Sign in / up

back to article Dixons Logik LE423ED11 42in passive 3D TV

Now that the big name TV makers have made 3D a mainstream commodity, traditionally cheaper own-brand vendors are moving in for a slice of the pie. But does it make sense to nab a cut-price stereoscopic TV? Not on the evidence of this 42-incher, released under the Logik marque and distributed exclusively through Dixons, Currys …

COMMENTS

House rules Send corrections
This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Neil Barnes Silver badge

    Without any access to the tv in question

    it's hard to see how a passive 3-d can fail to be registered unless there's something fundamentally wrong with the alignment of the image and the polarising strips.

    Is it possible there's a mechanical fault with this particular unit? (or the software equivalent thereof?)

    0 0
  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Does anyone ever proof read these articles?

    If not, perhaps they should start. If they do, perhaps they should be fired.

    6 0
  3. Sampler
    FAIL

    This the same Dixons..

    ..selling fully branded 51" Active Shutter 3D TV's (albiet without the glasses) for £500 last time I was in? Why would you pay £600 for that borked box?

    0 0
  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Dixons at least had the right idea going the passive route. If done properly, the results will look vastly superior to those obtained from shutter glasses, removing the annoying bleedthrough from one eye to the other. Sounds like a fail on the "done properly" part judging by this review.

    0 1
    1. My New Handle
      Reply Icon
      Thumb Down

      Nothing wrong with Shutter Glasses

      2011 spec shutter glasses from all the manufacturers are a vast improvement on the original Infra Red-driven tech of previously. There is no bleedhtrough across eyes or any problem whatsoever where compatible products are used.

      This reviewed set is either a Friday build or Dixons has gone and bought a job lot of crap that couldn't be sold to the locals in the Far East and so has been dumped on Blighty.

      Passive is unlikely to ever look as tight was active technology, but it shouldn't be a stark difference as the reviewer has witnessed. But then, I tend to shy away from any of Dixons own-brand stuff. It is generally C-grade nonsense.

      0 0
  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    What's with the odd slanted splitting of the screen and bevel into three-quarters black, one-quarter light grey, as illustrated in the first photo? Not quite sure I'd want a tv that looks like that... it'd be rather distracting, and the contrast ratio for the left part of the screen must be terrible.

    0 0
    1. NogginTheNog
      Reply Icon
      Coat

      Someone...

      ...please slap that man! :-D

      0 0
      1. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Anonymous Coward

        The last picture on the second page is even worse, like someone's gone mad with a spray can of silver paint. Their marketing people need to lay off the photoshop... what the hell is wrong with just showing a photo of the tv how it actually looks, without adding an obviously fake effect on top?

        0 0
  6. John H Woods Silver badge

    Amazon 1 star syndrome

    Guys, when something is this bad, you owe it to us to check it isn't a faulty model. Otherwise you are no better than the green-ink brigade raving on Amazon: "The HDD arrived in a badly damaged box but I opened it anyway. It only worked for a bit and then it stopped. One star."

    0 0
  7. MJI Silver badge

    I got 3D from our 2D TV

    BBC HD was doing side by side - I had a squint operation as a child.

    I was able to overlay the two sides - squished 3D

    is this TV any better?

    0 0
This topic is closed for new posts.