Just bought one of these from BIGW they were marked as 30% off, was $599. They had one in display.
The link attached is for the exact TV as BIGW don't appear to have TVs on their website.
4K Ultra High Definition TV
4 x HDMI Input
High Dynamic Contrast
PVR Function From USB connection
Slim PanelPre Purchase egiftcards for another 5% off.
https://www.cashrewards.com.au/woolworths-gift-cards#
$398.35 using Woolies Wish Card.
Any idea if its 60hz on 4k?
Ah. Any idea if that's the model you got? I saw that in the post but its RRP was $200 more than you mentioned so thought maybe it's not :)
Yep same model. Looks like bigws full price are about 10-20% of the rrp
Can't see any reference to the refresh rate there or in the manual :(
OP; Can you let us know the picture quality after you test it out?
The one i saw in store was horrible.
Question: Could you use this as a monitor? ie would sitting too close hurt your eyes/would the text be readable?
Tempted to get one and split it into 4 sections of the screen for multitasking.
Lol, why would anyone want a 55 inch monitor? You would need to sit back a fair bit.
I do alot of multitasking for my job. I currently run 3 monitors
I would be splitting the screen into quarters with winsplit revolution.
I suggested the same thing to my partner, but he said the resolution wasn't high enough for that purpose. He doesn't think the refresh rate would be up to the task either. Apparently it'd work, but it wouldn't be great.
There would be an input lag.
Blotski, I use 4 x 24" panels at my workstation, I find an "inverted T" setup works best vs a large rectangle divided by 4, more expensive but allows me to focus on a particular screen without getting distracted by activity on the others.
it would mean you have three low res screen on the one big screen.
@LustStarrr:
It's got an 80dpi, on the same level as a 27" monitor with fhd resolution. Not ideal, but I'd wager it's not the worse surprise this TV has in store.
I'd be more concerned about color reproduction, contract, and connectivity. A TV I bought for that purpose was managable on the first two, but when it came to connectivity only ran at 60i when connected to HDMI. Made everything look like it was viewed through a fine wire flyscreen.
As always, best thing to do is buy first, and return if it has any serious issues.
Viewing angles are the biggest problem when sitting this close to a large panel. Colours and contrast are off on the sides compared to the middle. The anti-glare coatings also negatively affect the sharpness at those angles. I looked into it last year and the only thing good enough was OLED but you have the burn in problem. Might be better this year.
The colour and clarity might be a bit crap (as it's designed for media to be viewed from across the room) but I expect it would work.
A computer monitor has certain requirements aside from resolution at a comfortable size.
Not sure about this model, but many 4k TVs might not do full color at 60hz. You want 60hz even when you're working. Also, you obviously want full color resolution (4:4:4).
Also, some panels have different pixel structure other than RGB. Some panels have a BGR structure. Windows can adjust to that with its font rendering, but Mac OS has no such option and those screens look terrible with Mac OS.
yeah definitely on Windows mate.
Display Colour (max) 1.06 Billion does that mean it does hdr 10bit?
Yeah I'm intrigued by that as well. Might be worth contacting them and seeing what they say? Could be a spec error?
Dont think so, even my monitor at home is 1.06 billion colour but it definitely does not do HDR.
How does this work on an Xbox One S? Will it be good for all the HDR and requirements or gonna need something better?
Cheap TV's are often too laggy for gaming
Makes no difference with consoles, as they aren't capable of 4K gaming at standard 60fps+.
lol. Input lag is still a big thing for HDR. It doesn't matter if about your resolution or refresh rate if the tv takes 100ms to display what your console has sent it.
Neither are the vast majority of PCs but even if you had a pc with dual titan x and ran games at 120 fps at 4k and connected your PC to the TV there would still be huge input lag on cheap TV's. The processing on them is soo slow and makes a big delay between you using a control and it coming up on the screen. This means games where you must react quickly are much harder since the TV slows down the image by the time you see it you can't press the button in time.
Doubt it's HDR.. (High Dynamic Contrast /= High Dynamic Range)
its a 4k screen, not a 4k HDR screen
I just bought this tv was playing zelda wind waker on gamecube, the input lag isn't as good as pc ofc but its not bad at all I'm guessing it is around 30ms better than my Samsung tv which is around 100ms
I've uploaded a YouTube video quickly showing the input lag take what you want from it
https://youtu.be/fAcFKBDJ81k
They had one in display
so you bought the display model?
does this post meet guidelines - would need confirmation of stock level and other stores availability
No they had the whole tv range on display with about 10 boxes on the floor
We're the boxes upright or flat?
I just checked my local BigW and they have it at the same price, thanks for posting this.. Unfortunately they didn't have one on display for me to check out the quality so didn't end up getting one
Wow! This, or the Samsung for $1,500 more? https://www.binglee.com.au/samsung-ua55ks8000-55-uhd-smart-l… Thinking, thinking …
Depends on your budget. I'd rather spend the extra and be happy, than sitting there watching regret.
