This was posted 10 years 6 months 28 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

Seiki SE39UY04 39" 4K Ultra HD US TV US$699 + US$120 Odd Del. Suitable for Monitor

70
Seiki SE39UY04 39" 4K Ultra HD US TV US$699 + US$120 Odd Del. Suitable for MonitorAffiliate
Go to Deal
Cashback
LKevCol on 29/10/2013 - 20:17 amazon.com (671 clicks)
Last edited 29/10/2013 - 20:44 by 1 other user
This post contains affiliate links. OzBargain might earn commissions when you click through and make purchases. Please see this page for more information.

I tried unsuccessfully, to buy one of these through Ebay and discovered Amazon was letting them ship to Australia with cheap, efficient, DHL shipping.
Works on 240V with a polarized US 2 prong plug but no PAL tuner.
Mine worked at 4K straight out of the box with a Haswell equiped 4600 graphic motherboard. Reasonable build with no obvious defects in pixels or screen.
30Hz so not for games. 1.4 hdmi input worked with supplied cable and one I had.
Has good reviews and I have tried to tune colours to my taste but currently it does not seem to wow me as much as when I first got my 27" iMac.
Beats spending excess money as an early adopter here and comes in under $1000 Customs threshold for gst.

Price History at C CamelCamelCamel.
Computing 39inch LCD TV Seiki TV

Related Stores

Amazon US
Amazon US

closed Comments

  • Balls on 29/10/2013 - 20:27

    page not found

  • KevCol on 29/10/2013 - 20:32
    -2

    Guess my link has a typo?
    Is very easy to find in amazon.com.

    • furythree on 29/10/2013 - 23:26

      posting here so you will see it

      can you post some pictures?

  • seanbaussie on 29/10/2013 - 20:32
    -4

    Perhaps I'm confused, but why wouldn't you buy a 40" FHD TV for less than this?

    • dosada on 29/10/2013 - 20:40
      +4

      Because this is not FHD, this is 4K which is way higher resolution then FHD

      • kermuffle on 29/10/2013 - 20:47
        +1

        wow 4k tv for $819…

        • furythree on 29/10/2013 - 23:22

          i should point out that ive had this in my watch list for ages, it was only $499 at one point

          so will be worthwhile waiting

          Also if you use a shipping forwarder, you can get the even larger 50" for $1177 (or 999 when on sale)

      • Jackson on 29/10/2013 - 22:14
        -4

        Fair enough, but wouldnt you rather have a 50" the than a 39" 4k? Considering there is SFA constant available, why be the early adopter?

        • mskeggs on 29/10/2013 - 22:23
          +2

          He is using it as a PC monitor, not just a TV

        • Jackson on 30/10/2013 - 18:19

          Did he say that?

  • sk3iron on 29/10/2013 - 20:45
    -2

    Why'd you say it was only 30Hz when it clealy states: Seiki Digital SE39UY04 39-Inch 4K Ultra HD 120Hz LED TV?

    • allan0102 on 29/10/2013 - 20:49
      +1

      For games, the hdmi 1.4 only goes 30hz I think

      • sk3iron on 29/10/2013 - 20:51
        +3

        From the comments it seems that 120Hz is at 1920*1080, 30Hz at 4k, think i'll be holding out, quite aside from the ugly bezel

      • plmko on 29/10/2013 - 20:51
        +1

        Yes need a HDMI 2.0 standard TV to go beyond that.

  • seijai on 29/10/2013 - 20:52
    -7

    and the normal eye can see the difference between 720p and 4k on 39" ??

    • Checkboy on 29/10/2013 - 21:08
      +5

      The difference between 720p and 4k is massive, a normal eye can surely see the difference :)

    • SBOB on 29/10/2013 - 21:10
      +1

      that would depend on the viewing distance of that 39" screen ;)

    • AlexF on 29/10/2013 - 21:48
      +1

      that would depend on the eye

    • Jackson on 29/10/2013 - 22:16

      It doesn't matter when there's no content anyway. We're still watching SD or barely better most of the time on fee to air and fox is no better.

    • PresidentClinton on 30/10/2013 - 03:43

      Eye would assume so

  • KevCol on 29/10/2013 - 20:54

    It is only 30Hz at 4K res where most people would expect a baseline of about 60 for things to work smoothly.
    I find the mouse works ok and everything else seems normal. Seiki just released new firmware and my set may have that as it performs better than I expected. I thought I would need to buy a graphics card to get it going.

