Samsung's Active 3D Glasses Gets Priced
Consumers will need to dump more money into active shutter glasses after shelling out a huge load for the 3D HDTV.
Will 2010 be the year of 3D in our living rooms? That may depend on our wallets. 3D HDTVs won't come cheap, and many brands won't include the required active shutter glasses, forcing consumers to shell out even more money for the emerging technology.
Samsung will be one of many who won't include the specs with the HDTV, making it hard for the second class consumer to drop loads of money into the new trend.
According to ITProPortal, Samsung's 55-inch 3D LED HDTV is already on sale at Amazon, tagged with an impressive $3300 pricetag. However Samsung is also selling separate active shutter glasses for a whopping $150 a piece (the SSG-2100AB).
With that said, a family of four will be forced to shell out $600 for the glasses after dumping over $3,000 load into a new 3D HDTV.
ITProPortal also points out the drawbacks to active shutter glasses: they require a CR2025 battery, they may have an effect on brightness and contrast calibration, they they do not fit children. In addition, viewers must have at least own one pair of the active shutter glasses in order to benefit from the 3D technology-- those without the glasses can't watch the content simultaneously because of the way it's formatted.
So the question still stands: is this the year of 3D? For consumers with deep pockets, 3D technology may be tomorrow's investment. Consumers pinching pennies may not jump onto the 3D HDTV bandwagon for a while. Besides, the first version of 3DTV is probably going to not be so great and have kinks that need to be worked on.
We suggest waiting for at least 2nd generations of 3D TVs.

Maybe it's because I'm not rich. Maybe it's because I wear perscription glasses and don't want to wear contacts.
Or maybe it's because other gimmicks exist I'd rather blow my money on.
Frankly if i had the cash to burn and was in the market to get a new TV, i would be reading up on this in great detail.
If you have 3k to spend on a TV, you can throw another 500 in for glasses. For some people 3-4k is not a lot money... Unfortunately it is for me
Maybe it's because I'm not rich. Maybe it's because I wear perscription glasses and don't want to wear contacts.
Or maybe it's because other gimmicks exist I'd rather blow my money on.
Looks like I'm going with Vizio.
I personally like my tv non-3d and prefer not to wear the dorky 3d glass.
If the shutter glasses catch on, then companies with some style will see an open market and drop a few good looking pairs. I for one was hoping the polarized 3D would win since the glasses require only your face, but it seems that's a no go.
Frankly if i had the cash to burn and was in the market to get a new TV, i would be reading up on this in great detail.
If you have 3k to spend on a TV, you can throw another 500 in for glasses. For some people 3-4k is not a lot money... Unfortunately it is for me
If i could have that @ home, hell yah, bring it. I really, really, really want to see boobs in 3D!
"I personally like my tv non-3d..."
Priceless.
$3300 for a TV they should include 4 sets.
He seems to be wanting to drop a load or something.
3d glasses won't be dorky forever. Once there's a mass market, you can certainly order your pair of polarized 3d glasses in an Oakley frame.