LG 55EG910 & 55EC930  55" Full HD 1080p OLED TV £1099 at John Lewis 5 Years Warranty
396°Expired

LG 55EG910 & 55EC930 55" Full HD 1080p OLED TV £1099 at John Lewis 5 Years Warranty

68
Found 21st Jun 2016
Great price for an oled TV comes with 5 Years Warranty.

Available both 910 and 930 models.

Popular question answers, before we get silly comments:
- Yes, this is 1080p, not 4K.
- Yes, it is not cheap, but it's OLED.
- No, 55 inch Bush TV from Argos is not better than this.
- Yes, there are still a few issues with LG OLED TVs, but picture quality is superior and cannot be compared to LCD tvs out there.

Thanks
Community Updates

Groups

68 Comments
repost
Great spot, heat added. Thanks for posting.
Nearly at my price point, good find OP.
Heat.
Great TV, and I personally don't care too much about 4K, but the butchered resolution of the Stereoscopic 3D of these non-4K passive TVs are a big turn-off to me.
Edited by: "BestHotDeals" 21st Jun 2016
BestHotDeals

Great TV, and I personally don't care too much about 4K, but the … Great TV, and I personally don't care too much about 4K, but the butchered resolution of the Stereoscopic 3D of these non-4K passive TVs are a big turn-off to me.


This thing is 3D?
umirza85

This thing is 3D?


Passive 3D, yes.
Do the LG OLEDs passthrough DD 5.1?
Do this have less than 6ms input lag? I am thinking of becoming a star wars pod racer.
what are the downsides of this oled tv? other than not 4k which im not bothered about due to lack of contents
Can't believe it's this price. Had mine three months and cost me £1600 lol.
montana78

what are the downsides of this oled tv? other than not 4k which im not … what are the downsides of this oled tv? other than not 4k which im not bothered about due to lack of contents



No downsides mate. Amazing tv.
Damn. Paid £1699 for this in February! Emailed them to see if they're willing to do a partial refund
HDR ?
montana78

what are the downsides of this oled tv? other than not 4k which im not … what are the downsides of this oled tv? other than not 4k which im not bothered about due to lack of contents



My dad has this very tv. It is fantastic, the picture quality is the best I've seen on a tv. Of course I've not seen the 4k equivalent...yet...but I'm avoiding doing that because I can't afford the cost of what will happen after. Personally I'm going to remain patient and hang on for the 4k to fall to a price I can justify.
What is the difference between both models ?
BestHotDeals

Great TV, and I personally don't care too much about 4K, but the … Great TV, and I personally don't care too much about 4K, but the butchered resolution of the Stereoscopic 3D of these non-4K passive TVs are a big turn-off to me.



While a deal breaker for you, I would say for most the 3D is neither here nor there. I've watched a film in 3D for perhaps half our before it irritated me to watch the 2D version.
Great TV bought about 4 months back when JL price matched marks electric,paid just under 1200 so getting cheaper now,I swapped a Samsung 4k model for this due to lack of content ,picture quality is great but wouldn't say it can match 4k quality ,looks stunning even when switched off !!!
Have the 910 and it is a fabulous TV!! I believe that the internet side of the TV is second generation than the 930 and is far superior..... unless of course someone else says different? price is now incredible and worth every penny. Bought mine in January and still comment every single day on his good the picture is, especially the black's. Makes the film Gravity very very good!!!
Argument between this and 4k? Who cares this is a great TV and have loved every second of it since January. 4k still isn't widely available and at a certain distance... quality of picture is negligible. The blacks are blacker than iv ever seen on a TV and definitely made the choice when I was out for a TV. When choosing 4k or OLED.. Question that needs to be answered is.. Is your content or source all or mostly in 4k and can you really tell or need the difference in resolution?
scud..... if you can afford it go for the 4k to future proof your purchase! there is not a great deal of 4k content at the moment but I am sure this will increase rapidly. unless of course you can afford to change your TV in a couple of years and if you can go for the cheaper!!!!
FYI JL have a very long return period so if you bought at higher price and they won't match, just return and rebut
adam4007

Can't believe it's this price. Had mine three months and cost me £1600 … Can't believe it's this price. Had mine three months and cost me £1600 lol.



ollie2001

Damn. Paid £1699 for this in February! Emailed them to see if they're … Damn. Paid £1699 for this in February! Emailed them to see if they're willing to do a partial refund



Where the hell did you guys buy it? I bought it in November from JL and it's always hovered around the £1200 price mark
910 version now out of stock.

