Home / News / TV News / Samsung 3D LED TVs Given a UK Launch Date

Samsung 3D LED TVs Given a UK Launch Date

Gordon Kelly

by

Samsung 3D LED TVs Given a UK Launch Date

Its merits have been discussed to death, but I bet you didn't know the first home 3D TVs will be launching in the UK as soon as next month...?

Naturally enough, Samsung is the overachieving company which has given us this shock and we'll be getting its 3D enabled, LED 8 Series, LED 7 Series and LCD 7 Series models any minute now. The LED 9 Series will follow shortly after. All models were originally announced as part of the Samsung 3D CES onslaught last month and will require proprietary 3D glasses.

On the heels of these TVs will also be the 3D capable BD-C6900 Blu-ray player and HT-C6930W Home Theater System, which are due in 'spring'. Samsung says bundles of this equipment, plus one of the aforementioned TVs will include a copy of what is set to become the first 3D Blu-ray move, 'Monsters Verses Aliens'.

Just as it did at CES, Samsung hasn't broken down the tech specs of any of these products or given pricing information. Such is life.

In related news FlatPanelsHD has learnt Philips is set to join in the 3D spamming 'revolution' of our homes as well with a 3D version of its stunning 21:9 Cinema TV being made available by 'this summer'. It will be joined by 3D ready 32in, 37in, 40in, 42in, 46in and 53in LCD and LED backlit models which will no doubt a) impress, and b) confuse us with Philips' impenetrable product codes.

And yes, I still think 3D is bunch of old hogwash...

Links:

Samsung UK TVs

via FlatPanelsHD

FreQ

February 23, 2010, 6:08 am

Personally.....don't care. Wearing glasses over glasses is pretty uncomfortable and you look like a spanner. You can put up with it for 2 hours in a dark cinema, but at home I don't think many will bother.


On top of that, I don't think 3d adds anything to the experience. I don't feel any more "immersed" in the movie if it's in 3d, I just see some scenery closer than other objects. A higher quality picture or better sound quality makes things better, but I don't really get this 3d push. Buil in Freeview HD on the other hand....

Jay4d0

February 23, 2010, 6:54 am

here is the '3D event of the year' http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... you can clearly see where the '3D' is going to be placed and how it will clearly ruin the film, can anyone see how '3D' benefits films, ever! it is only used to point and throw things at you. does anyone not get the effect of something coming towards you without '3D'?


I am very firmly hoping the '3D' fad fails and quickly so people dont waste their money and the film and tv industries get the message that we will not be sold every useless piece of technology just because they say it's 'the next big thing'.


my mind boggles how '3D' is anymore than a gimmick at least until real 'star trek holodeck 3D' if I am still alive when that happens

jopey

February 23, 2010, 8:16 am

I'm only interested in 3D for two things. Gaming and porn. Though if either of those two industries think it's appealing to have stuff "throw", "shot" or "poked" out of the screen and towards your face, they are extremely mistaken.





Inny 3D not Outty 3D! Or be gone with you!





3D films are not necessary.

Charm El Snake

February 23, 2010, 12:47 pm

Personally, I'm very much looking forward to getting 3D TV.





Saying 3D TV is unnecessary is like saying 7.1 surround sound is unnecessary. What's wrong with a mono speaker under the telly?





We live in a 3D world, and whilst the current technology is certainly not as good as real life, I'm prepared to put up with it until someone invents a full colour holographic TV system.





If you're not interested in 3D telly, then just ignore it. What's the point of you banging on about how much you hate it? It's like my grandma harping on about how pointless smartphones are, and who wants to access the internet from a train anyway?





Accept it or ignore it, but stop whinging.

HDRE

February 23, 2010, 1:15 pm

The Samsung TV's look stunning as Samsung only knows how.





TV manufacturer's seem to be pushing this as they are running out of things to offer that they can deliver this year. Until 3D doesn't cost a premium and you can watch a film in genuine 3D I'll be giving this a miss.





On a side note, given ODEON's decision to not screen Alice in Wonderland, and their reason for it, doesn't the introduction of 3D TV's feel like a dagger to cinema's heart?





