BUSH S642F1 42" 100HZ FULL HD LCD TV £309.99 ARGOS CLEARANCE EBAY - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit
For a 42" 100Hz HD TV I think you'll struggle to find a better deal than this - my brother has this TV (or possibly it's predecessor) and I was pleasantly surprised by the picture quality and features.
Full spec. as follows:

USB Record/Playback.
SRS.
Timeshift.
Television Picture Quality:
Full HD (1080p).
Integrated digital (Freeview).
42in (106cm) widescreen TV with 106cm visible screen size.
Resolution 1920 x 1080 pixels.
100Hz.
Brightness 500cd/m2.
Contrast ratio 1,400:1.
Response time 5ms.
Image enhancement.
Viewing angle 178 degrees.
Progressive scan.
Connectivity:
3 HDMI sockets.
2 SCART sockets.
PC input socket.
Component video socket.
Composite.
Optical connection.
Headphone socket.
S-Video socket.
AV socket (side).
Sound Quality:
NICAM sound system.
2 x 8W RMS power output.
Digital sound processor.
Freeview Features:
Digitally interactive.
Digital text.
Digital audio broadcasting (DAB).
Digital video broadcasting (DVB) subtitles available.
RF loop.
Auto setup.
Auto scan for new channels.
Now and next electronic programme guide.
7 day Electronic Programme Guide.
Top Up TV compatible.
CI slot.
Audio description compatible.
Additional Features:
Teletext.
Fastext.
UHF/VHF tuners.
Auto setup.
Auto search tuner.
Auto search sorting.
Auto search labelling.
Sleep timer.
Child lock.
NTSC compatible.
Remote control requires 2 x AAA batteries (included).
230V AC mains operated.
Size of TV (H)65.4, (W)102.2, (D)9.8cm.
Weight of TV 18.2kg (unpackaged).
Complete with tabletop stand.
Size of TV with stand (H)70.4, (W)102.2, (D)29cm.
Weight of TV with stand 21.3kg.
Suitable for wall mounting (brackets not included).
Standby power consumption
Energy Savings Trust recommended.
This product uses less energy than standard models, therefore lowering energy bills and helping the environment.
Please note that the Digital (Freeview) features mentioned are not compatible with digital signals broadcast in the Republic of Ireland.
More From eBay:
×
Get the Hottest Deals Daily
Stay informed. Once a day, we'll send you the deals our members voted as the best.
Failed
Aliwoo18 Avatar
5y, 9m agoFound 5 years, 9 months ago
Options

All Comments

(15) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
#1
Okay, so please could people voting cold tell me where I can get this cheaper or a similar/higher spec for the same price?
#2
this seems a good deal to me, especially for a full hd tv. not quite as good as the lg from dixons but still pretty good. voted hot
#3
don't know why this is so cold, seems an ok price for 100hz 42" tv, voted hot.
#4
Oh well, maybe someone will still see it and it will help them out, you can't please all the people all the time!
#5
#6
Aliwoo18
Okay, so please could people voting cold tell me where I can get this cheaper or a similar/higher spec for the same price?

Don't think you'd get it cheaper necessarily, but most people are aware that Bush historically produce crappy TVs; hence the poor scoring.

Its a lot of screen for the money, however that will no doubt mean that the development and production costs will have been trimmed including testing post production. Expect a quality/reliability lottery. I'll be fair and not vote as I have no direct experience of these myself but I wouldn't buy one. I'd rather get a smaller screen and go for a decent brand.
#7
philby27
Aliwoo18
Okay, so please could people voting cold tell me where I can get this cheaper or a similar/higher spec for the same price?
Don't think you'd get it cheaper necessarily, but most people are aware that Bush historically produce crappy TVs; hence the poor scoring. Its a lot of screen for the money, however that will no doubt mean that the development and production costs will have been trimmed including testing post production. Expect a quality/reliability lottery. I'll be fair and not vote as I have no direct experience of these myself but I wouldn't buy one. I'd rather get a smaller screen and go for a decent brand.

