Size & budget?
My Home Cinema Pioneer KRP 500A, Yamaha RX-V1900, MA Radius R225HD LCR, R90HD rears, AW12 sub, Panasonic BD60, PS3, Boxee Box, Sky HD, Boxee Box, Logitech Harmony One, Logitech PS3 Adapter, Sonos ZP90
Bedroom Samsung UE32C6510, PS3 slim white, Apple TV, Sonos S5, Sonos ZP90, Audioengine 2, Oppo OPDV971H
Miscellaneous: Synology DS212J + 2 X WD Red 2TB drives, WD 1TB NAS, Sonos ZoneBridge, BT HH3 as modem & AirPort Extreme router
40" about £600
This has just been released; the price should fall to your budget soon:
Any reason you're averse to 3D? You can get a 3D TV for your budget.
Right, just by the best 2D TV for your budget. If it's a 3D TV too, nobody will force you to use this feature.
Hardware: Panasonic TX-P50VT65B (calibrated); Cambridge Audio Azur 651BD; Yamaha RX-A810; Teac PD-H600; PS3; B&W 601 & 600LCR (series 3); Q Acoustics QAV (rear)
Furniture and Accessories: BLOK Classix 3000 Oak AV Cabinet; Atacama Nexus 6 (atabite metal filled); 3D3 A1112
I just don't want to buy a TV which requires you to wear glasses. Yes and I am aware no one is forcing me to she'll extra on 3 pairs of glasses to watch limited content. oh and my three year old toddler wouldn't be too happy looking at something that doesn't look 'right' What companies should be concentrating on is display very good SD TV seeing as this still comprises about 80% of TV scheduling. But that's a topic for another day or month.
Sebrouen, I think your anger is misplaced. You don't like 3D. We get that. We're arguing that 3D is incidental to the discussion.
A large proportion of televisions now come with 3D functionality as standard. If you start from a position of thinking "I refuse to buy a TV that includes 3D as a feature," you greatly limit your options.
If you audition a television, decide it suits your budget, has a 2D picture you love, and also offers 3D viewing, you shouldn't rule it out on the basis that it can also display 3D content. You're not saving money by eschewing 3D, because most large screen televisions are now 3D-capable.
Let me give you another example by way of comparison. My television is a so-called "smart TV," though I don't surf the net on my television because it's much slower than my laptop and the internet platforms supported are scaled-down versions. I think "smart" features are a gimmick and I've zero interest in them, but that's not why I bought my television. I buy home video hardware because I want the best possible picture. I simply ignore the smart features because nobody is forcing me to use them. They're there. I know they're there. But I see no value in raging about their inclusion, as I'm focused on the picture the TV produces.
As I say, choose a TV within budget that has the 2D picture you like best. Ignore the other features if they're included. In saying "I'll never buy a TV with 3D functionality," you're overcomplicating your decision.
What's more, the inclusion of 3D often has knock on benefits in terms of 2D performance (faster refresh rates, for instance). The best 3D TVs are usually the best 2D TVs, as well.
I just don't want to buy a TV which requires you to wear glasses. Yes and I am aware no one is forcing me to she'll extra on 3 pairs of glasses to watch limited content. oh and my three year old toddler wouldn't be too happy looking at something that doesn't look 'right'
Don't buy 3D glasses, & don't watch any 3D content. Simples.
Are you under the impression that a 3D TV attempts to show all content in 3D, forcing you to wear glasses?
2D is exactly the same as any other TV, & you dont need glasses.
My understanding is that the OP understands that you can watch a 3D TV in 2D, without glasses, but out of vehement 3D hatred, refuses to have a 3D-capable TV in his home.
I'm happy to corrected on this.
Just wanted to make sure.
I agree with you that even 2D content benefits because of 3D capability of the TV.
Point taken strapped for cash. I guess I am complicating matters. But am I right in thinking that 3D is usually found in a brands more expensive models?
slght misunderstanding big boss. I was thinking from a practical point of view if we chose to sit down as a family to watch sky 3D for example we would need three pairs of glasses and the little un wouldn't be able to watch for obvious reasons. But my original issue was advice in seeking out a 2D only TV such as the Panasonic recommended earlier.
The problem is that pure 2D TVs are vanishing, and ones that are being sold are low spec. You'll get better 2D TVs in your budget if you don't mind 3D functionality (although it'll end up as a feature you won't use). Just keep the clause that 3D is not important to you.
This is older the 2012 model of the TV I linked earlier (discounted as it's an outgoing model):
If you don't restrict yourself to pure 2D TVs, this is the best TV you can buy for your budget:
Another good option:
© 2013 Haymarket Publishing