Just seen this at John Lewis, I was interested in the one advertised at Argos until I found this one at John Lewis including the 5 Year Warranty and is exactly the same price. Thought it was a good deal, I know people are going to start saying it's RGBW, but, if you don't want to spend the kind of money you need to spend on true 4K TV's then this could be what some people are looking for.
At the end of the day it's a decent make 55 Inch TV with a good picture for a decent price.
People were excited about the 55UJ630V on Amazon Prime day for £699 which is a very similar TV so it seems a decent price.
All comments (60)
Redscoped
9 Oct 17#1
Seems to be the standard price for this TV I guess the 5 year warranty is nice. The TV has good reviews I think i will hang on to see if black friday turns up any better deals
Websta to Redscoped
9 Oct 17#2
That's what I was going to do, but, in the end I went for it and ordered one because it does everything I want. I was so close to ordering it from Argos, but, at the last minute found it at John Lewis. I think there's only Argos and John Lewis that sell this model, many places sell the 55UJ630V, but, it has legs at either end of the TV so the legs will literally be on the edge of the TV stand I have, the 55UJ635V has the stand in the middle of the TV set which is perfect for me.
mikecml
9 Oct 17#3
Great thing about John Lewis is the quality of their guarantee, no ifs or buts they will solve the problem.
Seggamackem to mikecml
9 Oct 17#4
Not if you bought a Panasonic plasma from them about 6 years ago!!
davidridge1 to Seggamackem
9 Oct 17#5
Obviously not if you are 6 years into a 5 year guarantee :wink:
sparklehedgehog to davidridge1
9 Oct 17#7
He wouldn’t have moaned if he’d bought it from Argos as it would’ve failed 6 years into a 1 year warranty so wouldn’t have been so close.
davidridge1 to sparklehedgehog
9 Oct 17#8
He may have being ironic rather than moaning but I thought that I would comment anyway :wink:
Seggamackem to davidridge1
9 Oct 17#53
Been ironic!! :kissing_heart:
Seggamackem to sparklehedgehog
9 Oct 17#54
No , six months into a 5 year guarantee!! :face_with_monocle:
elbow777 to mikecml
9 Oct 17#55
Not in my experience. Took an email to the CEO to sort out a faulty TV after probably the worst customer service I have ever had. 3 months into the warranty. 3 months of getting lied to.
I'm looking for a 49/50 inch TV. What's a realistic price for one that is "real 4k" and "true HDR". Finding it very difficult to search for one without having to dig deep into the specs of every tv listed which is really time consuming. Seems retailers aren't very keen to help you filter out ones that aren't quite as good as they seem.
Websta to kingjobbie
9 Oct 17#24
John Lewis have an LG 49" for £699 including 5 Year Warranty.
No you'll have to pay around an extra £400 for a true 10 Bit 55" LG.
pavel76 to Websta
9 Oct 17#15
Only £280 more for SJ850 from Currys with current code
Websta to pavel76
9 Oct 17#17
No 5 year warranty with that though, I was doing like for like.
pavel76 to Websta
9 Oct 17#20
5 years warranty included
Websta to pavel76
9 Oct 17#23
Sorry my error.
Bit of a difference in price though £880 compared to £599
pavel76 to Websta
9 Oct 17#26
Yes, but whats the point of buying Tv which is not even 4K really ?...not talking about other bits. Sorry but £599 sounds expensive for such Tv...
Websta to pavel76
9 Oct 17#27
OK
gregskellorn to pavel76
9 Oct 17#18
"only"...
pavel76 to gregskellorn
9 Oct 17#21
Yes, only £280 more for proper 4K Tv - better looking with much more features. Better spent money than this junk at JL...
gregskellorn to pavel76
9 Oct 17#25
It's far from junk and 50% is a LOT more money.
pavel76 to gregskellorn
9 Oct 17#28
Shouldn't be called 4K, so yes, it's junk for that money
Websta to pavel76
9 Oct 17#29
OK from your perspective, forgetting the 4K issue, it's £599 for 55" LG TV with a great picture and a 5 Year Warranty, forget the 4K, even though it will play 4K and have a much better picture than Full HD, still a great price.
BrummyGeeza to Websta
9 Oct 17#19
What's a 10 bit panel compared to this model? Is there a great difference? I'm not very good with technology it seems a lot of fancy jargon to me :thinking:
EndlessWaves to BrummyGeeza
9 Oct 17#30
Tests show very little difference in reality. I suspect it's people thinking they need a 10-bit LCD panel to reproduce 10-bit HDR.
True HDR doesn't exist yet, and these TVs are as close to 4K as makes no difference in practice (for normal TV use anyway, PC monitor or other up-close & detail-dependant use can be affected).
