|
||||||||
Suggestions for a new TV under £500 |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,846
|
Suggestions for a new TV under £500
Hi all,
I currently have a 32" Samsung tv and I think its time for an upgrade to something bigger. I'm looking to spend no more than £500 and I'm not particularly fussy about it being LED, LCD or Plasma (mainly because I'm not at all techy and can't tell the difference). There's a few 50" Plasma's in Curry's which I was eyeing up but then I started wondering about the Smart TV's and whether it's worth getting say a 42" Smart TV for the same price? I like the idea of having a Smart TV but reading a number of reviews, it seems that the excitement of the apps/features tends to wear off pretty quickly and then it's 'just' a TV. Plus I have Sky on Demand & Movies anyway so I wasn't sure if Smart TV is more of the same thing? Any suggestions/advice much appreciated as I know nothing about TV's or home entertainment! |
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 6,762
|
If you already have Sky, you'll probably find SMART TV a short-lived novelty.
How about - http://www.amazon.co.uk/LG-50PN650T-.../dp/B00BS55R1I Seems pretty well rated and bang on your budget. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 2,270
|
I agree. I think the smart TV concept is just a gimmick. Picture quality is far more important. Make a shortlist that fits your price / size requirements and audition them personally. Don't forget to look at them showing something in standard definition as well as HD. Too many shops fob you off by showing an HD cartoon, which is incapable of revealing any of the set's shortcomings. If they demur, take your business elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,846
|
Quote:
If you already have Sky, you'll probably find SMART TV a short-lived novelty.
How about - http://www.amazon.co.uk/LG-50PN650T-.../dp/B00BS55R1I Seems pretty well rated and bang on your budget. yes, I was afraid of that about the Smart Tv's, although I do concede that Skype would be useful as it's painful to use it on our archaic laptops! |
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Derbyshire
Posts: 41,789
|
Quote:
Thanks for this sancheeez; this was actually one of the ones I was eyeing up on the Curry's site so glad to see it suggested here too.
yes, I was afraid of that about the Smart Tv's, although I do concede that Skype would be useful as it's painful to use it on our archaic laptops! But the supposed 'smart' features on TV's aren't really that wonderful, and even the best are pretty useless for web browsing. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 772
|
Quote:
I agree. I think the smart TV concept is just a gimmick. Picture quality is far more important. Make a shortlist that fits your price / size requirements and audition them personally. Don't forget to look at them showing something in standard definition as well as HD. Too many shops fob you off by showing an HD cartoon, which is incapable of revealing any of the set's shortcomings. If they demur, take your business elsewhere.
Missing the point that non smart or otherwise known as bottom of the range TV's have been dumbed down to such a level that most are only just about acceptable . Good screens and perhaps more importantly "good screen drive electronics" ( think graphics card for your PC ) are only fitted on middle of the range or better TV's which happen to have other features built in whether you use them or not ! |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,846
|
Quote:
If the TV has Skype built-in (preferably with an internal camera), and obviously assuming you use Skype a lot?, then it's a VERY useful feature.
But the supposed 'smart' features on TV's aren't really that wonderful, and even the best are pretty useless for web browsing. |
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 2,270
|
Quote:
Allot of people fall into the trap of thinking " I don't want a smart TV" just a good picture ?
Missing the point that non smart or otherwise known as bottom of the range TV's have been dumbed down to such a level that most are only just about acceptable . Good screens and perhaps more importantly "good screen drive electronics" ( think graphics card for your PC ) are only fitted on middle of the range or better TV's which happen to have other features built in whether you use them or not ! |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Derbyshire
Posts: 41,789
|
Quote:
Had I asked for opinions of it, I doubt whether I would have received many complimentary ones.
, Philips have got a terrible reputation, and always have had.However, they used to have one in my local pub, and I always thought it was a decent picture. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 3,469
|
If you have a branch of John Lewis near by go there as they have a free 5 year warranty and lots of sets on display. Modern TVs are quite reliable but if you are unlucky they can be very expensive to repair. Alternatively Richer Sounds do a very cheap warranty. I have noticed that people on this forum don't rate Curry's to put it politely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 961
|
Quote:
If you have a branch of John Lewis near by go there as they have a free 5 year warranty and lots of sets on display. Modern TVs are quite reliable but if you are unlucky they can be very expensive to repair. Alternatively Richer Sounds do a very cheap warranty. I have noticed that people on this forum don't rate Curry's to put it politely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 772
|
Quote:
Not necessarily the case at all. I wasn't referring to bottom of the range TVs. The OP has a budget of £500, and for that sort of money it is quite possible to find a set with an excellent picture, but which isn't festooned with a lot of useless gimmickry - although it may have some. My own set is a case in point. That is why I suggested compiling a shortlist and auditioning them. I would never have chosen my set on the basis of recommendations in this forum. I would have been given a list of Samsung, LG, Sony and Panasonic models to choose from. Nothing against any of them by the way. I eventually chose a Philips, based on my own observation of how it performed under a variety of test conditions. Had I asked for opinions of it, I doubt whether I would have received many complimentary ones. I have had it for six months now, however, and have no regrets.