@jopey Gaming YES. I can see a benefit for that industry, I can't say anything about the later. I doubt my wife will left me watch that in the comfort of our front living room :)

Hamish Campbell

February 23, 2010, 1:38 pm

@jopey...well you might be right with gaming, but surely the other one will require both Inny AND Outty....rather repeatedly.

TechVegan

February 23, 2010, 2:57 pm

@FreQ:


I've worn 3D glasses over regular ones and found the discomfort to be minimal. As to immersion, have you actually seen Avatar in an iMAX? It does make a noticeable difference for at least some of us - IF done well (which it is in Avatar and any CG animation like UP!).





@Jay:


Sorry to disagree with you, but I hope 3D is here to stay. After all, for those who don't like it there's always the option to stick to 2D, and new 3D televisions will likely push down prices on non-3D sets.





@jopey:


erm...

MarioM

February 23, 2010, 3:17 pm

And so help me if I see another ludicrously bespoke Samsung solution, I'll... I'll... well, I'll buy a different brand! I bought my wife a Samsung mobile and a camera for Christmas and they both have stupid Samsung unique cables. Not even interchangeable. I expect their glasses will be the same kind of nonsense.

HDRE

February 23, 2010, 3:53 pm

@Ardjuna:


I can't imagine we'll all have our own iMAX to watch TV/Films on! iMAX is so huge you feel like your in the film. I can't imagine my puny 32" could have the same result some how. I wonder how many people could accommodate a suitably sized TV (AND sat back far enough) to take advantage of the picture, let alone have an effect in 3D that matches the iMAX.





With regard to the glasses. I don't thankfully have to wear them (yet). I've seen UP in the iMAX and thought the experience was enhanced but could have been dropped 20 min into the film as it had little noticeable effect thereafter. And with regard to Avatar, I wasn't sat in the sweet spot that must exist as ghosting was apparent (local cinema 3D experience). Towards the end of the film mine and my companions eyes were strained and remained so afterwards for a considerable time.





Sorry Ardjuna the Earth (I mean TV) is flat for me!

FreQ

February 23, 2010, 4:01 pm

Well, I wouldn't have posted my opinion like that had I not actually experienced some 3d movies. I've seen Avatar twice and Up! once, both in 3d. For me it didn't make the experience any better. Adding to that, the cinema's now use it to charge £10 a viewing, which is very expensive.





I also have wide cheekbones, meaning wide glasses, meaning 3d glasses don't really fit. Maybe I'm a special case with that, but I wouldn't know how other glasses wearers feel although I imagine quite a few wouldn't like wearing two pairs. Nintendo agrees with me on the this front anyway.





Oh, and the whinging comment? This is a forum where people exchange ideas and opinions. If anyone who disagreed with a story wasnt allowed to post (and kept quiet) then it wouldn't be worth having would it? Just a bunch of yes men....





I'll be surprised if 3d is still the big "revolution" it's currently being billed as in 5 years time. I think they'll have moved onto the next money-making craze. Just an opinion.

RazorA

February 23, 2010, 4:30 pm

I think 3D will have a future in our home AV systems just not in it's current form. Can anyone explain to me what ever happened to the 3D TVs that didn't require 3D Glasses to show 3D Images? See Link below


http://technology.timesonline....


I thought this technology would have matured by now. Seems to me this current crop of 3D TV's are just like the old 3D, just without the coloured glass lenses. No Major step taken there. We should all expect more from these electronic companies and with people having spent a lot on HDTV's I don't see this upcoming generation of 3D TV's offering that much in terms of evolution.

HDRE

February 23, 2010, 6:52 pm

@RazorA:


I've been wondering about that too!

peter sturgeon

February 23, 2010, 8:42 pm

the current best tv ie 40pfl9704 is not even freeview hd ready so say no to 3d now before it causes more trouble than its worth ;keep 3d to cinemas if people want 3d sport etc wait until it is established via sky or whomever ?

ffrankmccaffery

February 24, 2010, 6:13 am

Beautifully distilled design although the perspex frame touch is a bit tired and inconsistent.


As for 3D? I've yet to see it in action and I'm not going to if I have to wear a pair of goofy specs to do so.

xaba

May 4, 2010, 1:53 pm

i think they just don't step two on the ladder in order to maximize their profit. the glassfree 3d tv could be next step though... but when? the question is that in fact.

comments powered by Disqus