COMET - Samsung 42" HD Ready Plasma - £499 + 3.5% Quidco - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HotUKDeals, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HotUKDeals app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit
358Expired

COMET - Samsung 42" HD Ready Plasma - £499.00 + 3.5% Quidco

£499.00 @ Testing
Nice looking TV and a good price. maybe discount vouchers to bring the price lower and Quidco will give you 3.5%. Brand SAMSUNG Dimensions 72.4x105.5x31.6(H/W/D)cm Television type Plasma TV s… Read More
avoint Avatar
8y, 10m agoFound 8 years, 10 months ago
Nice looking TV and a good price. maybe discount vouchers to bring the price lower and Quidco will give you 3.5%.

Brand SAMSUNG
Dimensions 72.4x105.5x31.6(H/W/D)cm
Television type Plasma
TV size 42 inches
++TUNER++ > > >
Reception Digital Tuner with all Freeview channels
Electronic Programme Guide 7 days
++PICTURE++ > > >
Picture enhancement DNIe
HD ready Yes
1080HD No
100Hz Yes
Response time tbc
24p Technology No
Light Sensor No
LED Technology No
Pixel resolution 1024x768
Contrast ratio 20000:1
Brightness 1500 cd/m2
Picture-in-picture No
Can be used as a PC monitor Yes
PC resolution N/A
++SOUND++ > > >
Sound system SRS-XT
Audio power output (RMS) 20 watts
++CONNECTIVITY++ > > >
Total number of Scart sockets 2
RGB enabled scart sockets 1
S-Video connection No
Component video connection Yes
AV inputs Yes
HDMI connection 3
HDCP enabled No
Headphone socket Yes
PCMCIA slot for pay channel module No
DLNA Technology No
USB Connections 0
On/off timer Yes
Sleep timer Yes
Premier Collection No
Other features
Optical connection
277/1.2watts :in use/powered-down power consumption
Desktop TV stand included
175Degrees Viewing Angle
Picture-in-Text
100 Channels
16:9 widescreen format
400 VESA wall mount compatible
More From Testing:

All Comments

(57) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
Page:
#1
a little more detail would help.
1 Like #2
Brand SAMSUNG
Dimensions 72.4x105.5x31.6(H/W/D)cm
Television type Plasma
TV size 42 inches
++TUNER++ > > >
Reception Digital Tuner with all Freeview channels
Electronic Programme Guide 7 days
++PICTURE++ > > >
Picture enhancement DNIe
HD ready Yes
1080HD No
100Hz Yes
Response time tbc
24p Technology No
Light Sensor No
LED Technology No
Pixel resolution 1024x768
Contrast ratio 20000:1
Brightness 1500 cd/m2
Picture-in-picture No
Can be used as a PC monitor Yes
PC resolution N/A
++SOUND++ > > >
Sound system SRS-XT
Audio power output (RMS) 20 watts
++CONNECTIVITY++ > > >
Total number of Scart sockets 2
RGB enabled scart sockets 1
S-Video connection No
Component video connection Yes
AV inputs Yes
HDMI connection 3
HDCP enabled No
Headphone socket Yes
PCMCIA slot for pay channel module No
DLNA Technology No
USB Connections 0
On/off timer Yes
Sleep timer Yes
Premier Collection No
Other features
Optical connection
277/1.2watts :in use/powered-down power consumption
Desktop TV stand included
175Degrees Viewing Angle
Picture-in-Text
100 Channels
16:9 widescreen format
400 VESA wall mount compatible
1 Like #3
rob585
a little more detail would help.


That's what the link is for.
1 Like #4
simate
That's what the link is for.


yep i was thinking that...
banned#6
got this tv from dixons last week for £499 with 5% quidco:thumbsup:
#7
simate;2822174
That's what the link is for.


