• expired

Bauhn 58" 4K QLED HDR Smart TV $699 @ ALDI 14th March


I think this is the first QLED Aldi have released? Interested to see the quality.

Related Stores


closed Comments

  • +4

    So a re branded Samsung seconds panel?

  • +30

    Qled is a waste of money, too many sport fanbois got hooked up to Samsung marketing just like apple's firewire or Toshiba's hddvd

    • +2

      What's wrong with QLED?

      • +14

        QLED isn’t LED technology so it seems misleading.

        • +7

          It literally is LED technology.

          • +24

            @Burnertoasty: By LED technology I mean pixels are lit by individual LED's, which is what OLED technology is.

            QLED is just LED backlighting with LCD panel for display of the pixels.

            • +7

              @ATangk: You didn't say OLED, you said LED. QLED is LED. I'll accept your apology.

              • +21

                @Burnertoasty: Sorry you are incorrect.


                also backed up by every single other QLED vs OLED article on the internet.

                The current QLED sets mis-branded by Samsung etc are simply LCD tv's with an LED backlight albeit with a quantum dot colour filter in front of the backlight as others have posted here already.

                There is future/up and coming tech that has already been named QLED but these sets are not it.

                So I hope you have prepared your apology to ATangk ;-)

                • -1

                  @prxy: What do you think about LED TV is?

                  • +19

                    @Burnertoasty: Did you read the article i linked to???

                    You can google for many many other articles saying same.

                    The current TV's that are branded as LED or QLED are simply LCD tv's with an LED Backlight.

                    As i wrote above QLED simply has a quantum dot colour filter in front of the backlight

                    • -4

                      @prxy: Yes. LED tvs are LCD Tvs with LED backlights. This isn’t a revelation. LED tvs are not OLED TVs. You’re getting caught up in marketing terminology.

                      Despite the mechanisms behind the product, we can assume there are competing technologies:

                      LED, which includes QLED



                      Feel free to offer your apology in writing with a personal seal.

                      • +14

                        @Burnertoasty: It looks like you have not read the article i posted or felt free to google any other article related to OLED vs QLED.

                        Sorry but you are the one that has fallen victim to and is caught up in the "marketing technology".

                        All tv sets that are currently called LED or QLED are actually LCD TV's.

                        Only the backlight is LED.

                        So the current technologies are either LCD or OLED.

                        This has nothing to do with confusion over OLED.

                        So both ATangk and I await your apology ;-)

                        P.S. i personally don't require your personal seal but can't speak for ATangk.

                        • -4

                          @prxy: You’re just not getting it. You didn’t even read my response.

                          • +20

                            @Burnertoasty: Sorry but you are the one not getting it.

                            You refer to a tv by the technology used to display it's pixels ie.

                            CRT, Plasma, LCD, Laser, OLED etc.

                            You don't refer to a tv by it's backlight technology no matter how much Samsung wants you to.

                            So the current 2 main technologies are:


                            LCD TV with (CCFL backlighting)

                            LCD TV with (full-array LED backlighting)

                            LCD TV with (LED edge lighting)

                            LCD TV with (LED backlighting and quantum dot film)

                            These tv's don't use LED technology to display the pixels so are all LCD tv's.



                            So as I stated above the two competing technologies are LCD and OLED (NOT LED)

                            Just google it and you will understand.

                            • -3

                              @prxy: I’m assuming comprehension is your problem? You realise you’re agreeing with me?

                              • +17

                                @Burnertoasty: HAHAHA.


                                You've given me the biggest laugh of the week perhaps month thanks @Burnertoasty.

                                What a mind you must have where someone absolutely contradicts you in the most opposite way possible to claim they are agreeing with you.

                                You claimed "It literally is LED technology." to ATangk post.

                                You claimed:

                                "Despite the mechanisms behind the product, we can assume there are competing technologies:

                                LED, which includes QLED



                                in reply to my post.

