrated by knocking the colour setting up a couple of notches, I realised the 1112s had the edge.

I can't recommend the 1112s highly enough for those seeking a subtle if worthwhile upgrade in 3D performance. It'd be great to see the mag put glasses from different manufacturers through their paces. They're an increasingly necessary accessory and I think a group test would make for useful reading. Strapped, Any idea if the 3D3 A112`s would be compatible with my Sony 55hx853 ? Thanks.

Went on the website and got the info. I need A1111`s to suit the Sony. Thanks.

 

[strapped for cash]

Went on the website and got the info. I need A1111`s to suit the Sony. Thanks.

You're welcome. (Apolgies, I only just saw your question.)

Unfortunately there's still no word on a 3D glasses group test.

 

[camac]

Went on the website and got the info. I need A1111`s to suit the Sony. Thanks.

You're welcome. (Apolgies, I only just saw your question.)

Unfortunately there's still no word on a 3D glasses group test.

 

[camac]

Went on the website and got the info. I need A1111`s to suit the Sony. Thanks.

You're welcome. (Apolgies, I only just saw your question.)

Unfortunately there's still no word on a 3D glasses group test.

Thanks strapped.

Come on What HiFi, a test would be beneficial to a lot of users.

 

[camac]

Purchased the 3D3 universal glasses, and they are worth the money. Thay are a major step up over the bundled Sony ones that I use with my 55HX853. Thanks for the heads up strapped.

 

[strapped for cash]

Thanks strapped. Come on What HiFi, a test would be beneficial to a lot of users.

I think it's clear that nobody at WHF is interested, Camac.

Glad the 3D3s are working out for you.

 

[spiny norman]

Probably more the point that no-one's interested in 3D

 

[ellisdj]

That's most probably because their watching on the crap glasses you get free on un calibrated screens

Glad you like the glasses strapped - it was a no brainier to me

 

[strapped for cash]

Probably more the point that no-one's interested in 3D

That's a sweeping generalisation.

3D television didn't take the world by storm, but there remains a niche market for 3D, which can happily exist in supplement to 2D viewing.

It really isn't an either/or formulation. Besides, we'll end up owning the technology by default; and the occasional 3D Blu-ray can be enjoyable.

One of the biggest issues with 3D is a lack of quality content, by which I mean a dearth of 3D movies that are worth watching in their own right. Gravity is perhaps as good as it gets, even if critics went a little over the top with praise.

Moreover, if the mag is willing to conduct cable supertests (products that many readers argue have no bearing on performance), a group test of glasses that clearly alter viewing experiences surely has some merit.

 

[strapped for cash]

Glad you like the glasses strapped - it was a no brainier to me

Actually, my original post was pre-VT65. The 3D3s offered clearer advantages over Panasonic's 2012 glasses, in my view.

In any case, my VT65 was calibrated through the 3D3s, so it'd be silly to watch 3D content using Panasonic's bundled specs...