Completely agree! The first post should just cover the essentials.
#8
Still new to this Guys and Gals so feedback is appreciated.
#9
already posted on here but got voted cold because this is the average price for tis tv now
#10
Is the panel any good? I've just ordered a philips plasma:

http://www.hotukdeals.com/item/229923/philips-42pfp5532d-42in-hd-ready-fr

Is the samsung better?
#11
I think this is the same tv being sold for the same price as on John Lewis,
Bought from JL you get a free 5year guarantee though which makes it a much better deal,
If a plasma fails they can be expensive to fix!
#12
Panel resolution only 1024 x 768, meaning it can only do up to 1080i - no 720p sadly.
It's HD Ready, but only by the skin of its teeth. If you had £500 to throw at a new TV, this wouldn't be my first choice!
#13
Xb0xGuru
Panel resolution only 1024 x 768, meaning it can only do up to 1080i - no 720p sadly.
It's HD Ready, but only by the skin of its teeth. If you had £500 to throw at a new TV, this wouldn't be my first choice!


Don't you mean no 1080p? It should do 720p.
#14
Xb0xGuru
Panel resolution only 1024 x 768, meaning it can only do up to 1080i - no 720p sadly.
It's HD Ready, but only by the skin of its teeth. If you had £500 to throw at a new TV, this wouldn't be my first choice!


This is a 720P set, people can debate all day long if 1024*768 is true 720P, but as it's over 720 it counts as HD ready.
You say it's only 1080i not 720P. To show 1080i requires a resolution of 1920*1080, which it doesn't have. It will accept a 1080i signal, dut downscales.

Resolution counts for very little in what produces a good picture, most 42" plasmas are 1024*768 and most will out perform most LCD's at 1368*768 and even 1080p LCD's.

Not sure how good this Samsung exactly is, but certainly a low price for a 42". If you can afford it though I would aim at Panasonic, or you really have the money Pioneer plasma.
#15
i agree
#18
Richierea
This is a 720P set, people can debate all day long if 1024*768 is true 720P, but as it's over 720 it counts as HD ready.
You say it's only 1080i not 720P. To show 1080i requires a resolution of 1920*1080, which it doesn't have. It will accept a 1080i signal, dut downscales.

Resolution counts for very little in what produces a good picture, most 42" plasmas are 1024*768 and most will out perform most LCD's at 1368*768 and even 1080p LCD's.

Not sure how good this Samsung exactly is, but certainly a low price for a 42". If you can afford it though I would aim at Panasonic, or you really have the money Pioneer plasma.


No, it's not a 720p set. This is not debatable and you've already lost if you try.

It may ACCEPT a 720p signal, but that's not the same thing. In order to display 720p it needs a minimum of 1280 x 720, which this TV falls short of.

And no, 1080i does not need 1920 x 1080 - that would be 1080p. Maybe take a look on how interlaced frames work eh?

Just an FYI - if it didn't accept a 720p signal (i.e in this case, it does and downscales it to 1024 lines) it wouldn't even be allowed to be advertised as 'HD Ready'. Like I said, it barely scrapes the specification.

If you think this is going to outperform a good LCD at 1920 x 1080 then try running 1080p content through it and let me know how you get on.
#19
Xb0xGuru
No, it's not a 720p set. This is not debatable and you've already lost if you try.

It may ACCEPT a 720p signal, but that's not the same thing. In order to display 720p it needs a minimum of 1280 x 720, which this TV falls short of.

And no, 1080i does not need 1920 x 1080 - that would be 1080p. Maybe take a look on how interlaced frames work eh?

Just an FYI - if it didn't accept a 720p signal (i.e in this case, it does and downscales it to 1024 lines) it wouldn't even be allowed to be advertised as 'HD Ready'. Like I said, it barely scrapes the specification.

If you think this is going to outperform a good LCD at 1920 x 1080 then try running 1080p content through it and let me know how you get on.



some become so obessed by specs to notice picture quality. Take a look at a measly 1024x768 Panasonic PX80 plasma and then become disapointed with your 1080p LCD :-)
#20
And also to the average joe, who couldn't give a flying f*ck about specs, who is really gonna notice!!??

For me, this is a decent brand for a decent price, gotta be better than getting an Acoustic Solutions or a Wharfdale for the same money?
#21
Xb0xGuru
Panel resolution only 1024 x 768, meaning it can only do up to 1080i - no 720p sadly.
It's HD Ready, but only by the skin of its teeth. If you had £500 to throw at a new TV, this wouldn't be my first choice!