All the current range has smart facilities built in . Perhaps we should give them a chance to prove themselves just like the warning on investments "past performance is not a guarantee on future performance" Thank goodness !!!! |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 772
|
Quote:
Probably not
, Philips have got a terrible reputation, and always have had.However, they used to have one in my local pub, and I always thought it was a decent picture. |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 2,270
|
Quote:
The current Philips range is a joint venture with 70% of the business owned by TP vision of China, the performance of there products will depend solely on who makes them and perhaps more importantly where the major components are sourced from .
All the current range has smart facilities built in . Perhaps we should give them a chance to prove themselves just like the warning on investments "past performance is not a guarantee on future performance" Thank goodness !!!! Obviously, auditioning under shop conditions is not ideal, but you have to start somewhere and make comparisons. On getting it home, I soon discovered that the presets were just about useless and it took me a great deal of trial and error to persuade it to deliver its best. Having done so, however, the effort was worth it. Six months in, it is working reliably, so I have no complaints. I did have the foresight, however, to take out Richers' 5 year warranty just in case. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Derbyshire
Posts: 41,789
|
Quote:
Perhaps we should give them a chance to prove themselves just like the warning on investments "past performance is not a guarantee on future performance" Thank goodness !!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 2,270
|
My previous TV was also a Philips and it gave 12 years of faultless service. I only replaced it to get HD. It is still going strong in the house of the person I gave it to.
You appear to be in the trade and, if you say they have a bad reputation, who am I to argue? All I can offer is my experience. |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Derbyshire
Posts: 41,789
|
Quote:
My previous TV was also a Philips and it gave 12 years of faultless service. I only replaced it to get HD. It is still going strong in the house of the person I gave it to.
You appear to be in the trade and, if you say they have a bad reputation, who am I to argue? All I can offer is my experience. ![]() Going back 60+ years, Philips have always had the reputation for the worst service of all manufacturers. From an a engineers point of view Philips tends to be 'weird' - it's often like it's designed and built on a different planet. |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 6,762
|
I know three people who had Philips plasma TV's. Every single one of them broke down.
Fortunately, they all bought them out of Costco and all had extended warranties so were all replaced free of charge (none of them replaced with a new Philips I should add!). Mind you, these were all bought between 3 and 5 years ago so the technology was not as mature as it is now and I do know that a couple of the newer Philips models are actually very well regarded (although I can't recall if they were LCD/LED or plasma models? The former I suspect). |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Derbyshire
Posts: 41,789
|
Quote:
I do know that a couple of the newer Philips models are actually very well regarded (although I can't recall if they were LCD/LED or plasma models? The former I suspect).
But well regarded by who?, and on what criteria?. |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 6,762
|
http://www.whathifi.com/review/philips-55pfl6007t
I think it popped up when I was looking for reasonably priced TV's over 50" in size. I know not everyone regards What HiFi as a good source but a 5* review from anyone makes you take some notice .... |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Derbyshire
Posts: 41,789
|
Quote:
I know not everyone regards What HiFi as a good source but a 5* review from anyone makes you take some notice ....
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 6,762
|
Ha ha ha ha. You may have a point!
I plan to stick to Panasonic if my budget allows it .... |
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 3,469
|
Quote:
Perhaps you should check the amount of Philips advertising in that issue of the magazine?
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Derbyshire
Posts: 41,789
|
Quote:
Very true. The latest edition goes mad about a new 4K Sony TV.
One thing did astonish me, it really doesn't look all that big
|
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: southampton uk
Posts: 670
|
Quote:
If you have a branch of John Lewis near by go there as they have a free 5 year warranty and lots of sets on display. Modern TVs are quite reliable but if you are unlucky they can be very expensive to repair. Alternatively Richer Sounds do a very cheap warranty. I have noticed that people on this forum don't rate Curry's to put it politely.
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 06:31.




, Philips have got a terrible reputation, and always have had.