    • furythree on 29/10/2013 - 23:20

      i assume you can run it at resolutions in between 1080p and 4k?

  • Newtz4 on 29/10/2013 - 21:04

    I remember doing some research on this screen a while back. Reviews were pretty average. When compared to decent 1080p tv's, it usually didn't come out on top.

    Seems that majority of positive reviews were from people who had nothing to compare it to..

    But then again, can't expect much for $800 when most other 4k tv's are selling for like 4x that price…

  • Alzori on 29/10/2013 - 21:47
    -1

    Currently, item can be shipped only within the U.S.

    Sure they're (still) sending it?

  • KevCol on 29/10/2013 - 22:14
    +1

    Yes. I checked before listing. Put item in cart and it came out with the freight to Australia of around $US120. With another click I would have bought it.
    Plus I received mine yesterday as proof they ship.
    I dont think they ever shipped the 50" Seiki that is $950 odd. I don't think you would want one anyway and I agree with what people say about how a 4K might be silly. Check out those customer reviews on the Sony 4K sets where their are lots of bad experiences.
    I tried Buydig in New Jersey on Ebay twice. They dispatched them then Ebay's Global Shipping partners, Pitney and Bowes said they were too big and liquidated them. So you can see I have been trying for a while to get hold of one

    I am not suggesting this be used as a TV, but it might do as a monitor, but it is not a fancy IPS panel and the colours look a bit like those on a TV but maybe it can be calibrated better. It certainly has the resolution and text can be microscopic yet crisp.

  • Jackson on 29/10/2013 - 22:19
    -3

    4k is a gimmick to get people to buy more teles. They tried 3d, and most ppl didn't care, now they are pushing 4k that no one cares about, waste of time for at least 1-2 years minmonitorn top of that, you could probably buy an the now, then upgrade when 4k finally does get traction for the same price and end up with 2 TVs instead of one.

    Might be good as a big monitor?

    • TCM on 29/10/2013 - 23:04

      So I'm guessing you're still using VHS or even Betamax on an old CRT TV? Because DVDs, Blu-rays and flatscreen TVs are also the same gimmicks that have evolved since then.

      3D is different as 4K is based on resolution rather than effect, and with screens 65 inches or above you'll notice that there is a clear difference between 1080p and 4K.

      • sharky_k on 29/10/2013 - 23:17
        +2

        True for 65"+, but I really don't think you need 4k on a 39" screen. The resolution would be useful for a PC monitor (due to closer viewing distance), but then you really need 60Hz.

      • Jackson on 30/10/2013 - 18:27

        Actually Betamax was technically better than VHS.

        DVD was leaps and bounds better than tape, and panel TVs come in sizes and resolutions that are streets ahead of CRTs, so I agree these are huge innovations.

        I absolutely would not consider 4k a huge innovation, more incremental. Also 10 from 10 people I know that bought a 3d TV watched Avatar on it once and then never watched 3d again, most even saying that in hindsight they'd have saved themselves the extra money.

        • furythree on 01/11/2013 - 00:07

          WTf?
          3d is not a relevant technology to compare with 4k

          one is about visual effects

          the other is high resolution

          you need to say "the jump from SD to FULLHD was a gimmick" to fairly compare apples to apples (resolutions)
          which of course is completely bullshit

          because high resolution is a completely valid technology.

          The reason why apple's retina display gimmick sold so well was because it had enough PPI to not see the pixels

          I have a 1600p 30" monitor and i can still see the pixels on my screen

          so 4k will be a welcome technology

          <MOD: Removed personal attack>

        • Jackson on 02/11/2013 - 22:48

          Those who make assumptions are as bad as those who throw stones. You my friend are both.

          If you read my earlier comment, you would have realised that my opinion was that the jump to FHD from SD was very worthwhile. You would have also noted that I had suggested it may be good as a big monitor.

          Also I was not directly comparing 3d to 4k, any idiot knows that, I was comparing new technologies that most people don't care about or can't be leveraged due to a lack of content, or decent content. Both designed to extract money from people, but in the case of 3d, everyone I know who bought one later regretted spending the money.