I'm talking from experience by the way I'm not just a ranter. Lots of people go on about stuff they have no knowledge of. I work in electronics and system design engineering and the product lifecycle is something I'm familiar with; and I can imagine the parts of the programme that I would cut out first to keep costs down.
#8
I appreciate what's been said about brand and quality (I buy brand names when I can afford to), but if you can't afford a better brand then you have to go with the best available offer within your budget - if the idea is to vote cold because you dislike a brand or think their quality is low then I should vote cold any deal on an Iphone (as I think they're an unreliable overpriced fashion accessory). Again, if there's a 40"+ fulll HD 100Hz branded tv available for the same price, please point it out (I'd guess the 37" Lg or 40" Toshiba from Amazon at £30 and £70 more are probably the closest though neither is 100Hz).
I'll hasten to add that I have a 40" Samsung 3d tv, my brother has the 42" Bush LCD, no doubt mine is a better TV but as it cost twice as much, is it twice as good or is it guaranteed to last twice as long?
Put another way, if I can't afford to buy a (second hand) Japanese car but know the French equivalent is the same spec. but lower quality, should I not buy a car and just walk everywhere because the French car might break down? :p
#9
A fairly typical experience of owning a 100Hz TV is to turn off the motion processing, due to annoyingly unnatural effects. A good 50Hz TV is much preferable to a mediocre 100Hz TV.

I have a Samsung LE40C580 ( http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/samsung-le40c580-le32c580-20100728791.htm ), which cost £359. It's a superb TV, & well worth the extra money over a TV of unknown origin, with no published reviews to confirm it's performance or lack thereof.
#10
dooper
A fairly typical experience of owning a 100Hz TV is to turn off the motion processing, due to annoyingly unnatural effects. A good 50Hz TV is much preferable to a mediocre 100Hz TV.

I have a Samsung LE40C580 ( http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/samsung-le40c580-le32c580-20100728791.htm ), which cost £359. It's a superb TV, & well worth the extra money over a TV of unknown origin, with no published reviews to confirm it's performance or lack thereof.


I agree with you the c580 is a wonderful tv but i sent the 40c580 i brought back as its got bad ghosting ! S-PVA SQ01 panel (on sticker on the rigfht side of the tv it will say sq01 there)Also amazon have removed it from sale at time of reply, i am not a fan of the 40 as my use is pc monitor,gaming,usb and lastly tv so the 40 was a huge let down for me as every black was ghosting also images to !

The bush is worth a go if thats all you can afford,but i beleive everyone can pretty much afford the extra little bit if they really wanted to.Also i think you get what you pay for 99/100 times anyway.Don't argos own bush now ? as they seem to have a lot of bush products ......... Samsung or LG is the better choices.

Lastly do you think the 100 hz on a bush will match samsungs 100hz quality ? I have heard lg isn't the best at 100hz but haven't looked in to samsungs either.If you have sensitive eyes you shouldn't even be considering a cheap so called 100hz tv which most users turn off due to the above comment. I have voted neither way as i would only EVER buy a tv from amazon now,as no one can touch them on return policy (except maybe JohnL also i am returning a second set tomorrow 40c580 was the 1st due to ghosting when using as monitor and the samsung ledc5100 as the led tvs seem to have horrible blue tinted backlight bleed on blacks ! Led isn't as good as lcds in the same sort of price range £100 difference either way) I'm having trouble myself buying a tv which means i need to go for either the 37c580 or lg37ld490 as 42 is too big. I learned the hard way with buying from dixons twice (lg50pk590 +46c580 which were both too big i tried to return the 46 but dixons wouldn't let me as it been turned on ! this was next day after i got it !) Just take note of my experience and don't learn the hard way like i did ! If i brought from amazon 5 months ago i would of been able to buy this tv now with the losses i made on both sets ! I Will ALWAYS buy my TVS from AMAZON/JOHNL Now !

Hope this helps someone !

Edited By: Gunner4Life on Feb 27, 2011 19:42
#11
dooper
A fairly typical experience of owning a 100Hz TV is to turn off the motion processing, due to annoyingly unnatural effects. A good 50Hz TV is much preferable to a mediocre 100Hz TV.

I have a Samsung LE40C580 ( http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/samsung-le40c580-le32c580-20100728791.htm ), which cost £359. It's a superb TV, & well worth the extra money over a TV of unknown origin, with no published reviews to confirm it's performance or lack thereof.