No ragrets with this tv
Do you have one and watched on it before?
Like not even single letter?
Neither
Can anyone confirm these calcualations based on the link OP provided?
Energy rating 348 kWh per year based on 10 hours viewing per day
10 hours per day * 365 = 3650 hours
384 / 3650 = 0.105 kW
So it draws 105 watts
Electricity tariff of around 27 cents / kWH
348 * .27 = ~ $94 per year to run based on 10 hours per day
If you only watched 4 hours per day
4 * 365 = 1460 hours
.105 * 1460 ~= 153 kWh per year based on 4 hours viewing per day
153 * .27 ~= $41 per year to run
GEEZE that was convoluted.
You cannot really scale it like that, because the yearly power consumption is for the WHOLE year, not just the 10 hours per day that it's switched on.
Anyway, ProRata would be:
Energy rating 348 kWh pa @ 10 hrs viewing per day
Electricity tariff of around 27 cents / kWH << PROBABLY TOO CHEAP
348 * 0.27 = ~ $94 per year to run based on 10 hours per day
If you only watched 4 hours per day
$94 pa multiply by (4/10th) 0.4 = $37.60 per year
There will be an introduced error for the standby current 0.5W x 20 hrs x 365 = $1.00
But none of that is particularly accurate. The Ratings are designed to allow you to compare between TVs, not work out your energy budget.
It should have been 348 / 3650 (for some reason i did 384)
= 0.095 kW
So it draws 95 watts when running, and 0.5w when standby
.095 * 1460 = 138.7 kWh per year based on 4 hours viewing per day
138.7 * .27$ tarriff ~= $37.50 per year to run if only viewing for 4 hours per day.
this matches your calculation.
So when running the TV draws 95 watts.
this game of spot the virgins is ez!
You mean the way they work things out with math, so they never find themselves getting f**ked by a high electric bill?
I dunno about that - personally I don't think it's even worth bothering for a low consumption device like a TV.
It's the Air Cond, Heating, Hot water, Clothes drier and the Fridge(s) + Freezer(s), and maybe pool pump (if you run it continuously) that make a significant difference. TVs, audio and even lighting is almost completely irrelevant compared to those.
I work in the energy efficiency industry, so it's a pet topic for me. However I personally don't really worry about energy efficiency, for example my own home doesn't even have LED lighting, since I am not prepared to compromise the superb halogen lighting quality just to save a few bucks on my power bills.
Anyone able to comment on the latency of these things, for gaming?
Perfectly fine for consoles, unacceptable for PC gaming standards though.
I just bought this tv was playing zelda wind waker on gamecube, the input lag isn't as good as pc ofc but its not bad at all I'm guessing it is around 30ms better than my Samsung tv which is around 100ms
I've uploaded a YouTube video quickly showing the input lag take what you want from it
https://youtu.be/fAcFKBDJ81k
That's a lot of TV for not a lot of price! The link provided above says 4 HDMI in the summary, but only 3 HDMI inputs in the specs.
The link provided above says 4 HDMI in the summary, but only 3 HDMI inputs in the specs.
Errrr, nope - the other way around (Specs say 4 x HDMI. Summary says 3)
Anyway, User manual shows 1 x Rear HDMI and 2 x on the Side panel. Source Menu shows 3 x HDMI as well.
EDIT - IGNORE THAT, As mentioned above, the Manual is not correct one for this product
Did you note if one of the HDMIs is ARC compatible?
yeah someone at viano needs to fix the page the user manual it links to under support is just a 1080p HD tv not the 55 4k" one. i am going to email them about the 1.06 Billion colour's mentioned as that is full 10bit screen, if true this has got to be cheapest 10bit 4k screen ever
Let us know what they say :)
you'll find they most likely misspelled Million as Billion :p
Birrion <
Curious if one of these would fit in the rear of a Falcon sedan?
Does any one know the packaged box size?
1320x825 I managed to squeeze it into our 4 door corolla so I think you should be fine
Thanks for the reply!
Must have been a squeeze to get it in your corolla…!?!
Did you fold it in half ;-)
Corollas are actually TARDISs in disguise, I swear. I can fit so much in the back of mine. Seats fold completely flat.
I have one of these. Picked it up for $500 a few months ago on sale.
Its not bad for the price. 60 htz 4k. 3 hdmis.
Color is just a bit off, blacks are not very good and it can only play 1080 from usb.
Play with the settings a bit and you can get it to look ok.
Dont expect oled performance from something thats a tenth of the price.
Have not hooked it up to a computer yet as waiting on the 4k chromecast.
Regular netflix 1080 looks just fine.
There is a bit of input lag so not great for fps but its not really noticeable for most stuff.
