Samsung's Active 3D Glasses Gets Priced

By published

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.

Kevin Parrish
48 Comments Comment from the forums
  • traesta
    way ugly glasses samsung!
    Reply
  • cscott_it
    I completely agree with Kevin (begin voting me down now), this technology isn't ready for mass adaptation. Maybe in it's 2nd or 3rd generation.

    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.
    Reply
  • dman3k
    And the price from Vizio? $2000 with 4 pairs of glasses...

    Looks like I'm going with Vizio.
    Reply
  • sciencectn
    I think you have a typo: "they they do not fit children"
    Reply
  • pochacco007
    what amazes me is that there are companies who are investing in this stupid idea! did hd do anything for tv?! absolutely not. what will making tv 3d going to do anything?
    Reply
  • bcube
    greedy
    Reply
  • gekko668
    Is it just me or 3D tv is just a fad?

    I personally like my tv non-3d and prefer not to wear the dorky 3d glass.
    Reply
  • Parrdacc
    3d t.v. is just too expensive right now, that and the history of 3D shows it as a fad the comes and goes every few decades. So until it shows it is going to stay and the price comes down I'll pass.
    Reply
  • beayn
    If they stuck an Apple tag on it, it would be revolutionary and brilliant, making the high price well worth it.
    Reply
  • Honis
    What amazes me, is that after decades of this economic tech cycle people get all up in arms about new tech being "ZOMG to high of cost!!!!" It's new tech, it's going to be expensive for a little while, then it's going to lower in price, then we'll see if it catches for a long term trend (blu-ray, VHS, DVD, x86, etc.), gets a quick dump off (HD-DVD, Beta Max, etc.), or a niche market (Beta tapes, tape backups, Apple computers , Laser Disc, etc.)

    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.
    Reply