                                We all know that "assumptions are the mother of all …"

                                So when I directly contradict you by saying the 2 competing technologies are LCD and OLED

                                and NOT

                                LED and OLED

                                how am I agreeing with you???

                                I eagerly await your next feat of twisted mental and logical back-flipping gymnastics.



                                • +3

                                  @prxy: I think I can help you guys out here.

                                  The dispute isn't whether QLED TV is a TV using LED panel technology. The dispute is whether QLED is LED technology or not, seeing that QLED is using an LED component that means from a technical stand point as @burnertoasty stated it literally is LED technolog. This was confirmed and stated by both you and @ATangk "QLED uses a LED backlighting on a lcd panel." No one in this chain is trying to state that QLED is a true LED display. As an alternate example. A cotton, polyester blend clothing, companies may make misleading advertising by saying it's " cotton clothing" trying to imply it is made from 100% cotton but from a semantics standpoint to say it isn't cotton clothing is also incorrect because yes why it not 100% cotton, it does indeed contain cotton and makes up a portion of the material used.

                                  Hope it helps.

                                  • @ceroau: Yep.

                                  • +21

                                    @ceroau: I know what you're saying but that isn't what ATangk and i have been discussing in relation to Burnertoasty's replies.

                                    The discussion is more akin to Samsungs mis-branding co-op of the names LED and QLED to describe it's tv tech.

                                    For Samsung the LED in both LED and QLED mis-leadingly actually refers to the back-light technology as everyone has pointed out and not the pixel display technology which is LCD.

                                    And even worse it uses QLED (a rebrand of its failed SUHD market speak) to describe it's quantum dot tech when that name actually refers to describe a process that more naturally rivals OLED's emissive tech.

                                    From the Techradar article I posted above:

                                    "The weirdest thing is that QLED TVs are not QLED TVs. A QLED TV should be just like an OLED TV in having a panel that's self-emissive, so that it can switch individual pixels on and off. Samsung's QLED TVs can't do that, and in fact just put a quantum dot colour filter in front of an LCD backlight. It's premature to call them QLED, and they should really be called QLCD-LEDs"

                                    So mainly correcting Burnertoasty's claim that the two main techs were LED vs OLED rather than LCD vs OLED.



                                    • @prxy: "
                                      +8 votes
                                      Burnertoasty 23 hours 20 min ago
                                      @ATangk: You didn't say OLED, you said LED. QLED is LED. I'll accept your apology."

                                      Is where your chimed in. Here the argument is "Is Samsung QLED technology an LED technology based on the fact it has some form of LED componentry?". Based on the information you've supplied yourself, the answer to that is Yes. No one is debating whether Samsung is falsely advertising the technology, no one is debating whether samsung QLED is a true "LED panel" or if samsungs QLED is the same as OLED or whatever argument you think is being made here. You're wasting your time if you want to try and debate that argument. The argument is simply this

                                      Is Samsung QLED an LED technology in the sense that it uses LED componentry? before you answer. Read these

                                      OLED stands for "organic light emitting diode."
                                      QLED (according to Samsung) stands for "quantum dot LED TV."
                                      OLED is a fundamentally different technology from LCD, the major type of TV today.
                                      QLED is a variation of LED LCD, adding a quantum dot film to the LCD "sandwich."
                                      OLED is "emissive," meaning the pixels emit their own light.
                                      QLED, like LCD, is, in its current form, "transmissive" and relies on an LED backlight.

                                      (source: https://www.cnet.com/news/samsung-qled-vs-lg-oled-how-the-tw...)

                                      Notice specifically the last point.

                                      If you answer yes. There is no longer an argument here and what you're attempting to do is ultimately futile cause you're trying to argue something that no one disagrees with or cares about. If the answer is no…. then you're just plain wrong and your attempt to twist the argument based on the parameters you laid out above is not going to help you change the answer to that one simple question.

                                      • +17

                                        @ceroau: Sorry Ceroau but gonna have to disagree with you whole heartedly here and I currently have way toooooo much time on my hands ;-):

                                        You are trying to defend the argument like some slippery Hollywood lawyer in a trial based on a technicality.

