Panasonic TY-ER3D4MU review: Panasonic TY-ER3D4MU

Switching quickly between the two glasses there is a slight but noticeable difference in black levels. The image viewed through the Panasonic glasses seemed just a bit darker on the screens of both TVs. We're not sure if this difference is caused by the lenses themselves or simply by the Panasonic's fit--the more closed design blocks out more ambient light even in our completely dark room.

There was almost no difference in color between the two sets of glasses, and the ghostly outlines of crosstalk appeared identical as well. Both varied depending on which TV we watched--for the record the Samsung was superior in both areas--but the glasses had a negligible impact.

As far as longevity, neither pair are particularly immune to breakage--we actually have a pair of each with cracks in the lenses that broke during shipping (better packaging next time, guys). The cracks expose the liquid crystal layer, which makes them useless. Moral of the story is: don't leave these out for people to stand or sit on. And if this is a problem get a passive LG TV where the glasses are much cheaper and don't have the gooey LCD center.

Opinons are split on whether passive or active is the best 3D technology. Ty prefers passive as the interlacing artefacts aren't as annoying as the eyestrain that results from the crosstalk still found in active technologies. Katzmaier finds those artifacts more objectionable than the mild crosstalk seen on the best active TVs.

Conclusion
If 3D is a secondary consideration (as it should be) here's what we'd recommend. If you're looking to save money on active glasses and own a compatible 2012 TV, buy a pair of the Panasonics for yourself to use most of the time, and then buy a few more pairs of these cheaper Samsungs for when the whole family sits down together. Just don't forget to put them away afterwards.

Don't Miss

 

Discuss Panasonic TY-ER3D4MU

Conversation powered by Livefyre