This is the better version of the two as it has WebOS apparently whereas the other version is older OS
adam4007

Can't believe it's this price. Had mine three months and cost me £1600 … Can't believe it's this price. Had mine three months and cost me £1600 lol.

ollie2001

Damn. Paid £1699 for this in February! Emailed them to see if they're … Damn. Paid £1699 for this in February! Emailed them to see if they're willing to do a partial refund



Nah, the EG910 has always been an extra £400-500. Newer OLED panel.
ollie2001

Nah, the EG910 has always been an extra £400-500. Newer OLED panel.



My bad, thought they were referring to the EC930
BestHotDeals

Passive 3D, yes.


I bought an LG 3D TV years ago during the first round of 3d. Are we so far along 3d that it's not mentioned anymore in descriptions? Not being rude, serious question. Also I'm a huge fan of passive vs active.
My Samsung TV is active 3D and watching a film gave me eyestrain and a thumping headache, yet when I watched some short 3D cartoons on a passive 3D computer monitor I didn't struggle at all. So I think passive 3D is a feature I'd look for on any future TV.

Back to this unit, what are the issues with LG OLED? I thought it was supposed to be the best picture quality since high-end Pioneer plasma.
I was impressed viewing the OLED Tvs in John Lewis, but if you are investing this kind of money in a TV you need to stretch to 4k. I had to buy a new TV earlier this year because my old one broke down. Settled on a 49" refurbished sony 4k @ £329. I can really notice a big difference between 1080p and 4k feeds, stunning picture. Not an entry level and no hdr, but I think UHD has a few years to evolve with 8k hdr becoming the normal. I will live with the limitations of my current tv, and buy an expensive model in a few years time
Can't believe we are still talking about 3D, it's a waste of time.
3d is ace on a projector on a huge screen.

I never use 3d on the TV, bit regularly use it on my projector. Depth & immersion are needed for 3d & you only get that with a big big screen. Fwiw active 3d on a modern home cinema projector is way better than passive in the cinema.
As for the TV, have some heat. I can't afford this currently but can't wait to go to oled, my plasma packed in, & whilst my current lcd tv is good, I want proper blacks & truly high contrast again.
umirza85

I bought an LG 3D TV years ago during the first round of 3d. Are we so … I bought an LG 3D TV years ago during the first round of 3d. Are we so far along 3d that it's not mentioned anymore in descriptions? Not being rude, serious question. Also I'm a huge fan of passive vs active.


I think it's more like we're so far along that they've finally given up on 3D (again).
djh1975

Can't believe we are still talking about 3D, it's a waste of time.



On a screen that's not up to the job, I totally agree. On my Fuji W3's lecticular screen however, is perfect and amazing. I look at other tourists taking shots on there crappy iphones and think, "Your so end naughties," even though my Fuji is older than there iphones.

For 3D, you will need the 4K TV's as the extra pixels allow FHD for both eyes. The 910 will give you 3D, but at only half resolution for each eye.
Edited by: "Masteryates" 22nd Jun 2016
umirza85

I bought an LG 3D TV years ago during the first round of 3d. Are we so … I bought an LG 3D TV years ago during the first round of 3d. Are we so far along 3d that it's not mentioned anymore in descriptions? Not being rude, serious question. Also I'm a huge fan of passive vs active.



Totally Agree, active sucks.
JL have removed the 910v from the site altogether. 930 still available.
montana78

what are the downsides of this oled tv? other than not 4k which im not … what are the downsides of this oled tv? other than not 4k which im not bothered about due to lack of contents


Very slow OS - WebOS is pants.

Pink hue to white colours on display.

Still excellent though.
Paul Bradbury

scud..... if you can afford it go for the 4k to future proof your … scud..... if you can afford it go for the 4k to future proof your purchase! there is not a great deal of 4k content at the moment but I am sure this will increase rapidly. unless of course you can afford to change your TV in a couple of years and if you can go for the cheaper!!!!



pjhukd

I was impressed viewing the OLED Tvs in John Lewis, but if you are … I was impressed viewing the OLED Tvs in John Lewis, but if you are investing this kind of money in a TV you need to stretch to 4k. I had to buy a new TV earlier this year because my old one broke down. Settled on a 49" refurbished sony 4k @ £329. I can really notice a big difference between 1080p and 4k feeds, stunning picture. Not an entry level and no hdr, but I think UHD has a few years to evolve with 8k hdr becoming the normal. I will live with the limitations of my current tv, and buy an expensive model in a few years time



I would have to disagree with the both of you on this one. Standard 4K is not really future-proofing (if anything, it's doing the opposite). I believe that standard 4K is a redundant and soon to be dead format, limited to a few streaming options. Remember when High Definition TVs came out and consumers could either buy a 720p or 1080i/1080p model? Standard 4K is the modern day equivalent of 720p. To properly future proof, you'd need to buy a TV with the "Ultra HD Premium" sticker (which includes HDR). Given the level of manufacturer and studio support (Link), there will be a huge drive to increase the level of 4K-HDR content, phasing out the (already limited) standard 4K content. Seeing as Ultra HD Premium TVs are mega expensive (plus it'd be advisable to also buy an Ultra HD Blu-Ray player as well), if consumers cannot afford them then I would rather get the best 1080p TV (i.e. this one) that money can buy.