With HDR right now you can't ask 'is it HDR', you have to ask 'how much HDR ability does it have?'
You'll see big improvements in HDR content right up to the top of the range £3-4K TVs like the Sony ZD9. So if that's important to you then I'd be looking at the best you can get at 49", namely the Sony XE90 at £1150 or Samsung Q7 at £1300, although the XE90 is the more popular of the two.
thefinest1
9 Oct 17#9
can you comment on the backlight issue. there is a review and photo on amazon of the backlight showing up through the edges of the TV. it could be that particular one is faulty, but the photo does show it
Websta to thefinest1
9 Oct 17#11
Amazon don't sell this TV?
gregskellorn
9 Oct 17#14
Looks like a great deal, this model is just missing a few bells and whistles that the £699 one from amazon yesterday had. It's a thicker case, slightly larger bezel, direct backlight rather than edge (pros and cons), no dolby vision, higher power consumption... With a 5 year guarantee though it's a steal.
leel246
9 Oct 17#16
It's a good thing it's got the 5 year warranty as our LG TV started playing up when it was 3 years old.
collectorcol
9 Oct 17#32
Don't buy RGBW! The manufacturers are ripping you off...
Uh, you realise that's a Samsung marketing video right? As in LG's biggest competitor.
The resolution stuff doesn't affect things, notice how they don't give any real world examples.
The inconsistent brightness is real, but what the video doesn't say is that Samsung varies the brightness on their own TVs for different reasons. 'CE dimming' they call it.
The colour would be the only real reason to avoid it, at least on the non-wide gamut models like this one that are lower down the range. However, colours vary between TVs anyway, and as demonstrated in the video it's no bigger than the normal difference you'd expect at this price.
In short, the minor downsides might matter on a top of the range TV where everything's as perfect, but on a model like this they're lost in the normal variation.
collectorcol to EndlessWaves
9 Oct 17#43
Yup, I know.
You can Google 'RGBW' and independent sources will demonstrate the same thing. The video explains it better regardless of who posted it.
musical
9 Oct 17#33
What you need to do is go to a shop and see TVs in your price range playing the type of media you'll be using it for. Buy the best one for your budget.
Or, spend your life on av forums and take photos of solid purple or yellow screens and look for imperfections. Reminds me of the kind of people who used to spend £2,000 on an amp, £4,000 on a turntable and then listen to terrible prog rock. Or the kind of people who claim to be able to hear the difference with 192kHz audio without knowing what a Nyquist is.
For most people, the arrangement of the remote control, whether the remote has a Netflix button or the TV has Freeview Play, will be far more important than the arrangement of the LCD pixels. And, certainly most people buy TVs too small for the quality difference from UHD to be discernible to the human eye from their sofa.
collectorcol to musical
9 Oct 17#34
No, you need to go to a shop that has a dedicated demo room. Viewing sets in your local Currys is a pointless task. Or do lots of research and come to the conclusion that OLED is worth the extra outlay.
I think more people are buying bigger sets and, real, UHD makes a huge difference, regardless of screen size.
Websta to collectorcol
9 Oct 17#36
Are you having a laugh, 55" LG OLED TV's are around £1800 to £2500, how many years do people need to save to buy one. I can see it now:
"Sorry kids, no presents for christmas this year because daddy wanted to spend an extra £1200 on a TV that when you take a photo of the TV screen and zoom in people can't tell it's RGBW and that when he pressed his eyes up against the screen he couldn't see any white pixels".
To be honest this whole "don't buy RGBW" that is posted by so many "TV experts" is getting really boring. I own a 43" LG that has RGBW that I have in the bedroom, I paid £350 for it a year ago and the picture on it is stunning, I am really happy with my LG. In fact, I bought a Samsung 40JU6500 (not saying it's 4K, to be honest I don't care) for £650, had it for around 9 months, sold it for £400, because the picture, especially clouding, was absolutely awful and bought the LG with RGBW for £350. At the end of the day it is what suits the individual, if the picture looks good, it's worth the money, whether it has RGBW or not.
collectorcol to Websta
9 Oct 17#38
I paid £1,500 for my 2016 55' OLED and it came with a free 4K player that was selling for £350. Worth every penny.
It's all about buying at the right time.
If you can't afford the extra that's fair enough. I'm not suggesting anyone should make their children suffer.
Just making people aware of the manufacturers marketing tricks. They shouldn't be allowed to label a 4K, it's a blatant con.
Websta to collectorcol
9 Oct 17#42
I put in the description it has RGBW and was aimed at the average punter, but, people still came on here to say it has RGBW and to spend more money.
