Is 3D TV too expensive for Brits?
A new survey has found the 3D TV may prove just too expensive for us Brits.
While nearly 1 in 3 would like to buy all the kit required to bring a third dimension to our living rooms, out of the 3,000 people who took part in the VoucherCodes.co.uk survey, 53% would only pay up to £499 for a 3D TV.
In fact, only 1.4% said they'd be prepared to pay the expected cost of £2,000 for a 3D set, while 35% said they would be turning their back on the new tech altogether.
Not promising figures for the likes of Sony, which hopes to sell 2.5m 3D TVs by next year.
While football in 3D seems to be a big push for Sky, it seems that 3D movies will be the clincher for most. Nearly half of those survey wanting to watch films in an extra dimension, compared the just 11% wanting 3D football.
What about you - how much would you pay for a 3D TV? Will you be buying or will you wait for prices to come down? Let us know in the comments below, and be sure to check out our guide on how to get 3D TV.
Comments
OwenDarko
3 years ago
I will consider it, but in a year or so time! I still think it should have come into action for the Olympics in 2012 and not before! That would have then gave the normal HD more time on the market, at the moment it seems like tech overload when the tech we're already using still seems fresh (if you get what i mean) and normal blu-ray films are becoming popular. I think it's just too early personally! and £2000+ just seems ridiculous, really is ashame we couldn't just use our HDTV's and buy a adaptor to make it 3D, other then purchasing a whole new TV set! Espicially for those who have just recently purchased the Samsung LED LCD's.
Ttreb
3 years ago
No 3-D for me. I'm perfectly happy with 2-D telly and a HiDef box. I also don't want to wear polarised sunglasses in the house. I can picture a nation of pensionable photophobic people in the not so distant future. Their lightsensitivity provoked by wearing shaded lenses in the home all the time.
DanielPrice
3 years ago
2D is perfectly good for me. I think 3D is just a gimmick pushed on to us for more sales. I don't think i'll ever watch 3D outside the cinema
SergeAStorms
3 years ago
The problem is the majority of TV is total rubbish. Who wants to watch Eastenders (at all) in 3D, for supereal depression. I understand movies being a big attraction but the olympics in 3D, it's people running and jumping. The only big draw will be 3D porn, don't say you're not interested. And I'm sure its only a matter of time before a format war comes on 3D BluRay vs some other beast, silly glasses vs contact lenses. People will still be paying the credit on big LCDs off by the time it hits the shelves. Maybe we need a government TV scrappage scheme.
martin27scott
3 years ago
For me, it's just the inconvenience of the technology. I don't mind and have enjoyed 3D in a cinema but I just can't get my head around the idea of wearing polarized glasses at home or in the pub. I'll be giving it a miss for sure at least until it proves to be the way forward and fends off any other 3D technologies which may arise. I like early adoption, but not in this case.
MikeyB_Jawz
3 years ago
i totally agree. a lil' too soon for 3D Tv. It kinda hurts my eyes a lil' bit and i've got near perfect vision. As a lil' side note, i noticed that my iMac (1st gen aluminum version) is 3-D ready and handles motion pretty well. Now for the games.. 3-D call of duty? hell yeh!
soulsonic34
3 years ago
I totally agree with the other comments in that 3D TV is just too new. The 3D format should be launched in say 8 to 10 years time allowing the present HD format to die out gracefully. Like most consumers my HDTV (a Pioneer Plasma) is not even 3 years old and manufacturers want us to ditch our screens for another technology. Who's to say, that 3D TV will last 3 years before another new format is launched. Besides there isn't sufficient volume of native HD programmes on Sky let alone 3D content. Most HD programmes shown on Sky et all are simply upscaled SD by the broadcasters.
mjcairney
3 years ago
Being one who paid over £3,000 for my existing Pioneer plasma about five years ago and now see plasmas selling for not much more than 15% of that figure, I for one will not be jumping in and paying top dollar for 3D, rather I'll give it a couple of years and perhaps look to buy when the prices have settled down to reasonable levels.
Pippys
3 years ago
To be totally honest with you, I don't see exactly why we need a new 3D TV?? I was watching 3D films when I was a kid on our old "New Colour" TV years before HD was thought about? If these TV's let you watch 3D without glasses then that would be cool but not worth paying over £1,000 for AGAIN!! It's a corporate capitalist economy gone barmy and we are creating a quite nasty want want want american type society that will end quite harshly! The recession was just a first warning of things to come... Happy Easter everyone!! Phil
foomandoo
3 years ago
I agree with many here that it really is too soon after the launch of HD TV to be wanting us to 'upgrade' to 3D. Also a large lack of 3D content (still not enough HD at the mo let alone 3D) although I'm sure that will grow with current surge in 3D at the cinema. Oh and I can't think of anything more boring than football / cricket / athletics in 3D. (except maybe the above in 2D :P ) As for the person wanting to convert their current TV, well you can't simple as that - you need a true refresh rate of 120hz which most tv's can't do and even 200hz TV's don't do 120 refresh. I think the exciting area at the moment is 3D for PC's. This is do-able now albeit still needing a 120hz capable monitor and just needs the relatively inexpensive Nvidia 3D vision kit. And its capable of running with the majority of current games out now. It also looks great. (no, I dont work for Nvidia :P ) Ok, passing the soap box to the next person...