                                        You say: "Here the argument is "Is Samsung QLED technology an LED technology based on the fact it has some form of LED componentry"

                                        Now I don't know whether you're a bit of a Samsung fanboi and feel obliged to rush in to their defence :-)

                                        But I'll put forward my case for the prosecution.

                                        Your argument is simplistic and absurd so let me posit "Reductio ad Absurdum" in reply to show how ridiculous your argument is:

                                        I'm currently repairing a nearly 50 year old early 70's CRT TV for a collector.
                                        It contains LED componentry as it has an LED power on indicator light.
                                        Therefore by your logic it is an LED Technology??????

                                        Not only do I reject your argument but I also reject you narrowing the scope that this is only what the discussion thread is about.

                                        The argument at its root is also about the MISLEADING nature of the claim that "QLED" is an LED technology.

                                        "ATangk on 29/02/2020 - 18:20
                                        QLED isn’t LED technology so it seems misleading."

                                        This is the source of the discussion thread I was replying to not the one you identified.

                                        ATangk is correct. Currently so called QLED isn’t LED technology just because as you put it "it contains LED componentry".

                                        ATangk also correctly elaborated the point here:


                                        "LED Technology" in the AV industry narrowly and specifically refers to the pixel display technology no matter how much Samsung wishes it didn't.

                                        You can "qualify" the pixel display technology by saying that an LCD tv is LED backlit ie LCD-LED Backlit but don't confuse the two.

                                        Currently the only available "LED Technology" TV's are OLED. This will change when REAL QLED tv's are produced.

                                        Burnertoasty's writes:


                                        "@ATangk: You didn't say OLED, you said LED. QLED is LED. I'll accept your apology."

                                        Burnertoasty is wrong because as I described above QLED in its current implementation is neither LED nor is it even QLED. If you read ATangk's comment correctly you will also notice that he mentioned OLED only as an explanation to what "LED technology" is supposed to refer to.

                                        Now Burnertoasty totally goes "off the reservation" with claims like:


                                        "LED tvs are LCD Tvs with LED backlights"

                                        Incorrect! Currently only OLED tvs are LED tvs. These are properly called LCD-LED Backlit Tvs.

                                        "LED tvs are not OLED TVs"

                                        What??????? OLED tvs ARE the ONLY LED tvs! AS you yourself have also pointed out OLED(Organic Light Emitting Diode)

                                        "Despite the mechanisms behind the product, we can assume there are competing technologies:

                                        LED, which includes QLED



                                        Current QLED tvs are not LED but LCD-LED Backlit nor are they QLED tvs.

                                        Burnertoasty categorises OLED tvs as not LED! AND also defines them as a competing technology????

                                        Burnertoasty is very confused about even the fundamentals of the technologies he is trying to discuss.

                                        You write:

                                        OLED stands for "organic light emitting diode."

                                        QLED (according to Samsung) stands for "quantum dot LED TV."
                                        This is one of the points of the discussion. It is Samsung's new market speak for its old "SUHD" tech that didn't fly.
                                        They have mis-appropriated a name that already existed for a different technology that as ATangk pointed out is more akin to OLED tech.
                                        So don't agree!!!!

                                        OLED is a fundamentally different technology from LCD, the major type of TV today.

                                        QLED is a variation of LED LCD, adding a quantum dot film to the LCD "sandwich."
                                        Only in Samsungs "Mind"!
                                        QLED already described a "theoretical" tech that as has been discussed is emissive not transmissive.
                                        So Incorrect!!!

                                        OLED is "emissive," meaning the pixels emit their own light.

                                        QLED, like LCD, is, in its current form, "transmissive" and relies on an LED backlight.
                                        Currently QLED is only marketing drivel and is not really QLED as discussed above.
                                        SO a fallacy!!!

                                  • +19

                                    @Burnertoasty: My diagnosis would be that it can only best be described to your condition in the face of such overwhelming evidence to the contrary.


