Active 3D vs. Passive 3D TVs - Opinion. When LG revealed at this year’s Las Vegas Consumer Electronics Show that it was turning to passive technology for its 3D LCD TVs, we immediately felt it was a big deal.
The active 3D manufacturers tried to play LG’s move down, but in recent weeks we’ve also had Philips announce a range of passive 3D TVs. And it’s become apparent that LG, at least, isn’t just positioning passive 3D tech as a ‘cheap and cheerful’ alternative to active 3D. Rather it appears the company isout to suggest that passive is the better of the two systems. This ‘charm offensive’ began at CES, and included claims of research suggesting that more than 80 per cent of people preferred watching passive 3D over active 3D. There was also talk of how the passive 3D TV approach is more in line with the experience of watching 3D at the cinema, and how passive 3D tech is more ‘in tune’ with side by side 3D broadcasts of the sort used by Sky. Passive 3D vs. active 3D: Hands-on TV comparison.
In late 2010, Vizio quietly released the 65-inch ($3,700), the first mainstream TV equipped with so-called "passive" 3D technology for the U.S. market.
Earlier this week our review sample arrived, so in advance of the full review I'd like to present some initial impressions. This is the first time we've had a chance to really sit down and watch a passive 3D TV, so of course our first order of business was to set it up in the lab next the other 65-inch 3D TV we had on hand: the 2010 Editors' Choice -winning ($4,300).
Like nearly all other TV makers, Panasonic has embraced "active" technology for its 3D TVs, and for 2011, it didn't announce any passive 3D TVs. For this initial look, I chose not to include comparisons with other TVs, for the simple reason that the Panasonic is the best comparison model to the Vizio I have available. No Active 3D Standard Leaves Door Open For Passive 3D HDTVs.