Having seen OLED, the picture quality of an OLED 1080p is better than the picture quality of an average (non-OLED) 4K - in my opinion.

Now before I get shot down for this, there is more to picture quality than just resolution alone. The retailers have fooled the public into thinking more pixels = better image, and people have fallen for it, buying mediocre/cheap 4K sets. My AV obsessed friend has two LG TVs side-by-side in his living room; one 65" at 1080p and the other 55" at standard 4K. In real world scenarios (once you factor in room size and sitting distance), I could not notice a difference between the two images (one showing 1080p, the other showing a 4K stream of the same show from Netflix). Both were just as sharp from where I was sitting. I actually preferred the 1080p image, as it was marginally bigger. Now I acknowledge that 4K is technically sharper but from me to have benefited from the increased resolution, I would've had to have sat significantly closer to notice any difference.

I've spoken to several home cinema installers and they all say the same thing. Standard 4K is a waste of time and money with a limited shelf life. Either get a decent 1080p set (like this one) or go big (if you've ££££ to spare) with Ultra HD Premium.

This is why the OP gets a huge HEAT from me. Cracking find.
Paul Bradbury

scud..... if you can afford it go for the 4k to future proof your … scud..... if you can afford it go for the 4k to future proof your purchase! there is not a great deal of 4k content at the moment but I am sure this will increase rapidly. unless of course you can afford to change your TV in a couple of years and if you can go for the cheaper!!!!

pjhukd

I was impressed viewing the OLED Tvs in John Lewis, but if you are … I was impressed viewing the OLED Tvs in John Lewis, but if you are investing this kind of money in a TV you need to stretch to 4k. I had to buy a new TV earlier this year because my old one broke down. Settled on a 49" refurbished sony 4k @ £329. I can really notice a big difference between 1080p and 4k feeds, stunning picture. Not an entry level and no hdr, but I think UHD has a few years to evolve with 8k hdr becoming the normal. I will live with the limitations of my current tv, and buy an expensive model in a few years time


You do realise that a set doesn't have to have the UHD Premium label to have HDR? Many 2015 and 2016 sets support HDR without having the UHD Premium logo. Also some manufacturers, e.g. Sony, don't want to support the UHD Premium initiative so none of their sets will be labelled UHD Premium despite their top of the range sets, e.g. 75xd9405, being some of the best around.

If future proofing is a concern then having Dolby Vision support would be my main concern. There are two different types of HDR - HDR 10 and Dolby Vision. HDR 10 is the standard HDR and is included on all HDR TV sets and HDR UHD blurays. Dolby Vision can be regarded as a premium optional extra. At the moment the only DV enabled TVs are made by LG. The first DV enabled content comes from streaming services. There is an interesting comparison of DV and HDR-10 here:
hdtvtest.co.uk/new…htm
GadgetHunter

You do realise that a set doesn't have to have the UHD Premium label to … You do realise that a set doesn't have to have the UHD Premium label to have HDR? Many 2015 and 2016 sets support HDR without having the UHD Premium logo. Also some manufacturers, e.g. Sony, don't want to support the UHD Premium initiative so none of their sets will be labelled UHD Premium despite their top of the range sets, e.g. 75xd9405, being some of the best around.If future proofing is a concern then having Dolby Vision support would be my main concern. There are two different types of HDR - HDR 10 and Dolby Vision. HDR 10 is the standard HDR and is included on all HDR TV sets and HDR UHD blurays. Dolby Vision can be regarded as a premium optional extra. At the moment the only DV enabled TVs are made by LG. The first DV enabled content comes from streaming services. There is an interesting comparison of DV and HDR-10 here:http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/dolby-hdr-201606214303.htm



I have read your post. Taken time to decipher it. And agree with everything that you've just said. I did notice pre-Ultra HD Premium sets released last year with HDR.

The Dolby Vision / LG partnership is interesting. Once you get a moment, take a listen to this interview:
https://www.avforums.com/threads/avforums-podcast-13th-june-2016.2034507/

From Stephen Auld (from Dolby UK), who talks about Dolby Vision and future plans. After listening to the interview, we may have a while to wait...

Anyway, going off topic here! My main point was that I don't think it is worth shelling out extra for a bog-standard 4K, considering the marginal benefits. If money were no object, I would love the latest LG E-series but at £5,000 for the 65"... think I'll wait...
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text