I thought you had your fingers burnt enough in the last tv thread - and that would stop you posting **** like this again - obviously not.:roll:
#22
bobdylan
And also to the average joe, who couldn't give a flying f*ck about specs, who is really gonna notice!!??

For me, this is a decent brand for a decent price, gotta be better than getting an Acoustic Solutions or a Wharfdale for the same money?


spot on couldn't agree more:thumbsup:
#23
If you want a modern TV for watching standard definition and Standard definition DVD's then this Plasma will produce a picture superior to one that had a higher resolution (less scaling to do).

I have the 50" Samsung plasma (PS50A457) for an extra £100 which is not 1080p and the picture(SD+HD) is FANTASTIC!
#24
Xb0xGuru
No, it's not a 720p set. This is not debatable and you've already lost if you try.

It may ACCEPT a 720p signal, but that's not the same thing. In order to display 720p it needs a minimum of 1280 x 720, which this TV falls short of.

And no, 1080i does not need 1920 x 1080 - that would be 1080p. Maybe take a look on how interlaced frames work eh?

Just an FYI - if it didn't accept a 720p signal (i.e in this case, it does and downscales it to 1024 lines) it wouldn't even be allowed to be advertised as 'HD Ready'. Like I said, it barely scrapes the specification.

If you think this is going to outperform a good LCD at 1920 x 1080 then try running 1080p content through it and let me know how you get on.


It's clear from your posts you know very little. Like I said people will debate if 1024*768 is 'True' HD, but like it or not it IS classed HD.

And yes 1080i is 1920*1080, you obviously don't understand how interlaced works, check link above if you like for resolutions.

Also a quick google search quoted this:
'1080i, the former king of the HDTV hill, actually boasts an identical 1,920x1,080 resolution '

Interlaced will display odd lines then even lines, but it's still 1080 lines, just not all displayed at the same time as progressive.

You have obviously fallen for the 1080P marketing, knock yourself out and pay for it, others will go for what is best. This doesn't mean 1080p panels can't be as good, it's just that resolution isn't everything, and as already stated comes quite low in the list. I would rather have a decent picture than lots of extra pixels badly displayed....
#25
Xb0xGuru
And no, 1080i does not need 1920 x 1080 - that would be 1080p. Maybe take a look on how interlaced frames work eh?.


I've never heard anyone make this claim ever so feel free to explain it ito us then?
#26
Richierea
It's clear from your posts you know very little. Like I said people will debate if 1024*768 is 'True' HD, but like it or not it IS classed HD.

No, you said it was 720p and I said it wasn't - if you want to argue otherwise then don't move the goalposts halfway through.

Richierea

And yes 1080i is 1920*1080, you obviously don't understand how interlaced works, check link above if you like for resolutions.

Again, you're misquoting me. I didn't say 1080i wasn't 1920 x 1080, I said it didn't need a display of 1920 x 1080. Re-read my original post where I said this TV would happily do 1080i and your argument in this matter is moot.

Richierea

You have obviously fallen for the 1080P marketing, knock yourself out and pay for it, others will go for what is best. This doesn't mean 1080p panels can't be as good, it's just that resolution isn't everything, and as already stated comes quite low in the list. I would rather have a decent picture than lots of extra pixels badly displayed....


You've obviously lost the ability to read other's posts!

All I posted here was that it's not a 720p telly. There's a lot of sensitive people here that need to take a chill pill once in a while. If you want to throw £500 at a TV which doesn't even output 720p then go ahead - FTR I've not voted this hot OR cold. I was just making people aware of the above fact. Personally I wouldn't waste £500 on a plasma TV which didn't even progressive scan over 1024 x 768 - to me it's a waste of an investment. If I had a spare £500 every year to throw at a TV, then I suppose it would be a different matter. Good for you if you have this luxury!
#27
moob
I thought you had your fingers burnt enough in the last tv thread - and that would stop you posting **** like this again - obviously not.:roll:


Righty - tell me what's inaccurate in that post and I'll duly remove it.
#28
wow - people are really serious about their knowledge of TV specifications...