£359 for the 40 ? please show me the lowest i've ever seen the 40c580 is £388 ........
#12
As I've mentioned, I have seen the Bush 42" in action, I have a Samsung 40" 200Hz LCD, and have previously owned a Toshiba 37" 100Hz LCD, and a Philips 28" 100Hz CRT, and have never had issue with the picture on any of them, to be honest the Toshiba probably had the best picture overall and the best game mode, (the lag on the Samsung's game mode seems terrible, that's something I can't comment on with the Bush as I've not had it hooked up to my equipment set up so can't do a lag comparison).
As I have also used all of them though, for me a fairly typical experience of owning 100Hz and 200Hz televisions was to keep motion processing on except when gaming and enjoy the flicker free fluid picture on all of them. I also used to work in electrical retail (and took an active interest in it) so believe it or not I do have some idea of what to look for (and I've seen my fair share of good, bad and ugly TVs).
I will accept however that I have gotten used to 100Hz over the last 10+ years, and play HD video games, so perhaps that's partly why I don't find the 100Hz picture unnatural. I do still have a 50Hz LCD in the spare room but I don't find it strange to watch that after 100Hz or vice versa though.
I'd definitely recommend (if you are buying a branded TV) that you look at and consider 100Hz, as I can honestly say several people I know have commented on how the Philips 100Hz CRT and the Toshiba 37" LCD looked better than their 50Hz TVs (one of which was comparing the 2 year old Toshiba 37" 100Hz with a Sony 37" 50Hz he'd bought at the end of last year for quite a bit more money).
Of course, beauty is in the eye of the beholder as they say, and the picture is only as good as the pair of the eyes looking at it! Believe it or not, I really don't care what people think of this particular TV, I just think it's a bit unfair to act on the assumption that it will be crap because it's Bush, or that everyone can afford to throw another £30-100 down to buy a "better" brand - if that kind of mentality continues they might as well change the name of the site to "hotukdealsforthewealthy.com".
Right, I'm off into town to tell the local tramp that he should spend the extra £50 to get a Berghaus jacket cos the stinky green one he has isn't made of Gore-tex, I'm sure he can afford the extra. Might brag about how good my Oakley jacket is too, it cost three times as much as the ones they sell in TK Maxx so it must be better :D
#13
Aliwoo18
I appreciate what's been said about brand and quality (I buy brand names when I can afford to), but if you can't afford a better brand then you have to go with the best available offer within your budget - if the idea is to vote cold because you dislike a brand or think their quality is low then I should vote cold any deal on an Iphone (as I think they're an unreliable overpriced fashion accessory). Again, if there's a 40"+ fulll HD 100Hz branded tv available for the same price, please point it out (I'd guess the 37" Lg or 40" Toshiba from Amazon at £30 and £70 more are probably the closest though neither is 100Hz).I'll hasten to add that I have a 40" Samsung 3d tv, my brother has the 42" Bush LCD, no doubt mine is a better TV but as it cost twice as much, is it twice as good or is it guaranteed to last twice as long? Put another way, if I can't afford to buy a (second hand) Japanese car but know the French equivalent is the same spec. but lower quality, should I not buy a car and just walk everywhere because the French car might break down? :p

Don't get me wrong, I understand what you're saying about budget, but to compare your opinion about a products general value for money for what it does against a products quality or reliability is not a fair argument. Apple's products are overpriced in my opinion too; however they are reknowned for being of high quality and in comparison to any other smart phone, they are as reliable. What they do and how much value they give YOU as an item is irrelavent. I don't make the argument that i don't LIKE Bush products. Its not product 'snobbery' that puts me off them, its quality. Before I got into engineering and while I was at college, I worked as a salesman for the Co-Op selling Tvs and Hifis amongst other brown and white goods. Occassionally we would do Blue Cross sales and would set up big stands of cheap brand TVs and VCRs.

Back then the brands on the cheap stands were Akura, Akito, Goodmans, LG, Samsung (yes LG and Samsung) and of course Bush. With all of these brands you could usually see a difference in display performance when comparing one with another of the same brand. I commonly advised people that you get a good one or a bad one. Perhaps that was down to the set up of the tube and therefore this isn't so relevant today with panels, however there was also the returns. Typically out of say 100 tvs of the cheap brands, we might have a stack of 10 or 15 of them out back after being sold, returned as faulty within a month. As cheap as it might be, if there is a higher risk that it will fail in the short term, I would rather avoid it.

