Panasonic announces 46-, 42-inch plasma 3DTVs for Japan

So far, Panasonic's well-reviewed (and naturally, 3D capable) 2010 V-series plasmas have been exclusively a 50-inch and above affair, but it's just announced 46- and 42-inch versions for Japan priced at ¥350,000 ($3,833) and ¥300,000 ($3,285), respectively. Due July 30, it's a fair bet they'll make their way over here in a similar time frame (and with predictably lower MSRPs) just like their larger brethren. Panasonic has reported brisk sales of its initial 3D televisions, but as production ramps up and supply expands, TVs like these are a better fit for many rooms -- and budgets -- so with 3D channels and gaming ready to appear, we'll be eyeing their reception by consumers especially closely.

[Meekermoloko Posted Jun 9th 2010 12:49AM]

*3D will diminish six months after you buy it.

[SeeKo Posted Jun 9th 2010 5:52AM]

@Meekermoloko

Seems to get harder to buy a new TV WITHOUT 3D. I don't want it!

[littlea Posted Jun 9th 2010 12:53AM]

nice remote.

[aw2011 Posted Jun 9th 2010 12:57AM]

so far i have seen many 3d tv and its a major disappointment. yes i have seen some good video of 3d tv at the sony store but that was only one video where another ones are so bad. 3D is not ready for a few years yet i would say. (maybe its my eyes but it does not work well for me.)

[Quaildog Posted Jun 9th 2010 1:10AM]

Just give me a 50" with 24p playback @ 96hz WITHOUT 3d

[FNi Posted Jun 9th 2010 1:11AM]

Seriously, please somebody tell me what is up with all this active shutter-glasses 3D bull?

Is the lighter, cheaper, battery-free, passive version you see in cinemas really unsuitable for the consumer market? Is the screen technology too expensive?

[RichardLawler Posted Jun 9th 2010 1:33AM]

@FNi http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/26/ready-or-not-the-latest-3d-technology-is-coming-home/

[FNi Posted Jun 9th 2010 4:35AM]

@RichardLawler Interesting read, thanks Richard.

So basically, the cheapest home solution for passive polarised glasses is the JVC $9,000 LCD TV?

I agree that's expensive, but no where near what I thought it would be. Surely this means in the very near future that technology will be affordable to the masses?

Or do you think the major manufacturers have gone all in on active shutter and are not going to bother refine technologies such as JVC's Xpol?

[Joeyjoejoe Shabadoo Posted Jun 9th 2010 2:10PM]

@FNi

Major production companies have gone active shutter glass because its cheaper for them. The same 120htz tv's they have been making, with 3d tech taped on.

I am holding out for some sort of box that will split the 3d signal into two so I can do this
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/3d-polarized-projector,2589-4.html

However if no-one seriously backs polarization its not going to get any cheaper. :/

[RichardLawler Posted Jun 10th 2010 12:35AM]

@FNi Polarized is not better. You still want to watch 2D sometimes, right? That would suck on a screen with the polarizing film over it. I've seen that TV, it's not something you want to buy.

[dark star Posted Jun 9th 2010 1:24AM]

I rather have a 3d projector!
Any suggestion?

[Joeyjoejoe Shabadoo Posted Jun 9th 2010 2:12PM]

@dark star

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/3d-polarized-projector,2589-4.html

Wait for something that splits the 3d signal into two outputs. Buy the filters and *sigh* another projector.

Otherwise I have heard of LG working on a 3d projector for home use.

[Independence76 Posted Jun 9th 2010 1:43AM]

What a crazy random happenstance!

[skechers Posted Jun 9th 2010 2:27AM]

its a major disappointment. yes i have seen some good video of 3d tv at the sony store but that was only one video where another ones are so bad.
http://www.shape-upsskechers.com

[Bahumbug Posted Jun 9th 2010 2:44AM]

The 3D hype replicates the HDTV hype some 6-8 years ago. And how long did it take for HD content to be widely available, especially on free TV?

[annoynimous Posted Jun 9th 2010 3:21AM]

so its back to plasma all over again... wtf? I'm quite happy to save some money for the LED atm.

[xtasi Posted Jun 9th 2010 3:58AM]

How about some 3D where the glasses don't cost an arm and leg? I would be all over 3D tv if the glasses where $20 or less.

[blckman Posted Jun 9th 2010 6:34PM]

@xtasi
I so agree with you xtasi. You pay enough for
the 3D technology. But looking at things now, my rear projection Television I purchased in 2005 was $2,500. It's a different time today though. Most consumers want to get what they pay for. Now, if Panasonic includes three or four pairs of "universal" glasses that should be for the masses, then I'm all in baby. World Cup in 3D would have me sold on these two babies.