Lg - 50PG3000 Plasma Screen 50 inch (127 cm) 16/9, inchHD readyinch Freeview, 100Hz, HDMI x3 - £601.10 @ Pixmania - 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
284Expired

Lg - 50PG3000 Plasma Screen 50 inch (127 cm) 16/9, inchHD readyinch Freeview, 100Hz, HDMI x3 - £601.10 @ Pixmania

£601.10 @ Pixmania
Enjoy bright images and amazing precision with the 50PG3000 from LG. This 50? screen offers high definition resolution for your favourite films and TV programmes, and uses 100 Hz scanning to reduce la… Read More
nad2cool Avatar
8y, 2m agoFound 8 years, 2 months ago
Enjoy bright images and amazing precision with the 50PG3000 from LG. This 50? screen offers high definition resolution for your favourite films and TV programmes, and uses 100 Hz scanning to reduce lag by calculating frames at 100 images per second, instead of 50 or 60. The 50PG3000 also comes with an XD Engine image enhancer and a digital comb filter, making graphics seem lifelike, as well as three HDMI sockets and two scart jacks for adding a multimedia hard drive, a DVD recorder or a games console. Displaying graphics in breathtaking quality, the 50PG3000 lets you enjoy TV and films on a larger screen!

USE VALENTINES CODE TO GET IT DOWN TO THIS PRICE

Valentines093
More From Pixmania:

All Comments

(44) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
Page:
banned#1
An amazing price! :thumbsup:
#2
Shipping from £19.90.

Odd that shipping on the samsung LE40A656 (£669) from the same website is £80.50.

Excellent find though...
#3
**** i forgot about shipping and to add the price, also there are other coupons but i havent added them as i cant test to see if they work because i have to register and things.
banned 1 Like #4
43 user reviews (avg score 9.1)

http://www.testfreaks.co.uk/tvs/lg-50pg3000/user-reviews/

5 posts and no 1080p freak has appeared lol
1 Like #5
csiman
5 posts and no 1080p freak has appeared lol



:-D
#6
:w00t:
csiman
43 user reviews (avg score 9.1)

http://www.testfreaks.co.uk/tvs/lg-50pg3000/user-reviews/

5 posts and no 1080p freak has appeared lol


:w00t:
#7
Nice deal but for the lack of 1080p :P

May not be a big deal for some, but im looking for a tv to feed only 1080p signals and I can get a quality one for 570£.

Still nice though.
#8
Didn't take long tho':p
#9
l33t-krew
Nice deal but for the lack of 1080p :P

May not be a big deal for some, but im looking for a tv to feed only 1080p signals and I can get a quality one for 570£.

Still nice though.


Where can you get a 50" 1080p tv for £570?
#10
Hot, my mate wont be happy, he paid £700ish for this about 2 months ago :)
banned#11
hot because the price is cheap for a 50", but ****** quality and resolution, so aimed at a small market, people who want bigger size but don't care too much about quality.
#12
Pixmania suck
#13
askfareed
hot because the price is cheap for a 50", but ****** quality and resolution, so aimed at a small market, people who want bigger size but don't care too much about quality.


Someones spoiling for a fight:whistling:
#14
askfareed
hot because the price is cheap for a 50", but ****** quality and resolution, so aimed at a small market, people who want bigger size but don't care too much about quality.


So quality and resolution is rubbish - are you talking from first hand experience or are you just another pixel counter?

Personally I'd spend the extra and go for the 50PG6000, which is a must have TV for the price (around £718 at the moment).
banned#15
askfareed;4379532
hot because the price is cheap for a 50", but ****** quality and resolution, so aimed at a small market, people who want bigger size but don't care too much about quality.