This is why I don't buy these brands and why I wouldn't give it a positive vote or review. You don't get assured quality (i.e. you might get a decent one or a crap one at random), and its got a higher chance of failing than a better brand.
#14
This TV is cheap but is it a bargain? Is it sensible to risk £300 on a product for which there are no published reviews?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Bush is not a manufacturer. I believe they have the Bush name put on products sourced from factories in China, Turkey, etc. I bought a Bush Freeview+ PVR. It's very good, however, before I bought it I learned that it's actually the well-respected Vestel T835 PVR, with Bush badging. Who made this TV? What Panel does it contain? What Processor?

To identify what is a bargain as opposed to what is cheap, it's necessary to compare a product with it's peers. With TVs, the most reliable way to do this is to read reviews from impartial sources like Which? Magazine (see it at your local Library) & hdtvtest.co.uk.

I don't trust the reviews of the specialist magazines, as they are too heavily dependent on advertising revenue from Sony, Samsung, etc to risk publishing critical reviews.

Which? omit pricing from the assessment criteria, & it's interesting to see some TVs scoring higher than models that are twice the price. I counted 27 Which? Magazine Best Buy TVs:

Samsung: 10
Sony: 9
Panasonic: 5
LG: 3
Bush: 0

Which? also publish a list of 'don't-buy' TVs, including at least one M&S branded TV! I cannot find the 'don't-buy' list at present, & don't recall whether any Bush TVs were listed. I do recall that most of the 'don't-buys' are of the obscure brands found in supermarkets.

I would urge anyone looking for a new TV to invest time in researching their choice. Don't buy it because it's cheap. Buy it because it's a bargain price on a TV that's been reviewed & recommended by a reliable source.
#15
It is very unfortunate that the online ratings aren't available for this particular TV, HOWEVER I've just looked through the TV section on the Argos website, and calculated (taking all Bush TVs with a rating into account and taking the number of ratings into account to make it proportional), the average rating for Bush TVs on the Argos site is 4.577 stars out of 5 - and as I'd say more people are likely to bother to leave a rating when they're unhappy (bad news sells papers), I don't think that's a bad rating really! I realise this is only an indicator (as it's not strictly controlled and presumably Argos can delete ratings if they wish), but as this thread is mostly based on opinion and past experience at least it brings something with a numerical value to the table.
Back to earlier points - I'll agree that cheap brand or non-branded products will have a generally higher failure rate, but it is still a chance you take and weigh up in your mind against the cost too (my bedroom LCD TV is an own brand, over 3 years old and the inbuilt DVD player can be a bit temperamental now, but otherwise good - I went for cheap as that was what was within my budget, and as far as I'm concerned I've already had more than my money's worth out of it) .
Sadly (as far as I can tell) there don't seem to be valid statistics on failure rates for given brands, so it will all be anecdotal, which makes it somewhat unreliable data anyhow - I can give anecdotal evidence from when I used to work in electrical retail, but that would in fact suggest that the unbranded gear was outlasting brand names (because at the time one of our best selling TVs was made by LG and had a ridiculously high failure rate so our returns bay looked like an LG warehouse), and as it happened the own brand was being made by a decent manufacturer at that particular time, or could make the point with the Iphone that pretty much everyone I know (and I'm not exaggerating) has had a significant software problem (ie requiring the phone to be reset) or actual hardware fault with it within 3 months of getting it (and that's without counting the normal battery/signal issues), but because it's an Iphone (and Apple Iphones "are reknowned for being of high quality and in comparison to any other smart phone, they are as reliable") it's almost frowned upon to criticise it - my point being that sometimes people just convince themselves that what they want to be true is true (look at the Xbox 360 vs Playstation 3 arguments - both do similar things and both have what I would consider to be high failure rates, but still owners of either console will convince themseleves that theirs is the better one, when realistically they probably both fail at similar rates and like for like probably end up costing about the same over the period of ownership).

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Top of Page
Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!