LG 42 LW650T 42in passive 3D TV
Smart TV with disposable specs
Review When LG threw its weight behind passive 3D at this year’s CES, shockwaves rippled around the TV market. The brand used the show to rail against the dangers of Active Shutter 3D technology, enraging its rivals who cried foul.
Passive aggressive: LG's 42 LW650T
Suddenly the consumer electronics industry found itself teetering on the brink of another format war. But just how different is passive 3D from Active Shutter, and should you care either way?
The 42in LW650T reviewed here is the smallest of three sets in LG’s LW650T ‘Cinema 3D’ range, which is joined by the 47 and 55in models.
In many respects, it’s a cookie cutter slim-screen, just 29.9mm deep. Backside connections include four HDMIs, two USBs (one designated for external HDD recording duties), a CI slot, component and AV inputs requiring adaptors (supplied), PC 15-pin D-Sub, Ethernet and digital audio output. There’s also an RS232 control port and a legacy phono AV input.
There are no side mounted inputs; the set is too slim to support them and there's integrated Wi-Fi either, although LG sells a dedicated LAN-WF100 dongle.
Like most thin panels, break-out adapters are needed for some of the interfacing
The 42 LW650T features Smart TV, LG’s NetCast replacement. This ‘net connected portal offers a broad selection of on-line entertainment accessed from an intuitive Home page. Preloaded is BBC iPlayer, YouTube, Facebook, Picasa and Acetrax. More apps and services are available from LG’s apps market. The TV also incorporates Media Link, a Media Server client based on Plex.
For years PeeCees cost a thousand quid 'cos thats how much shops wanted to take off folks. Now its Tellies. Snag is, there's nothing on the box so worth watching as to justify paying that much.
I think I'll walk my dog instead. (Hmm. a thousand quid will buy a whole bunch of dried dogfood. If I don't buy this tv I could afford a third dog...)
Shaky but promising?
Passive HAS to be the way to go until such time as non-glasses 3D comes of age, in my view. But this sounds a bit average for the price.
Question - why do TVs have all the settings and optional modes which often are best turned off? Why not just make it use the best settings, the people designing it should be far more expert than the DSS pleb watching it at this.
How does the image look in 3D-mode if you're not wearing the required glasses?
You spent most of the time slagging it off, yet its gets 80%, an other paid for review ?
Is it darker?
Serious question: Does the passive 3D filter make normal non-3D watching significantly gloomier?
I initially guessed it would, because passive 3D requires polarization; then I remembered that LCDs use polarization anyway, so now I'm not sure...
Also can someone clarify whether it's vertical resolution (horizontal lines) or horizontal resolution (vertical lines) that's compromised (and which is worse?)