      • +20

        The branding for QLED is essentially designed to fool people who have also heard of the (superior) OLED panel technology.

        But you wont get an OLED for this price, so still a deal.

        • +1

          Not really. It's short for quantum led. Based on quantum dot technology. Its distinct advantage over oled is prak brightness.

          • +14

            @hazzad: Yeah whatever Samsung want to claim to sprinkle on their sub-par LED panels.

            Worked at a large electronics retailer previously and even Samsung's reps didn't want to be pushing it.

          • +9

            @hazzad: It's because LED backlit TVs were marketed as LED. The quantum dots are photo emissive so they convert the light from the backlight for the LCD panel. The next iteration is for electro emissive, those quantum dots will then produce their own light and should be just as good as OLED for blacks.

            How does that affect the price of eggs? if you don't wait for the bargain then you will be buying the cheap eggs.

          • +1

            @hazzad: Quite so. I just can’t get me enough of that prak.

            I reckon QLED screens are better than basic LED but that may because Samsung have brighter screens at peak. In fact for my house with big windows and heaps of light, and a tendency for Mrs Entropy to leave ABC24 and it’s logo on all day, better than OLED for my use case. Others of course will benefit more from OLED.

        • What's better plain LED or QLED? Or they are not comparable?

          • +7

            @Sutra: LED is used to describe a bunch of things, but is usually just the LED backlight on an LCD panel. In which case, QLED is a better lighting solution than LED-lit LCD.
            OLED is where the pixels are actually LED, so they emit their own light and this is the best option, especially for HDR. At least that's my understanding, but there are people here with far more technical knowledge.

            One major difference you will notice is black areas. LCD/QLED will light up a black pixel (local dimming aside), OLED will literally turn the pixels off.

          • @Sutra: QLED is better than LED in every way except blacks and viewing angle, which are similar. However I find off angle viewing a bit better on QLED even as it washes out because the brightness and colour depth are still reasonably good

            • @MaxDong69: QLED uses LED.. hence it's name.
              QLED can have some improvement in colour reproduction versus PFS phosphorous with less red afterglow.
              I think you may be confusing IPS vs VA vs TN - different display technologies - which all use LED.
              IPS being good with veiwing angle and colour reproduction, ok with response time, back with contrast.
              TN being good with response time, bad with everything else
              VA (most LED TVs) good blacks, good colour, and poorer response times.
              Add into the mix backlight technology (edge lit vs fully array, and how many in the array)
              AND now wide angle coatings that sacrifices some contrast for viewing angles…
              AND now Samsung previously only having VA+QLED, now also realsing TN+QLED..

              .. and you have something that's a tiny little bit confusing when it comes to LED panels.

              • @Jikx: Not confused, I was responding to Sutra's question with a simplistic answer. All other things being equal, VA+QLED displays are brighter, faster, more energy efficient and produce noticeably better colours than VA+LED

    • +1

      It really depends on how it's implemented and what it's for. QLED does win on colour volume and brightness, so if you're watching a lot of content in a very bright room, or watching a lot of content that is brightly lit, it may be advantageous to you to look at QLED.

      Overall, I still recommend OLED, but some people may also want to bypass the technology due to burn-in risk. I don't agree with that, and there's steps you can take to mitigate this further beyond what manufacturers already put in place, but we still need LCD technology as an option.

      The thing to look out for in this deal should be the nature (and number) of the backlight array that's being paired with this panel. The panel itself is going to be one from CHOT, Panda or Innolux, VA based, 60Hz panel, probably no HDMI 2.1, but reasonable response times for said refresh rate.

      With any luck, it might have a passable strobing/BFI option.

      • -2

        va panel?should has ghosting problem?

        • Very minor at 60Hz, and they're usually better binned panels than what you see in monitors. Virtually all LCD TVs are VA-based (including the 120Hz and higher models), as IPS models tend to fall apart at modern brightness and density levels, with shorter lifespans than both VA and OLED as they crank the brightness (and thus the heat).