When is the right time, someone who's TV has just knackered and wants a decent 55" TV for as little as possible as soon as possible would find this deal pretty useful. This is what drives me mad about the "don't buy RGBW" crowd, to the average person "none TV expert" this TV is perfect and it puts people off buying it who can't afford OLED.
Buy this TV for £599 and think about how someone who paid for OLED has slightly better colour than you while you are sitting on the beach drinking a beer with the money you saved.
collectorcol to Websta
9 Oct 17#44
Yup, beer is a great way to use your hard earned cash.
I don't drink or smoke, I work hard so I bought a cracking TV. My kids never go without but aren't spoilt.
A member asked if this was 10 bit proving potential customers need to know the facts before buying an item that claims to be something it isn't.
Websta to collectorcol
9 Oct 17#45
All inclusive holiday mate
collectorcol to Websta
9 Oct 17#47
Just think how much better that beer would taste...
Sorry kids no Christmas presents this year. You know how Daddy insists on laying on the beach supping beer...
Websta to collectorcol
9 Oct 17#49
haha...
"Sorry kids no Christmas presents this year. You know how Daddy insists on laying on the beach supping beer, while you lot are playing in the pool and going down the slides after you've been in the amusements and before we go and boogie at the discotheque to Little Mix". Not really back at me when I'm on holiday with my kids is it?
Not sure what the Polaroid link is, but, let's beg to differ on this deal, no doubt there will be another deal you and all the other TV experts can post "don't buy RGBW, spend loads more money" on somewhere soon.
collectorcol to Websta
9 Oct 17#51
Ermmm... Yeah, whatever! You're the one who turned it personal.
If my comments made one person question what they were getting for their hard earned cash and realise they were being conned then I'm happy.
Enjoy your next few years FauxK viewing :popcorn:
Websta to collectorcol
9 Oct 17#52
Personal?
It will be more than the next few years, I'm hoping to get at least 5, hence the warranty. Good job I'm only spending £599 if I was going to replace it in the next few years with the latest model, imagine if I'd spent £1400 and in three years time it was old news, now that would be silly.
sunama to Websta
9 Oct 17#56
I believe you can get a decent 55" OLED set from LG, for around £1700. You definitely don't need to spend £2500...those days are behind us.
The problem I have is that I already own a Panasonic Plasma, which in terms of quality is light years ahead of the TV being sold in this thread, so people like me are weary about buying a TV which is worse than what they already have.
Of course, if you own a bog standard LCD TV, then the LCD TV in this thread (don't be fooled by the LED in the title...it's an LCD TV, with LED back/side lighting), may be an upgrade - not in terms of quality, but in terms of sheer size (which will certainly give the wow factor).
At the end of the day though, it's all about budgets. For me personally, I'd rather save up for an extra few months and buy an OLED TV, rather than buy a cheaper TV which I know I am going to be disappointed with.
If my mother was looking to buy a TV, I'd have no issues recommending this to her (though I would do a little bit of research before making the recommendation, in case there is another TV in the same price range, offering a bit more quality).
gregskellorn to sunama
9 Oct 17#58
An LED TV is a TV with LED backlighting... Nobody's fooling anybody.
![Fresh Breakfast Meat Box (Using code) @ Campbells Meat [Haggis / Lorne Sausage / Bacon / Black Pudding & More]](/images/topics/208684_1.jpg)
![[Xbox One] Q. u. b. e: Director's Cut on Deals with Gold](/images/topics/208716_1.jpg)
Opening post
At the end of the day it's a decent make 55 Inch TV with a good picture for a decent price.
People were excited about the 55UJ630V on Amazon Prime day for £699 which is a very similar TV so it seems a decent price.
All comments (60)
displayspecifications.com/en/…b48
johnlewis.com/lg-…135
5 years warranty included
Bit of a difference in price though £880 compared to £599
True HDR doesn't exist yet, and these TVs are as close to 4K as makes no difference in practice (for normal TV use anyway, PC monitor or other up-close & detail-dependant use can be affected).
With HDR right now you can't ask 'is it HDR', you have to ask 'how much HDR ability does it have?'
You'll see big improvements in HDR content right up to the top of the range £3-4K TVs like the Sony ZD9. So if that's important to you then I'd be looking at the best you can get at 49", namely the Sony XE90 at £1150 or Samsung Q7 at £1300, although the XE90 is the more popular of the two.
youtu.be/Rss…I_8
The resolution stuff doesn't affect things, notice how they don't give any real world examples.
The inconsistent brightness is real, but what the video doesn't say is that Samsung varies the brightness on their own TVs for different reasons. 'CE dimming' they call it.