The sound would be terrible I'm guessing. And no smart tv features.. better options out there. 400 bucks I guess it's ok
yeah the sound is pretty shit, but I have it hooked up to some surround speakers. If you have it on at night and quiet its ok but the minute you turn it up it goes tinny. it also has a weird range with 1-10 being nothing to loud and 10-100 being nothing more.
The big thing is that it does not mention if the hdmi ports are hdcp 2.2 certified. Most of the more expensive brand name tvs only have one hdcp 2.2 certified port,a lot of cheap tvs do not have hdcp2.2 certification which means even if you connect a uhd bluray player or media player or ps4 pro, it will not display 4k due to the lack of certification. How can you call a TV 4k if you have no way of using the 4k given that free to air TV is not 4k and 4k inputs won't work on it?
The other thing is that a lot of these cheaper brands do not use a true rgb matrix per pixel. Most of them will use rgbw shared between two pixels, meaning that the actual resolution is halved and nowhere near as sharp.
Generally I avoid these cheap TV's like the plague. Spend a bit more and you get a significantly better product with hdcp2.2, which will be much more future proof as they will support 4k input and will have better picture quality.
Still cheap for a 55 4K or not though.
So if you connect a computer to this - you won't get 4k resolution? You're saying max you'll achieve is 1920x1080?
HDCP is a DRM thing for bluray; PC will output 4k just fine.
It's not just for bluray, streaming Netflix media gets blocked as well. Tried my Nvidia shield TV on the Aldi 4k TV and it rejects the 4k resolution as it detects that the TV is not hdcp 2.2. Anything that has copy protection will not work in 4k without hdcp2.2. As for PC, haven't tested it yet. From what I've heard, the ps4 pro has issues as well if hdcp2.2 is not detected.
Hdcp2.2 is also required for hdr
@khonfahm: we need someone on here to verify that it will actually run at 4k on pc. So far we have no way of even confirming that it has hdmi 2.0 ports. Unless someone who's bought it can confirm it
at the moment, don't expect HDR at the sub $3000 range.
However, no HDCP 2.2 is a deal breaker since you can't have PS4 Pro's 4K displayed.
I'll wait for the Aldi 55" since it has 60 days return.
Ironically or not, you may be waiting for the person before you to return theirs.
Really, do you have any experience with them? My 65" from the previous sale is going strong.
None at all. I'm hypothesising there may be other people riding on the 60 days return policy, intending to return on day 59 in lieu of something better.
@muncan: lol, Aldi TV are generaly fine aslong as you expect what your paying for… People who buy just to return deserve to be flayed and worn as a skin suit.
@Tasmaniac: I was watching a ep of bones last night where she wore the hand lol, was a bit of a joke for myself.
Thanks OP I went for the layby option. Be interesting to hear some comments from those that have already purchased.
The tv is probably as good as the Aldi one for $499. I have a viano fhd tv. Had it for 5 years. Decent durability for a cheap brand. The sound quality is shockers tho and the picture quality is quite average. Also no smart features and I think this one is the same so look at a chromecast as well. Good luck with it.
I find the sound is the first thing they cut back on with these cheap sets then you might be up for a decent 5.1 or soundbar and havent really saved much if anything
There is barely ANY tv with decent sound, you'll almost always need a soundbar anyway.
The sound on the modern TVs is crap because the speakers face BACKWARDS. The design trend is to not have any forward facing "block" on the sides or below the screen… hence there is nowhere for the speakers to go!
So people get a cool looking bezel-less TV, and then shove an fugly Soundbar underneath it, which is really dumb. I cannot fathom why people do that, when for the same money they could buy a far better set of small powered speakers with a sub which would give it proper stereo sound.
Not everyone has room for a set of speakers I guess, besides that I think most people associate TV sound with a sound bar. I agree about the sound though, I just use a set of logitech speakers from TGG's.
Not everyone has room for a set of speakers I guess, besides that I think most people associate TV sound with a sound bar.
A set of small satellite speakers takes up far less space than a soundbar. Plus you place them out of the line of sight, so TV itself stays cleaner looking.
But more importantly, adding a low end (sub $100 or so) soundbar simply gives you forward facing TV quality sound. Spending the same amount on a proper speaker system is going to at least give you something that will be reasonably acceptable for movies, music video, etc.
Just picked one up. Will let you know what I think after its setup
Unboxing photos?
Well done, please keep us informed. And does the USB play H.265 videos?
I'm comparing to my LG55LM7600.
Vianos blacks aren't as black, whites aren't as white, not as sharp.
Havent used a calibration disc on it yet but not too bad as a spare TV.
If anyone has specific questions I will try to answer or show images.
Here is a photo of the two TVs paused on same scene. LG is the top one
https://imgur.com/gallery/OHkW8
https://imgur.com/gallery/uEp74
Awesome price, I wonder how these compare to Aldi's latest 4k TV's.
Does anyone know what panel it's using?
Could you let us know what the general quality is like, the remote, picture quality, and input lag, how's the UI, etc?
Thanks!