          Good VA trumps good IPS for most use cases, the exception being when you want full colour accuracy and consistency to do professional colour-related work.

        • +2

          All the top LCD TVs have VA panels.

  • I'm vaguely interested, but the problem is by the time anyone has been able to give their impressions, everywhere will be sold out.

    The QLED brightness boost might actually make the HDR usable, though!

    • +14

      You have 60 days for change of mind so I would recommend utilising this and making the decision yourself

  • I remember there was a Qled Tcl that stood for quality lcd tv…. I wonder if this is legit

    • it says quantum dot tech on the advertisement

  • +1

    How did you get this catalogue so early?

    • We usually receive it in our junk mail on Friday (on occasion can be as late as Monday though).

  • +2

    Qute LCD

  • -2

    I recommend tcl tv panels. They sell quhd led tv( what ever that means) and they look great. Oled too expensive

    • I think quhd is how TCL markets their mid range TVs. They don't have quantum dots though, they're regular 4k led TVs.

  • How can they get away with only a 1 year warranty on such an expensive item? Surely you'd expect a TV to last longer than that

    • +1

      Australian Consumer Law. Go with the durability angle,it should last at least 2 to 3 years. If it pops after 1, take it in anyway and if they refuse, start waving statutes at them pertaining to durability under Australian Consumer Law.

      Products must be of acceptable quality, that is:

      safe, lasting, with no faults
      look acceptable
      do all the things someone would normally expect them to do.

      If they refuse, go here

      • thanks good to know

  • +5

    Is there much 4k content yet? My in-laws have a 4k TV, but everything looks shite on foxtel. I'm guessing its all 1080p still. I have 1080p TV and would like a 4K one. I watch youtube mainly. Might get netflix or one of those services too

    • I don't believe Foxtel is true 4k. It's probably 1080p upscaled.

    • +6

      What’s the point of Foxtel these days when you have Netflix, YouTube, Kayo Sports (Foxtel I know) for much cheaper

      • +1

        For sport especially, streaming services don't come close to matching the raw quality (high bitrate) from Foxtel satellite (/cable).

        Side by side (or even individually), you can really see the drop in quality from Kayo 1080p vs Foxtel 1080p via the IQx box. Also nice that it doesn't use my precious NBN bandwidth.

        As you said though, can save a lot of $$$$$.

    • If they have the HD pack everything is in 1080 it should like quite sharp, unless they have a cheap branded 4k tv like a soniq etc.

      • They have a Samsung q80r or something like that. Its a 75" so it's massive. Watching movies from the USB look great, but lots of stuff (not all) on foxtel looks potato

  • Hey guys, what's the performance like on ALDI's Android TVs if anyone has any experience? What kind of processors do they use?

  • Well this is gonna be interesting… QLED TV's are never at this price, so the introduction of an Aldi's QLED will be quite interesting to check out :)

    • +6

      I'm iffy about QLED from other brands after seeing the TCL x4 last year. I had to ask the staff member at jb hifi if there was something wrong with the model they had on display (there wasn't) because its picture quality looked sub-par for a modern TV at any price range

  • -2

    Ok I'm going to say it… Aldi TVs are worse than terrible! They hide the specs for a reason.

    I don't want to say it but even a Hisense would be better.

    But a budget is a budget and if you have one then that's that.

  • +4

    Got one 58" FHD last year for $444, i am not an expert but overall, very satisfy with my purchase even though it is just a dumb, non-smart TV

  • Apparently Kogan also has some QLED TVs at a similar price point but the expert reviews on those were less than stellar IIRC.

    • All the Aldi TVs have washed out colours. You would get used to it, they work but really really average TVs

  • Is this 100hz?

  • Before you buy, also consider the EKO Android TV range from BigW. Same AndroidTV 9 Operating System and remote, probably out of the same factories.