DFTT! :whistling:

Utter rubbish!
#16
Don't forget Quidco at 4% about £24:thumbsup:
banned#17
It's common sense a 50" screen with a resolution of 1366 x 768 is going to have **** quality. No point of being a cheap skate, you should just pay and extra £100 or £200 for better quality. As if your investing in something this expensive and something that you are going to use on the daily basis you might as well spend that little extra and get a decent tv. I still voted it hot for the cheap skates!
#18
askfareed
It's common sense a 50" screen with a resolution of 1366 x 768 is going to have **** quality. No point of being a cheap skate, you should just pay and extra £100 or £200 for better quality. As if your investing in something this expensive and something that you are going to use on the daily basis you might as well spend that little extra and get a decent tv. I still voted it hot for the cheap skates!


proving you know sod all about tv resolution.
if it was gonna have that bad quality, why bother to even make one?

normal SD tv not in 720p or 1080i/p

Sky HD not in 1080p

ONLY Blu Ray in 1080p

Have you actually SEEN this tv in use?

We have one in our store and it looks as good as any samsung 720p 50"

unless you have a PS3 or blu ray, you don't need 1080p
on normal sd tv your pixels will not look enlarged or noticable or whatever other rubbish people spout to try to get you to part with extra money on a set you won't see the benefits of without blu ray
banned#19
yes i have seen the tv and it's better to spend the extra cash for a decent 50".
Also it's not even all about 1080p, the resolution is rubbish, if you sit within 5m of the tv you can see the difference very easily.

You ask why do they make them? Very easy answer, it's cheaper to make therefore cheaper to sell therefore the small market of cheap skates will get them without knowing what they could of got for the extra few £'s
#20
askfareed
yes i have seen the tv and it's better to spend the extra cash for a decent 50".
Also it's not even all about 1080p, the resolution is rubbish, if you sit within 5m of the tv you can see the difference very easily.

You ask why do they make them? Very easy answer, it's cheaper to make therefore cheaper to sell therefore the small market of cheap skates will get them without knowing what they could of got for the extra few £'s


Absolutley spot on.....:thumbsup:
#21
askfareed
It's common sense a 50" screen with a resolution of 1366 x 768 is going to have **** quality. No point of being a cheap skate, you should just pay and extra £100 or £200 for better quality. As if your investing in something this expensive and something that you are going to use on the daily basis you might as well spend that little extra and get a decent tv. I still voted it hot for the cheap skates!


askfareed
yes i have seen the tv and it's better to spend the extra cash for a decent 50".
Also it's not even all about 1080p, the resolution is rubbish, if you sit within 5m of the tv you can see the difference very easily.

You ask why do they make them? Very easy answer, it's cheaper to make therefore cheaper to sell therefore the small market of cheap skates will get them without knowing what they could of got for the extra few £'s


Wow, I didn't think someone could really spout so much rubbish!

Firstly, you're one of the very sad pixel counters out there - both replies you gave stated it must be poor because of the resolution, proving you know absolutely diddly-squat about plasma panels. A 1366 x 768 plasma panel produces an excellent image - the LGs are some of the best in this field. Mine is the 6000 series and at 1366 x 768 resolution would wipe the floor with most of the 1080p LCDs out there. Common sense it's going to be rubbish quality? Do me a favour and actually go see one running HD content. On the subject of being a cheap-skate (which is a stupid term given this website is to find the cheapest deals out there - what are you if you're not a 'cheap-skate' doing on this site?), what 50" TV would you get for £800 that would be far better than this? I'd really love to hear your suggestion.

Secondly, 5m away from the TV and you can see the diffrerence? Seriously, you're either having a laugh or just a troll.
#22
slackrat77
proving you know sod all about tv resolution.
if it was gonna have that bad quality, why bother to even make one?

normal SD tv not in 720p or 1080i/p

Sky HD not in 1080p

ONLY Blu Ray in 1080p

Have you actually SEEN this tv in use?

We have one in our store and it looks as good as any samsung 720p 50"

unless you have a PS3 or blu ray, you don't need 1080p
on normal sd tv your pixels will not look enlarged or noticable or whatever other rubbish people spout to try to get you to part with extra money on a set you won't see the benefits of without blu ray


When it comes to Plasma, I'd even go so far as to say you don't need 1080p full stop.
#23
Xb0xGuru


Personally I'd spend the extra and go for the 50PG6000, which is a must have TV for the price (around £718 at the moment).


£ 709.58 Inc. VAT £19.90 delivery No brainer[SIZE="5"] if[/SIZE] you trust pixmania, £30 more from prcdirect.co.uk
#24
l33t-krew
Nice deal but for the lack of 1080p :P

May not be a big deal for some, but im looking for a tv to feed only 1080p signals and I can get a quality one for 570£.