          And regarding Apple, most of the people buying the retina display devices don't even know what res it's actually running. Retina itself was marketing hype from the beginning, the fact they even coined the term rather than just quote the res is proof of that. Higher res is better than lower res if everything else is equal, but people going from the iPad 2 to the 3 was in my opinion a waste, after all battery power suffered, and the 3 was much heavier, and had the extra overhead of running the high res although the last point was probably offset a little by better hardware.Unless the extra res was required for some specific application, it was a better option to stick with the 2, and prices of the 2 are still relative high compared to the current crop of iPads

    • [Deactivated] on 29/10/2013 - 23:11

      They tried 3d, and most ppl didn't care, now they are pushing 4k that no one cares about

      I stopped reading there.

      • Jackson on 30/10/2013 - 18:06
        +1

        Yeah, I know this is a tech centric forum, and there are people that have nothing better to spend their money on than the latest and greatest new tech as soon as it comes out. That's your prerogative, however:

        1. There is no content available on free to air not even close
        2. Neither on paytv
        3. There is no format providing 4k you can buy from any mainstream shop
        4. The content is miles away from being available

        So when ppl are splitting hairs on a forum for saving money, can you really recommend this product?

        Also how about answering the points without making glib remarks? I stand to be corrected

        • furythree on 01/11/2013 - 00:08

          you realise you can use this as a monitor right?

          Also, at this particular price in particular, this is a VERY GOOD price so its not a ripoff

          if the asking price was $20k then of course its better to wait

          jesus christ man

        • Jackson on 02/11/2013 - 22:59

          Why are you so worked up? This is a discussion forum where ideas are shared. Have an open mind.

          This is being sold as a television. If someone thinks or feels they are going to get decent performance out of it as a monitor that's neither here nor there, I havrnt addressed that at all, I was simply referring to it being used as what it was intended for, as a tv.

          Secondly the television market is constantly trying to sell you new features so they can keep making money, that's fine, as that's what businesses exist for, to make money. This doesn't mean the latest feature is ever going to be worth paying for, in this case I strongly don't think it is. Sure there's more pixels, but as a tv there's no content on the horizon and people would be better served holding off and buying one when it will actually make a difference having one. Also at 39" it's debatable whether it's required.

          Bringing religion into it is irrelevant also, why does Jesus care what I think about TVs?

  • Phreakuency on 29/10/2013 - 23:13
    +1

    My mate imported this a month or so ago. It looks ok, but it's not very stable. As in, your computer knows it's not a proper 4K monitor. Lots of games freak out, apps are wrong size and some refuse to display in 4K.

    I wouldn't recommend it as a monitor at all. I also believe there's a large thread on Whirlpool.

    • alittlelewd on 30/10/2013 - 00:22

      How is this not a real 4K monitor? "3840 x 2160 Panel Resolution", seems like a 4K monitor to me.

      Has your friend made sure he is going over a cable that can support 4K?

      EDIT: Ahhh the 30Hz problem, yeah that could cause the issues you described.

  • pin4e on 29/10/2013 - 23:50

    What kind of content is in 4k resolutions?

    • alittlelewd on 30/10/2013 - 00:17

      Computer games can be played in native 4K and when not gaming it's also great to have the extra real estate on the desktop for multiple windows. I don't know too much about the next generation of consoles, but it would be a great selling point if they could output 4K over HDMI 1.4 or even better yet would be the adoption of display port so the HDMI licensing fees can be done away with and prices brought down for consumers.

      RED cameras can shoot up to 6K. The Galaxy Note III shoots 4K and it looks incredible, although I was watching it on a 1440p monitor it looks miles in front of the 1080p on my Note II.

      I agree with others about 3D being meh, but 4K is what 1080p was to 576i, maybe not so much for TV as it will be for computer usage. Going to be an awesome day when high-gamut 27-32" 4K monitors capable of 60hz+ get under $750.

      • TheContact on 30/10/2013 - 08:01

        …and I bet Adobe still won't have UI scaling.

      • MrZ on 30/10/2013 - 10:06
        -1

        Wow, 4K is incredible. My Sony Cybershot shoots 14 megapixels.

  • KevCol on 30/10/2013 - 02:44

    Colours and the tones can be tuned to your liking with the service menu. Remote/menu/0000.
    Reducing the back-light from 100 to around 40 made the biggest difference and made the other controls more effective. Photos took on sophisticated tones that you appreciate when playing with light and bokeh on your camera.
    Yes, I have seen the problem where it refreshes its res and blanks out now and again. Nothing else to note though.
    I would recommend it now as a monitor and have not tried much else.
    I did look on uTube but could not find any genuine 4K video despite the labels. Downloading a Galaxy Note III sample may provide entertainment.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join