    I've purchased one of the 65" for my elderly mother and she's very happy with it. The Android TV functionality and Google Assistant remote is everything it needs to be. Fast, intuitive, easy to use and has a good prospect of it's apps remaining functional for longer as it gets them from the Google Play Store. It works with all the major FreeTV / Pay services (Netflix, Amazon, YouTube, ABC, SBS, Seven, Nine, Ten) and music services as well. It also works with her Google Home Mini.

    The picture quality is punching way above it's price point, and the built in sound would actually be tolerable to use.


    http://www.bigw.com.au/product/eko-55-4k-ultra-hd-android-tv... - $549
    http://www.bigw.com.au/product/eko-65-34-4k-ultra-hd-android... - $649

    • Looks pretty good. What's the refresh rate do you know?

      • Only 60Hz - But seemed okay, tennis looked nice on it.

        At least they quote the specs on their site

        4K - 3840 x 2160
        Display Colours
        1.07 Billion
        Contrast Ratio
        5000 : 1
        Refresh Rate
        Aspect Radio
        16 : 9
        Yes, 802.11 b/g/n
        Power Source
        100-240V 50/60Hz
        Power Consumption
        Multimedia Playback Format (USB)
        JPEG, PNG, BMP, MPO, GIF

        • Nice! Perfect for the bedroom

  • +3


    It's Bauhn's best picture quality yet I reckon.. And Android TV - so a couple of big ticks!


  • +1

    a quick look at their facebook page and you see all these noob boomer comments from people who dont the difference between led and qled..
    id really love to see a comparison between say a Samsung ru7100 (that tv in 65" sold for 800-850 during December month) how does it compare in image, blacks, motion, OS etc, id love to see a review but i know nothing is available at this point. and this will probably sell out by the time any of us figure out if its a good buy at 699

  • +1

    since i did not see some good info in regards to the quality of the screen i did some research and here is what im guessing.

    the tv is a 58" 4k panel, idk who its designed by (assuming lower grade Samsung) i'm positive its edge lit and not FALD and i am not surprised that its not FALD at this price point. so its safe to assume that it lacks the good qualities that QLED tvs are known for, that is deep blacks and peak brightness.

    this is what i read from another similar tv q60r that is also qled but uses edge lit instead of direct full array local dimming.

    "you notice trends with image processing. Sony likes a cool, classy palette; LG opts for smooth and lush over detail; and Samsung likes to highlight color, contrast, and fine detail. The Q60R is no exception to the rule, though it’s edge lighting prohibits it from generating the peak brightness and perceived detail of its pricier siblings. I measured around 520 nits, which is roughly half what you’ll see from its big brothers. That’s still enough to generate the HDR effect, though it obviously won’t be as vivid as it would be with the 1,000- to 1,200 nits you’ll see from other QLED’s."

    so its safe to assume the bauhn is around the same or worse, given that its around 500nit even in qled form. so its about 150 more nits compared to your average LED tv. still no assumption on the blacks and motion camera panning with line rendering ability in close proximity.

    ofcourse we are only talking about screen here, absent is the menu speed and feel and overall experience. i know one should not expect much at $699 but i cant help but wonder which would be a better buy, a Samsung ru7100 which is bigger and from a reputable brand for around 900 or something like this from aldi?

  • +1

    Waiting for updates todays the day!

    • I was on the fence because of the bauhn brand, but so glad I took the plunge. First few hours into it, and it rocks

      • we gonna need more information chief

        how are the blacks?
        menu speed?
        overall boot speed, app changing speed?
        any light bleeding from edge?
        motion speed/ scene change. any drag pixelated issues? sync?