Still nice though.


DREAMER!!!!!!!!!!!!!
#25
bellamy_47
£ 709.58 Inc. VAT £19.90 delivery No brainer[SIZE="5"] if[/SIZE] you trust pixmania, £30 more from prcdirect.co.uk


Digitech Electronics doing the 50PG6000 for £718 (free delivery) here : http://www.digitechelectronics.com/model.php?ID=3100
#26
Xb0xGuru
Digitech Electronics doing the 50PG6000 for £718 (free delivery) here : http://www.digitechelectronics.com/model.php?ID=3100


Nice spot mate... :thumbsup:
#27
bellamy_47
Nice spot mate... :thumbsup:


No worries - it's where I bought mine from a few months back for £748. The free delivery had it here in less than 2 days (ordered on the Saturday, came on the Tuesday).
banned#28
askfareed;4380574
yes i have seen the tv and it's better to spend the extra cash for a decent 50".
Also it's not even all about 1080p, the resolution is rubbish, if you sit within 5m of the tv you can see the difference very easily.

You ask why do they make them? Very easy answer, it's cheaper to make therefore cheaper to sell therefore the small market of cheap skates will get them without knowing what they could of got for the extra few £'s

you really haven't got a clue!

this is the standard resolution on a 50" TV unless you pay out for 1080P. Care to show us a 1080P 50" for £100 more.................:whistling:

and 5m away...............who are you trying to kid. You wouldn't notice any difference between this resolution and 1080P unless you sit within 6-7 foot (2M). Who would sit that close to a 50" TV? :roll:

http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.html

"What the chart shows is that, for a 50-inch screen, the benefits of 720p vs. 480p start to become apparent at viewing distances closer than 14.6 feet and become fully apparent at 9.8 feet. For the same screen size, the benefits of 1080p vs. 720p start to become apparent when closer than 9.8 feet and become full apparent at 6.5 feet. In my opinion, 6.5 feet is closer than most people will sit to their 50" plasma TV (even through the THX recommended viewing distance for a 50" screen is 5.6 ft). So, most consumers will not be able to see the full benefit of their 1080p TV."
banned#29
Xb0xGuru;4381366
Wow, I didn't think someone could really spout so much rubbish!

Firstly, you're one of the very sad pixel counters out there - both replies you gave stated it must be poor because of the resolution, proving you know absolutely diddly-squat about plasma panels. A 1366 x 768 plasma panel produces an excellent image - the LGs are some of the best in this field. Mine is the 6000 series and at 1366 x 768 resolution would wipe the floor with most of the 1080p LCDs out there. Common sense it's going to be rubbish quality? Do me a favour and actually go see one running HD content. On the subject of being a cheap-skate (which is a stupid term given this website is to find the cheapest deals out there - what are you if you're not a 'cheap-skate' doing on this site?), what 50" TV would you get for £800 that would be far better than this? I'd really love to hear your suggestion.

Secondly, 5m away from the TV and you can see the diffrerence? Seriously, you're either having a laugh or just a troll.

It pains me to say it being a ps3 man, but Xboxguru is spot on! :thumbsup:
1 Like #30
glad to have some back up on this, I actually sell these things for a living and therefore make it my business to take notice of different resolutions on different screens playing both sd and hd content.

a customer once told me that his SON had advised him to get a 1080p tv cos it has more pixels and on freeview you need 1080p or the pixels will be huge and easily seen.
I asked him, with respect what his son did for a living, he replied "nothing, he's 7"
#31
slackrat77
a customer once told me that his SON had advised him to get a 1080p tv cos it has more pixels and on freeview you need 1080p or the pixels will be huge and easily seen. I asked him, with respect what his son did for a living, he replied "nothing, he's 7"


LMFBO!! That's awesome if true, thanks for the laugh this morn :w00t:
#32
SiG
LMFBO!! That's awesome if true, thanks for the laugh this morn :w00t:


it is indeed.
Currys.Digital store in south shields
#33
Coincidentally, I've been doing so measuring this morning, so I had my measuring tape within arm's reach as I've sat slumped out here in the livingroom on the sofa, with my laptop on the table and the TV on. Turns out, I sit 2.2m from the telly. I could sit 5m away, but, who in their right minds buys a big-ass TV and then sits in the furthest seats from it possible? My set's a 720 40"'er, and while TV use is fine with it, running it with my PC, it becomes obvious how large the pixels and how low the res is.

