yes higher models are full 4K compliant but these UF600 sereies are RGB-W panels so have teh extra white sub pixel in the array - so not full 4K !

read here http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/rgbw-201510084189.htm

EliTom

All 10% BNPL offers on Home page

They've put their prices up in the last couple of days, obviously to cover the 10%.

The actual TV when you click the link is ugly compared to the thumbnail of a decent looking set.

original price is too high

these are cheap 4k TVs for a reason - they are fake 4k - not real 4k and if you view one it is apparent

http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/lg/uf6400

EliTom

I created an account, clicked the buy now, pay later link, pressed apply now and then it reads "You are currently logged in as (my account name). If you wish to login as a different user please logout first. " (+a logout button). If I just put the TV in the basket, I can't find this cheaper option even by the checkout, it costs £399.00+£6.99. What do I do wrong?

I've used a lot of these interest free deals with Very, no Probs

Thanks, mate!

Wow that's nuts, thanks for this information! I had no idea this was going on, but does not surprise me!

I agree £699 is too high, but at £359 for a smart 4k with HVEC it aint too bad....

Unless you're looking under a microscope or are expecting perfect picture on a £370 TV then does it really matter? The average user of these sets will never run a calibration unit on one nor give a monkeys and tbh I was quite impressed how good the panel was for the money.

Imo don't buy a 43" I have a Sony 49" and I regret not buying the 55" to appreciate the full benefits of 4K upscaling. Next door neighbour has the 55" and I can def see the difference

LG don't use Vestel!

possible quidco.com, 10% cashback for new customers, expires in 3h.

These tv's aren't fake 4K they are amazing. Mine is a higher model but they are really good and worth every penny

A relative bought this recently from ao.com for £399
I was interested myself so asked to see it and found
Pros- decent enough picture cheap price for a 4k set
Cons-only 2 hdmi connections and 1 usb connection
No headphone jack
Wifi required a dongle and the smart tv side of it was very basic
Speakers were quite poor tinny sound

Not so much with SD in fact with lower bitrate channels they can look worse but most definitely HD looks better.

So with only 12 or so HD channels out of 60+ available on Freeview then looks like those 1080 tv's may remain popular for a while unless you want to pay sky £36.00 a month for all the HD channels or unless you just watch BBC1, 2, 3, and ITV1 and Channel 4 when in which case 4k will be just fine.

Your choice, just offering my opinion. Size does matter even if it's for an extra £150 - £200

The 49" one is £449

My choice is already a 49" one, best I could get away with regarding the missus complaining...

Most people will spend their money on the best they can afford, another £150-200 is an extra 50% on top of the cost of this!

Besides I bought my parents this because they didn't want a set that was too big, this was pretty much the same size as their old Samsung 40" thanks to the slim bezels so fitted in the same spot in their room as the old set without dominating the space.

We can't get cable either where I live and we don't have fibre either with maximum download of 5Mbs on a good day. Just checked, 3.85Mbps

What are people talking about they have built in WIFI so don't need a dongle and yes I would say even the standard tv picture, without the 4K is really good. They can't say 4K and it not be anyway

LG say that the 50LB650V had an IPS screen as the link below. It's discontinued now but still available at PC World
business.

http://www.lg.com/uk/tvs/lg-50LB650V

The following are their words not mine.

With LG’s unique IPS panel enjoy perfect colour, clarity and contrast, from every seat in the room.

I own the 50LB650V. I can tell you it does NOT have their unique IPS panel. it has a VA panel made by AU Optronics.

This isn't a simple mistake. LG know perfectly well what types of panels and who's panel goes into their televisions. For those wanting an IPS panel this would be mis-selling. For those who are not bothered it is a simple error on their website that they have failed to put right.

On the subject of 4k on LG tv's with the extra white pixel then true 4k is questionable as the experts state. Just because LG say something in advertising doesn't mean to say it is right just like their 'motion / refresh rates' along with other manufacturers is utter cods and means nothing as it is true refresh rates that matter most.

very true

Today I went into the huge Currys megastore at J9 M6 in Birmingham / wednesbury

First shock was finding a Currys saleman who had a clue what he was talking about ......

first he explained the LG 43 incher was a real entry point 4K TV and he knew about the faux 4K / RGW-W LCD

Second he put on a dedicated feed to three TVs and said just watch this and he left me to it

The feed was a 4K demo followed by a trailer for Intersteller with 1080p

1st TV was the Currys version of the LG 43UF640V .... 2nd was a sOny 42" 4K at £600 ish and 3rd was a Sony 43" 1080p set

the difference between 1 and 2 was chalk and cheese - LG was much more washed out / lack any vibrancy and the black levels were noticeably worse. Also the resolution was noticeable. Funnily enough the difference between the two Sonys was not so noticeable

The sales guys advice was if you want to spend £400 ish buy a 1080p set - 4K TVs with decent quality picture and upscaling start at £600 !!

I was convinced !

EliTom

Maybe he did a "switcheroony" with the 3 leads!

Yes, I agree also but I am a firm believer of you get what you pay for where tv's are concerned. I also say if you like it buy but on this post I think a lot of people have given it heat just because it's 4k (ish). I did a recent test on 3 tv's in Currys. I set them all to BBC1, channel 1. The tv's were Sony KDL50-W8009, LG 49UF770V and Samsung UE50JU6800.

The Sony was the clear winner on SD BBC1. Little difference on BBC1 HD, Sony still best in my opinion as close up the image on the LG and Samsung looked unfinished. The LG was no better than my own LG and the Samsung was easily dismissed. I felt the picture quality wasn't quite as good as the LG next to it and neither were as good as the Sony. I also didn't like the sluggish response from the remote on the Samsung whilst the LG was quick with WEBOS 2 which is a huge improvement over WEBOS 1 which is awful. The Sony's tour round the remote was fast as tv's should be. I put all three tv's back on their respective HD and UHD memory sticks, stood 6 to 8 feet away and there was no benefit of the 4k from either the LG or Samsung in comparison to the Sony's 1k. No difference at all.

Testing these tv's on freeview was a good test for me as I don't have sky and don't want to be part of their expensive service anymore. I question why on sky their HD versions of the freeview channels which are not available on freeview and am not paying £36.00 a month to subsidise their football interest. I could see no evidence of the 4k tv's upscaling the SD or HD channels any better than the Sony, in fact the opposite. Had I been buying that day I would have bought the Sony first, the LG possibly second. Unfortunately the Samsung would have stayed in the shop which was disappointing as that was the tv that was top of my list.