LG 43UH610V 43-Inch 3840 x 2160 ULTRA HD 4K TV WebOS (2016 Model) Perfect harmony between ULTRA HD 4K Resolution and HDR technologies generates an incredibly rich and vibrant visuals. ULTRA HD 4K resolution is four times that of Full HD producing brilliant clarity and vivid details that amaze, even when viewed up close. True Black Panel, an anti-glare film within the panel reduces reflection rate by scattering harsh lights across the screen. This allows you to see new depths of darkness in your entertainment.
Top comments
Smeeble
20 May 175#16
we still have a 21 inch telly in the bedroom and a 32 inch telly in our lounge, never understand these comments on huge telly's saying that they're only good enough for the bedroom or toilet :laughing:
MBeeching
20 May 174#11
It's not a 10-bit panel, it uses 8-bit +FRC. It also uses the notorious RGBW pixel structure.
For £329 I still think it's decent buy.
KareemSaid
20 May 173#20
You're missing out then and not a true hot dealer. Come back when you have at least 50 inches - I have a 65 incher. Looks great in my 10'x 12' lounge. And saves from decorating!
We looked excellent when we were on Jeremy Kyle. What they say about TV adding 10lbs is true though. My wife / sister / mum appeared around 19 stone. Not fair!!
pavel76
20 May 173#13
RGBW panel, so not even 4K really... better to buy Hisense for less
All comments (37)
PVAD17
20 May 17#1
:stuck_out_tongue::smile: Burn baby Burn!!
Edit: Just did a price comparison AO.COM the next cheapest at £369 and selling at £400 plus in other outlets.
Darkeru
20 May 17#2
Can anyone comment about how it is for gaming in 4K?
Thank you so much. Got the last 6 in asda Dudley at that price.
Darkeru
20 May 17#8
The rating page linked previously initially said it was 8-bit, then updated saying the following;
That said, the review doesn't seem too enthusiastic about the picture quality as a whole.
allanbodgers
20 May 171#9
upscaling on this tv is supposed to be very poor. so unless you're streaming Netflix or amazon 4k etc it will "look" pixelated.
PVAD17
20 May 17#10
Would you go for the Samsung Series 6 UE40K600 Curved also priced similarly instead although not 4K?
MBeeching
20 May 174#11
It's not a 10-bit panel, it uses 8-bit +FRC. It also uses the notorious RGBW pixel structure.
For £329 I still think it's decent buy.
adamspencer95
20 May 172#12
AO will price match but i'd prefer Amazon customer services anyway.
pavel76
20 May 173#13
RGBW panel, so not even 4K really... better to buy Hisense for less
linhang90
20 May 17#14
When the sony xd7005 one was going for £649 the other day.. it was apparently the best seller in 4k tv. Now this one says best seller too? Lol. Sales
ChrisIW
20 May 172#15
8 bit? 10 bit? RGBW? So many pitfalls when buying 4k.
Smeeble
20 May 175#16
we still have a 21 inch telly in the bedroom and a 32 inch telly in our lounge, never understand these comments on huge telly's saying that they're only good enough for the bedroom or toilet :laughing:
theyiddo
20 May 17#17
They are most likely getting confused in that I believe the UH6100 can decode HEVC HDR10 but does actually not contain a 10 bit panel.
oddballjamie
20 May 171#19
Lucky you. The Walsall Asda's both had stock midweek.
KareemSaid
20 May 173#20
You're missing out then and not a true hot dealer. Come back when you have at least 50 inches - I have a 65 incher. Looks great in my 10'x 12' lounge. And saves from decorating!
We looked excellent when we were on Jeremy Kyle. What they say about TV adding 10lbs is true though. My wife / sister / mum appeared around 19 stone. Not fair!!
jimx26
20 May 17#21
As others have said RGBW panel do not even proper 4K, avoid and spend a little more on something decent.
thegamingkinginfo
20 May 17#22
Someone on a tight budget shouldn't exactly be searching for a UHD TV...
yorkie
20 May 17#23
I have the 43" and 49" version of this TV and I think the picture quality is great for the money. In fact both are better than my 4k Sony TV IMHO.
There is no way am I spending silly money on a TV until 4k content is widely available through Sky/Virgin/Freesat/Freeview and 4k/HDR standards have harmonised between manufacturers/content providers. By the time that happens I'll probably be able to pick up an OLED or Quantum Dot for a similar price.
I think this is a good deal and picked my 43" up from Amazon the last time it was this price. Heat from me.
turbo_c
20 May 171#24
4k + LG = 3k
mcormack to turbo_c
20 May 171#25
TC+iq=D.H.