I'd have bought a 1080 TV, only it was too expensive. If I was buying a new TV now, and I plan to before the year's out (it'll be my little reward after banking the ISA), I wouldn't touch anything less than a 1080. It's not just that the screen is a higher res, but it's also that upscaling content is done with greater accuracy and with more detail, un-aliased content looks much smoother, and I'd be able to use a digital connector to run my PC through the telly, unlike the VGA I have to use now, since Samsungs don't like running HDMI at anything other than 1280*720, preventing me from using digital + native res for best image quality.
#35
dxx
Coincidentally, I've been doing so measuring this morning, so I had my measuring tape within arm's reach as I've sat slumped out here in the livingroom on the sofa, with my laptop on the table and the TV on. Turns out, I sit 2.2m from the telly. I could sit 5m away, but, who in their right minds buys a big-ass TV and then sits in the furthest seats from it possible? My set's a 720 40"'er, and while TV use is fine with it, running it with my PC, it becomes obvious how large the pixels and how low the res is.

I'd have bought a 1080 TV, only it was too expensive. If I was buying a new TV now, and I plan to before the year's out (it'll be my little reward after banking the ISA), I wouldn't touch anything less than a 1080. It's not just that the screen is a higher res, but it's also that upscaling content is done with greater accuracy and with more detail, un-aliased content looks much smoother, and I'd be able to use a digital connector to run my PC through the telly, unlike the VGA I have to use now, since Samsungs don't like running HDMI at anything other than 1280*720, preventing me from using digital + native res for best image quality.


Of course you'll notice the difference on an LCD - it's the biggest fault with the technology.

Just in case anyone is wondering, this LG panel runs beautifully via an HDMI/DVI from a PC at 1360 x 768. Looking at the sharpness, i'd say if it's not displaying 1:1 pixel mapping, it's pretty much there.
banned#36
Xb0xGuru;4385114
Of course you'll notice the difference on an LCD - it's the biggest fault with the technology.

Just in case anyone is wondering, this LG panel runs beautifully via an HDMI/DVI from a PC at 1360 x 768. Looking at the sharpness, i'd say if it's not displaying 1:1 pixel mapping, it's pretty much there.

Once again, you are the man. Dxx is obviously not translating proper res from his/her laptop and blames it on the TV res.

not many laptops do 1080p lol :-D
#37


Since Pixmania do the 50PG6010 (http://www.pixmania.co.uk/uk/uk/1169580/art/lg/50pg6010-50pg6000-plasma.html), I'd get this instead. (£704.48 all in when using the voucher code on this thread)

Testfreaks.com give the 50PG6010 9.2 / 10: (http://www.testfreaks.co.uk/tvs/lg-50pg6010) , the 50PG6000 9.1 / 10: (http://www.testfreaks.co.uk/tvs/lg-50pg6000/) and the 50PG3000 8.8 / 10 (http://www.testfreaks.co.uk/tvs/lg-50pg3000/).

Neither a bad score IMHO but personally I'd go for the 6000/6010.
#38
Adidas Addict
Where can you get a 50" 1080p tv for £570?


I'm also wondering...
banned#39
l33t-krew;4379204
Nice deal but for the lack of 1080p :P

May not be a big deal for some, but im looking for a tv to feed only 1080p signals and I can get a quality one for 570£.

Still nice though.

Laughable statement :thinking:
#40
Adidas Addict
Where can you get a 50" 1080p tv for £570?


This Samsung 50" 1080p was £629 delivered just a few months back, and so it's not unfeasible that there will be 'branded' 1080p tvs around that mark. Ordered the Samsung myself , but had to cancel delivery it when I changed rented accommodation and realised it wouldn't fit my lounge's set-up.

If the tv on this thread is a good price then it's a good price, but personally I wouldn't buy anything bigger than 37" that didn't offer1080p.

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!