The colour would be the only real reason to avoid it, at least on the non-wide gamut models like this one that are lower down the range. However, colours vary between TVs anyway, and as demonstrated in the video it's no bigger than the normal difference you'd expect at this price.
In short, the minor downsides might matter on a top of the range TV where everything's as perfect, but on a model like this they're lost in the normal variation.
You can Google 'RGBW' and independent sources will demonstrate the same thing. The video explains it better regardless of who posted it.
Or, spend your life on av forums and take photos of solid purple or yellow screens and look for imperfections. Reminds me of the kind of people who used to spend £2,000 on an amp, £4,000 on a turntable and then listen to terrible prog rock. Or the kind of people who claim to be able to hear the difference with 192kHz audio without knowing what a Nyquist is.
For most people, the arrangement of the remote control, whether the remote has a Netflix button or the TV has Freeview Play, will be far more important than the arrangement of the LCD pixels. And, certainly most people buy TVs too small for the quality difference from UHD to be discernible to the human eye from their sofa.
I think more people are buying bigger sets and, real, UHD makes a huge difference, regardless of screen size.
"Sorry kids, no presents for christmas this year because daddy wanted to spend an extra £1200 on a TV that when you take a photo of the TV screen and zoom in people can't tell it's RGBW and that when he pressed his eyes up against the screen he couldn't see any white pixels".
To be honest this whole "don't buy RGBW" that is posted by so many "TV experts" is getting really boring. I own a 43" LG that has RGBW that I have in the bedroom, I paid £350 for it a year ago and the picture on it is stunning, I am really happy with my LG. In fact, I bought a Samsung 40JU6500 (not saying it's 4K, to be honest I don't care) for £650, had it for around 9 months, sold it for £400, because the picture, especially clouding, was absolutely awful and bought the LG with RGBW for £350. At the end of the day it is what suits the individual, if the picture looks good, it's worth the money, whether it has RGBW or not.
It's all about buying at the right time.
If you can't afford the extra that's fair enough. I'm not suggesting anyone should make their children suffer.
Just making people aware of the manufacturers marketing tricks. They shouldn't be allowed to label a 4K, it's a blatant con.
When is the right time, someone who's TV has just knackered and wants a decent 55" TV for as little as possible as soon as possible would find this deal pretty useful. This is what drives me mad about the "don't buy RGBW" crowd, to the average person "none TV expert" this TV is perfect and it puts people off buying it who can't afford OLED.
Buy this TV for £599 and think about how someone who paid for OLED has slightly better colour than you while you are sitting on the beach drinking a beer with the money you saved.
I don't drink or smoke, I work hard so I bought a cracking TV. My kids never go without but aren't spoilt.
A member asked if this was 10 bit proving potential customers need to know the facts before buying an item that claims to be something it isn't.
polaroidhdtv.com/pro…tv/
Oh yeah, right back at you...
Sorry kids no Christmas presents this year. You know how Daddy insists on laying on the beach supping beer...
"Sorry kids no Christmas presents this year. You know how Daddy insists on laying on the beach supping beer, while you lot are playing in the pool and going down the slides after you've been in the amusements and before we go and boogie at the discotheque to Little Mix". Not really back at me when I'm on holiday with my kids is it?
Not sure what the Polaroid link is, but, let's beg to differ on this deal, no doubt there will be another deal you and all the other TV experts can post "don't buy RGBW, spend loads more money" on somewhere soon.
You're the one who turned it personal.
If my comments made one person question what they were getting for their hard earned cash and realise they were being conned then I'm happy.
Enjoy your next few years FauxK viewing :popcorn:
It will be more than the next few years, I'm hoping to get at least 5, hence the warranty. Good job I'm only spending £599 if I was going to replace it in the next few years with the latest model, imagine if I'd spent £1400 and in three years time it was old news, now that would be silly.
You definitely don't need to spend £2500...those days are behind us.
The problem I have is that I already own a Panasonic Plasma, which in terms of quality is light years ahead of the TV being sold in this thread, so people like me are weary about buying a TV which is worse than what they already have.
Of course, if you own a bog standard LCD TV, then the LCD TV in this thread (don't be fooled by the LED in the title...it's an LCD TV, with LED back/side lighting), may be an upgrade - not in terms of quality, but in terms of sheer size (which will certainly give the wow factor).
At the end of the day though, it's all about budgets. For me personally, I'd rather save up for an extra few months and buy an OLED TV, rather than buy a cheaper TV which I know I am going to be disappointed with.
If my mother was looking to buy a TV, I'd have no issues recommending this to her (though I would do a little bit of research before making the recommendation, in case there is another TV in the same price range, offering a bit more quality).