EndlessWaves
20 May 171#26
They're not confused, rtings go by results not hardware. If it shows no banding with a 10-bit signal then they class it as 10-bit regardless of whether it acheives that through subpixels capable of 1024 shades or dithering.
No, it's the irrelevent one. For good HDR you need good backlight control, aka local dimming. The best LCDs TVs have hundreds of local dimming zones. This is a poor HDR TV not because it's 8+2 but because it doesn't support local dimming at all. Nothing else does at this price though, genuine HDR is still a fairly expensive technology.
It may an area of concern on the very biggest models (60"+) or for anyone using it really close (PC monitor use). On a 43" model like this at normal TV viewing distances you aren't going to see the slightest amount of difference in the amount of detail.
So you're left with the benefits like it being more energy efficient to manufacturer and run. For a budget model like this it's just one trade-off among many and not a significant one.
pavel76
20 May 17#27
...so better to buy nice Full HD model instead of this rubbish 4K with fat nasty bezel in this size
BUCKUM2
20 May 171#28
I have looked at loads of reviews of uhd/hdr tv's lately with the view of buying one and have not found one that has no problems whether it be bleeding from back lights especially edge lit which 90% of them seem to be. Banding , Motion blur poor sd picture not much better hd picture and the fact there is very little uhd content at present and even less hdr content so i have decided to stay with my 1080 lg with superb picture no bleeding as it has direct backlighting no motion blur whatsoever and no banding and also superb passive 3d at the moment i wouldn't pay more than £400 for any of them until content is better and sd and hd is better on them as this is going to be the majority of content for some time yet
billcooke
20 May 17#29
thanks - I did find one in Asda Hulme Manchester big up to the helpful staff there.
Balfington
20 May 17#30
I won't be below 48 inches for my cupboards because you never know when you might get trapped in one for a few hours.
kencol
20 May 17#31
Does the freeview play work from the satellite EPG?
djc0367
20 May 17#32
This or the Hisense 43m3000 for around the same price?
I got AO to price match the amazon price and then had a £30 Britains got talent discount code taking it down to £299.
brendinho
21 May 17#36
excellent!! cheers!!!
robjewitt
25 May 17#37
So. I bought this TV last week. I'm not at all impressed with it. Washed out colour palette and intermittent brightness. Netflix looks okay in 4K/FauxK but everything else is a step down from my 5 year old mid-priced HD Sony Bravia
Opening post
Perfect harmony between ULTRA HD 4K Resolution and HDR technologies generates an incredibly rich and vibrant visuals.
ULTRA HD 4K resolution is four times that of Full HD producing brilliant clarity and vivid details that amaze, even when viewed up close.
True Black Panel, an anti-glare film within the panel reduces reflection rate by scattering harsh lights across the screen. This allows you to see new depths of darkness in your entertainment.
Top comments
For £329 I still think it's decent buy.
We looked excellent when we were on Jeremy Kyle. What they say about TV adding 10lbs is true though. My wife / sister / mum appeared around 19 stone. Not fair!!
All comments (37)
Edit: Just did a price comparison AO.COM the next cheapest at £369 and selling at £400 plus in other outlets.
http://uk.rtings.com/tv/reviews/lg/uh6100?uxtv=bd45
http://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/lg-43uh610v-43-freeview-hd-freesat-hd-freeview-play-smart-4k-ultra-hd-with-hdr-tv-2667356
That said, the review doesn't seem too enthusiastic about the picture quality as a whole.
For £329 I still think it's decent buy.
We looked excellent when we were on Jeremy Kyle. What they say about TV adding 10lbs is true though. My wife / sister / mum appeared around 19 stone. Not fair!!
There is no way am I spending silly money on a TV until 4k content is widely available through Sky/Virgin/Freesat/Freeview and 4k/HDR standards have harmonised between manufacturers/content providers. By the time that happens I'll probably be able to pick up an OLED or Quantum Dot for a similar price.
I think this is a good deal and picked my 43" up from Amazon the last time it was this price. Heat from me.
No, it's the irrelevent one. For good HDR you need good backlight control, aka local dimming. The best LCDs TVs have hundreds of local dimming zones. This is a poor HDR TV not because it's 8+2 but because it doesn't support local dimming at all. Nothing else does at this price though, genuine HDR is still a fairly expensive technology.
It may an area of concern on the very biggest models (60"+) or for anyone using it really close (PC monitor use). On a 43" model like this at normal TV viewing distances you aren't going to see the slightest amount of difference in the amount of detail.
So you're left with the benefits like it being more energy efficient to manufacturer and run. For a budget model like this it's just one trade-off among many and not a significant one.
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/302304338606?clk_rvr_id=1217104413351&rmvSB=true