For the average person with a Terrestrial input or a Sky box and DVD's to watch this tv will be fine, if your serious about HD and have a Bluray player and / or HDDVD player then you may want to consider something else, but in doing so you'll have to spend quite a lot more than 500 notes.
#29
Xb0xGuru
Righty - tell me what's inaccurate in that post and I'll duly remove it.


You got absolutely roasted by arfster the other day on another thread about Plasma tvs - and here you are again slaggin off Plasmas - you need to let go of your fixation with resolutions/contrast rations and whatever else pointless statistic you feel the need to bring into the argument about panels. It's tedious - we already have a whole team of resolution 1080p fanatics on this forum, we really don't need another.:roll:

The proof is in the pudding. The advice I always give to people with panels is to view them in a shop that puts a decent feed through them - certainly not the likes of Comet/Dixons et al - and compare different materials.

The bottom line is this (IMO) - if you spend most of your time watching SD broadcasts - get a Plasma - if you play games all day and watch DVDs/Blu ray/HDVD - get an LCD.
#30
JasonMason;2824472
For the average person with a Terrestrial input or a Sky box and DVD's to watch this tv will be fine, if your serious about HD and have a Bluray player and / or HDDVD player then you may want to consider something else, but in doing so you'll have to spend quite a lot more than 500 notes.


Well said.
#31
Well I for one enjoy the debate - as long as its factual. Thanks.
1 Like #32
moob
You got absolutely roasted by arfster the other day on another thread about Plasma tvs - and here you are again slaggin off Plasmas - you need to let go of your fixation with resolutions/contrast rations and whatever else pointless statistic you feel the need to bring into the argument about panels. It's tedious - we already have a whole team of resolution 1080p fanatics on this forum, we really don't need another.:roll:

The proof is in the pudding. The advice I always give to people with panels is to view them in a shop that puts a decent feed through them - certainly not the likes of Comet/Dixons et al - and compare different materials.

The bottom line is this (IMO) - if you spend most of your time watching SD broadcasts - get a Plasma - if you play games all day and watch DVDs/Blu ray/HDVD - get an LCD.


I couldn't agree more with your post here - of course the proof is in the pudding. I certainly wasn't slagging off Plasmas as for SD content they're not half bad. Before I got my LCD I was looking at plasmas but was put off by a few factors (resolution was only one of them). I'm not intending to join the 1080p brigade any time soon.

What I posted was factual - because you have a difference of opinion doesn't make it c***. Like I said, some people need to take a chill pill or at least learn to debate constructively :roll::roll:
#34
The Philps is the better deal.
#35
Any reason why?
#36
This site has 77 user reviews for the Philips you bought:

http://www.testfreaks.co.uk/tvs/philips-42pfp5532d/

The concensus is to spend a little more on the panasonic th42px80b.
#37
Xb0xGuru;2826876
The concensus is to spend a little more on the panasonic th42px80b.


I can definitely agree with that. I paid £800 and don't regret it one bit. It can now be had for a little over £600.
#38
mercurystar999
Any reason why?


Well for a start its a good bit cheaper.

Xb0xGuru
This site has 77 user reviews for the Philips you bought:

http://www.testfreaks.co.uk/tvs/philips-42pfp5532d/

The concensus is to spend a little more on the panasonic th42px80b.


Although if you read mercurystar's question he was asking whether the philips was a better buy than the samsung - he wasn't looking for how it compared to Panasonics or Pioneers or Sony etc etc

PoisonJam
I can definitely agree with that. I paid £800 and don't regret it one bit. It can now be had for a little over £600.


Good for you. However the Philips is about £418 so there is not much value in comparing it to something costing over £600
#39
phatbhoy

Although if you read mercurystar's question he was asking whether the philips was a better buy than the samsung - he wasn't looking for how it compared to Panasonics or Pioneers or Sony etc etc


I did read the question - I don't have either TV so I did the next best thing and found him a review site with over 77 opinions on it.
#40
Xb0xGuru
I did read the question - I don't have either TV so I did the next best thing and found him a review site with over 77 opinions on it.


Ok - I cant access the site with the reviews on it from my office as its blocked - does the site give a score for the samsung ?

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!