Anyone here have a 3D TV?

[CP]

Impressions??? The premium over 2D is kind of steep.

[theriver]

i havent seem m mercury here yet with his asians

[Rotorhead]

I probably never will. Have a 42" Samsung LCD HD and so no need.

[Munch]

I was watching Avatar on one at Best Buy and it was extremely sweet. I could handle wearing the glasses once in a while for special movies but that would be about all I could take.

[Stangkiller]

I thought what made a TV 3d capable was basically the 240Hz+ response of the screen. Is a higher response worth the money? YES. Go look at some of the higher hz tv's there's usually a demo for 60hz vs 120 or 240hz. The best example is text scrolling across the screen it's VERY obvious that faster response makes for a crisper image.

[BuckyThreadkiller]

Unless I'm mistaken there are less than a half dozen 3D formatted movies out so far, there are a couple channels that broadcast only occasionally on DirecTV and that's it for programming.

Every review I've read where somebody tries to watch programming for any length of time - like two movies back to back - they get headaches or ill.

Plus - if you try and do anything while watching such as surf the net or text, it doesn't work with the glasses on.

[snide]

Costco has decent prices on the 3D TVs right now.

[CheySha]

Originally Posted by CP

Impressions??? The premium over 2D is kind of steep.

I have the Panasonic 50" HD3DTV and the 3D movies are awesome on it but as someone said there aren't that many out. The 3D specials and sports that DirecTv has are not that great but they aren't that bad either. The glasses for the Panasonic are rather bulky and kind of heavy IMO. Bottom line - If you aren't paying an outrageous price (I got the tv, 3D kit with 2 pairs of glasses, and a 3D blu-ray player with one pair of glasses for around $1200) and you aren't buying a new one just for 3D then the picture quality alone is worth it.