        • +2

          Oh my I didn't know I had to write a technical essay on this! I'm no expert but so far:

          blacks: blacks are very good in light, almost seems totally black, but when in a dark room to watch a movie, you can see it is very slightly gray (edge lit). But I am impressed how it is during the day - like I said it seems totally black (I really did try notice this point)

          brightness: I actually hate overly bright displays so I never pushed this one too bright but during the day it was fine with the windows open

          menu speed: quite zippy, slight delay. I would say it doesn't lag too much but not as responsive as I'd like

          boot speed: from power off, pressing netflix will take me to the app within 5 seconds or so

          remote: works great, other than I couldn't get the microphone to work (can't give assistant any commands) so need to call support tomorrow

          light bleeding: VERY faint, like I said in relation to the blacks in my first point, there isn't much but there is if you are really looking for it

          motion speed: I'm not qualified to answer this, but watching a few test movies in netflix, prime video and some 4K content (Our Planet) - it is visually stunning for this price range. No noticeable pixel drag though I haven't watched any fast action sports.

          One thing to note was that I had to basically turn off many of their processing features to make the image watchable. Upon first watching pokemon detective (which has a lot of grain in the video) it looked weird because it made the characters' faces do funny things like the skin was alive and moving on its own. But once I disabled those features in the display settings, it was much better.

          Hope that helps!

          ALSO - the setup was a breeze because it allowed me to use the settings in my smartphone to get info about the wifi network, google accounts and apps so it was super convenient.

          • @pongky: thanks chief, looks like its ok for the price, ill wait for the 65 inch. looks like it would need a vodaphone tv unit to get the best android experience without lag, coz that unit is not laggy at all.

  • +3

    bought this today. it's fantastic! TV has wifi, built in chrome cast, I've installed kayo. sound and picture is excellent. this is an absolute bargain !

    • May I know where did u buy it? Went to ALDI in Rhodes and its unavailable.

      • I lined up with the toilet paper people when the doors opened. I'm on Central coast. Looked like they had about 10 but they were going quick

        • +2

          Same, lined up with TP crowd, 3rd in line, first to the TV. South East Melbourne, had 3 in stock. Grabbed the first and some other dude grabbed the other 2.

          Value for money is excellent. Full black screen shows a little backlight bleed/patching towards edge of screen. Android TV good but could be snappier response, Plex good, Live TV good. Happy with screen clarity, brightness and colour. Would probably be a little more fussy for a main/living room TV but would also go bigger and more expensive anyway. Kick ass bedroom/second living/gaming TV.

          Happy with purchase.

          • @bigkris74: ahhh as i expected so there is light bleeding towards the edge..
            and not as snappy menu?

            • @striker5950: The light bleed is very minor, only on full black screen and only if I was being really picky.

              Remote response is good most of the time but occasionally is a little laggy on fast scrolling. I'm comparing to a Vodafone TV which is about as good as it gets, so maybe I'm being a little harsh.

              I'm really very happy with the purchase, value for money is amazing and user experience is high.

              • @bigkris74: well i got a vodaphone tv yesterday and its a bargain for $72 i didnt even know it exists until a few days ago when i read it in one of the comments, if this tv cant compete equally with that than its not that impressive.

    • Hi! I love this TV but couldn't get my google assistant to work. It's as if the mic isn't working (the green light is on). Did you have any issues with yours?

  • Scored one today to replace a 49" TV in the main room and I can't be happier. Pic quality is awesome, the blacks are very very deep, much deeper than the 2017 Sony TV I've been using. Setup was a breeze because it worked with my android phone (made it so fast and easy). Purchased in Tarneit, and there was one more left after I purchased mine at around 2pm.

    Worth. every. penny.

  • I got one of these yesterday. At my ALDI they didn't have any on the floor, but as I was about to walk out I decided to ask a staff member and he said they had some out the back.

    I haven't spent much time on setup and finetuning the picture yet, but on first impressions the picture looks decent. Colour seems a bit over saturated for my tastes.

    I'm quite impressed by the fact that it's an Android TV - having instant access to apps like youtube and the FTA catchup services is great.

    However I find the TV guide annoying. I haven't figured out whether it's possible to filter out unwanted channels (e.g. radio channels). Also, a small detail but whenever I select the FTA channel that I want to watch, I then have to press the "guide" button again to actually exit the guide. An extra step that's unnecessary and is highly annoying.

Login or Join to leave a comment