All three sets feature Vizio's Theater 3D Passive Glasses technology and network connectivity via Ethernet or WiFi connection.
Vizio's Internet Apps give users access to content from a host providers, including Netflix, Blockbuster-On-Demand, Amazon Instant Video, and Hulu-Plus.
The E3D470VX has a 47-inch screen size and lists for $899.99.
The E3D420VX has a 42-inch screen size and lists for $729.99.
The E3D320VX has a 32-inch screen size and lists for $549.99.
Two pairs of Passive 3D Glasses are included with each set. Extra glasses are resonably priced, and available directly from Vizio.
In addition, Vizio also offers a reasonably-priced 3D Blu-ray Disc player, the VBR333.
The benefits of passive glasses include more 3D viewing comfort, increased brightness of 3D images, no need for battery charging or replacement, and the lower prices charged for passive 3D glasses. On the other hand, although all these new sets sport 1080p resolution for 2D viewing, resolution for 3D drops to 540p, which is slightly above DVD quality.
The drop in resolution occurs because both left and right eye images are displayed on the screen at the same time, unlike TVs that require active shutter glasses, in which the left and right eye images are flashed on the screen in alternate fashion, timed to the TV's screen refresh rate. To determine if this difference is a major factor for you, go to your dealer and view both the Vizio passive-glasses sets and sets using active shutter glasses, in both in 2D and 3D mode, with both film and animation content, before making a purchase decision.
I had a chance to view several Vizio passive glasses 3D TVs that were on display at the recently held CES and they looked good. The glasses were indeed very comfortable to wear the image brightness and detail was acceptable.
Looking for more 3D TV Suggestions? Check out my list of Best 3D Plasma and LCD TVs.
Related Stories:
Panasonic and Xpand Team-up on 3D Glasses Compatibility Standards (Panasonic)
3D Just One of a Number of High-End TV Features (Wall Street Journal)
Comments
Mr Silva, I disagree with your statement that the resolution falls to slightly above DVD quality. Vertically, indeed resolution drops to 540, but horizontally, it remains 1920, which is a lot more than DVD.
Thank you for your comments.
You are correct about the 1920 x 540 part of the equation – You have to take into consideration that both images are displayed on the screen at the same time within the 1920 x 540 range – when combined into a single 3D image, although above progressive scan DVD resolution (480p), 540p is no longer considered true high definition – or least on the lower end of the high definition equation.
One way that this can be overcome is with the implementation of 4K resolution TV displays – which have a native pixel resolution of either (3840 x 2160 or 4096 x 2160 pixels) – this way, a 3D image using the passive glasses method would have full 1920×1080 resolution – of course, as added bonus, 2D images would be capable of being displayed in 4K either natively or upscaled from 1080p from currently available 2D content.. This might actually turn out be the best incentive to introduce 4K displays to the consumer market.
The difference with the active shutter method is that the left and right eyes images are not displayed on the screen at the same time, but alternately, in synchronization with the “flickering” shutters on the active 3D glasses – this means that the left and right eye images both receive the full 1920×1080 3D image.
There is a definite visual difference, although not a factor on smaller screen sizes (it is interesting that Vizio is releasing smaller screen sizes using this method) it is definitely a factor on larger screen sizes – However, as alluded to in the article it is a trade-off may not be an issue for many consumers.
I am definitely not a detractor of the passive 3D system – It is just that consumers need to be aware of the differences going in.
Robert Silva
Guide to Home Theater
http://hometheater.about.com
hometheater.guide@about.com
About.com | Need. Know. Accomplish.
One factor you have not considered is the fact that with the active system, the 1080p image is not seen in both eyes simultaneiously. When the left eye sees the 1080 line image, the right eye does not see anything. In the passive system, both the left and right 540 lilne images are viewed simultaneously. I also read that in the passive system all 1080 lines are displayed, but in two passes. The odd left eye image is viewed with the even right eye image, followed by the even left image being displayed with the odd right image. All 1080 lines are being viewed in both eyes. There are still 1080 lines on the screen. The visible lines are from a black matrix separating the polarized lines on the screen. This separation is to prevent cross talk. I do not see the lines at normal viewing distance.
Thanks for the comments Kent –
This topic continues to be hotly discussed by advocates for both systems – and there certainly are advantages to each.With that being said, I am taking into consideration regarding the way the images are displayed. The fact is that the Active System a full 1080p image is sent to each eye, regardless of the fact that they are not sent simultaneously, both eyes are still seeing a full 1080p image when shutters pass the image, where as in the passive system, a half-resolution image is sent to each eye. The fact that the frames are sent twice has no effect on the resolution, all that technique does is improve factors such as persistence of vision (similar to the effect of screen refresh rates).
As a result, in the active system, the brain is assembling a 3D image from two full 1080p frames, whereas the in the passive system the brain is assembling the image from two half-resolution frames. However, with the Active System, each eye starts out with 1080p resolution and is assembling the 3D image from two full 1080p frames. Therefore, the resolution of the assembled information in active system starts and ends with 1080p.
Also, with regards to the horizontal line issue, just as with things, such as the DLP rainbow effect, there is variation on how such things are perceived by viewers – some are going be more affected by others. For example, I have done extensive viewing with both active and passive systems, and am currently evaluating an LCD TV that uses the passive system, and with its 47-inch screen size, and viewing distance of 7 feet, I can see the effect of the horizontal line structure – especially on titles and text.
As a side comment, in order to see a full 1080p image in 3D using the passive glasses system, you must have TV with a native resolution of 4K, which would result in 1080p (approx 2K) images to be sent to each eye that can then be assembled through the use of passive glasses into a 1080p 3D image.
To illustrate the differences between Active vs Passive 3D further, I am going to refer you to the following article posted posted by Home Theater Magazine where Joe Kane, one of the major individuals responsible for establishing video standards, explains and illustrates the differences between active and passive 3D in more technical detail, which includes supporting photographs:
http://www.hometheater.com/content/closer-look-active-vs-passive-3d-flat-panels
Also, Steve Sechrist, of Display Daily, has also posted a counter argument you might like:
http://displaydaily.com/2011/09/07/displaymate-human-vision-delivers-full-hd-using-passive-3d-glasses/
I am sure the discussion on this will continue – It will be interesting to see if there is more discussion on this at the upcoming CES in January – especially now that there are a lot more passive system TVs on the market.
Let’s face it, if the image looks good to the viewer, that is the most important thing – so other factors, such as good color and motion processing are important, as is video noise suppression – and, of course, the quality of the actual source material is a major factor.
As for me, with all I have seen so far, the best overall 3D viewing experience has been with video projection on a large screen – using a DLP video projector in combination with Active Glasses.
Robert Silva
hometheater.guide@about.com
http://hometheater.about.com
About.com is a part of the New York Times Company