Yet another "help me choose a monitor" thread (but with a twist)

M

Matija

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 5, 2008
Messages
244
Hello everyone, after lurking here for some months now, I've finally decided to register :)

At the moment I'm using an old 19" CRT that lost its flair. Upping the contrast makes colours reasonable, but everything blurs to hell. No matter what I do, dark shades of gray cannot be displayed. The monitor, while good for general type of work, doesn't cut it anymore, especially not since I recently bought a DSLR and am doing some very amateurish photo editing. Nothing fancy, nothing to go in print.

So, I need a new monitor.

Things I should mention:

* I'm using this CRT at 1280x960, wouldn't like to go lower regarding pixel pitch
* Can't find decent CRTs in good shape
* I'm from Croatia, and monitor choices are very slim here, plus everything is expensive
* TN doesn't bother me much (shock, horror)
* PVA is out, kills my eyes
* IPS isn't widespread
* I don't have a calibrator, nor know anyone who has one, nor the money to buy one
* Not a gamer
* Need the display to be very, very dim in the evening; VERY dim

That's a short summary :)

Regarding the first point above, I did some simple calculations and found out that a 24" LCD at 1920x1200 will have slightly smaller pixel sizes than what I'm currently using. I could probably live with it, though a 26" (25.5", actually) would be equal to my CRT.

I'd probably be happiest with another CRT, but I can't find any good ones. My next choice would hence be an IPS monitor, but like I said, there isn't much of a choice. No Hazros, no Planars, no DoubleSights, no NEC 2490... I can only get a super-expensive and "small" 23" Apple Cinema Display, or the new HP 2475... Which brings me to my next problem: I'd very likely have issues with wide gamut.

I've narrowed down my choices to the following (prices in US$ for easier comparison, since most people here seem to be from the States):

HP LP2475W: $1020
Pros: H-IPS
Cons: wide gamut, smaller pixels than on my CRT

Benq V2400W: $700
Pros: fairly accurate colours by default
Cons: TN, smaller pixels than on my CRT

Samsung 2963HM: $920
Pros: 26", equal pixels to my CRT
Cons: TN, almost as expensive as the HP

Samsung T260: $900
Pros: 26" (as above), looks pretty
Cons: TN, almost as expensive as the HP

And yeah, the US$ prices above are accurate, it's not a mistake. The NEC 2690 would cost $2000 ;)

To be honest, I'm leaning towards the 2475, but I'm not sure if the cons will outweigh the fact that it's the only readily-available S-IPS of decent size here. If it wasn't wide gamut, I'd jump right on it, but I have a feeling wide gamut would drive me crazy. I usually like my colours muted, not vibrant.

Now, I did say that TN doesn't bother me much, but it still does. I've never worked on a TN that's so big, so I'm guessing that the vertical shift would be more pronounced than on smaller monitors. If I'm spending ~$1000 on a new display, then I'd like it to be at least close to my CRT back in its old days of glory, and not unable to display a solid colour without a gradient...

Any ideas about what to do? Things would probably be a bit easier if I could stand PVA, but I can't.
 
Yeah, let's twist again, like we did last summer... Oh, wait. Um...

Standard dot pitch for 24" is 0.27, which isn't bad. It looks better, and you change the DPI setting if there are reading issues (why do you want a *higher* dot pitch?). You're right though, a CRT sounds best - I suppose a Trinitron is too much to hope for? Otherwise, the HP sounds best unless you have a compelling reason to avoid the 0.27 dp.
 
Changing the DPI brings no good. I don't mind large pixels and everything large, especially since I can't use ClearType (like PVA, I can't stand it). I wouldn't even mind a 30" with 1920x1200, if such a thing existed :)

I went to have a look at four used CRTs (a couple of Mitsubishis, a Sony, and a Philips), and wasn't happy with any of them... So it probably has to be an LCD.
 
30" is usually the changeover to the next higher resolution. Except, HDTV screens will have lower dot pitch since they tend to stay at 1080p for HD resolution standards. The problem there is I think most of those are PVA.

It sounds like you're stuck choosing among the TN panels.
 
HP and BenQ would be my choices for you.

BenQ has good, accurate colors and the TN viewing angles are not as bad as some competitors. I tested it vs. the 2493HM and I kept the BenQ and returned the Samsung for various reasons including accuracy of color without calibration.
 
BenQ G2400W(D) if you want to save some money :)
HP LP2475w is also a good choice, personally I'd favour the HP over BenQ, but I think you will be happy with either of them.
 
I would go with the Benq espcially if you also want control to go very Dim.

Bear in mind that most LCDs on Zero brightness are brighter than most CRTs on Maximum.

The Benq has the backlight control that goes the lowest and would go the dimmest without resorting to panel blocking which lowers contrast. I have to resort to this time to time on my NEC.

Also you might look into G2200W for bigger pixels smaller/cheaper panel that is otherwise similar if you really need bigger pixels.
 
There's no G2400WD here, just the WA model (the older one).

Like I said, I'd jump on the HP immediately if it was plain ol' sRGB, but... And there's no way I can try it and return it for a refund if I'm not happy. Hell, it's likely that I even can't see it in action - it's carried by one store only (the last time I was there, they had zero displays attached to a computer).

The V2400W could be a good option, since I've read that it can be very dim. I like that in the evenings and when using text editors; my CRT is currently very dim, but if I have to stare at something white for a long time, I make it even dimmer, so white becomes dark gray :) I guess I should go see it in person...

Why did you have to be wide gamut, oh HP, why???

I envy you people. I have to pay 2-3 times as much money as you do, for a smaller selection of LCDs, and the only calibrators I've found were Spyders (the "medium" one is close to $500). *sniff, sob*
 
Heh, your situation is almost identical to mine. I'm running a 19" Dell P992 Trinitron at 1280x960 as well that's clearly about to die, and I'm considering many of the same options that you are.

I've been thinking about this for a while, and have pretty much decided that I'm going to have to buy a TN. I'd be happy to shell out the cash for a good IPS monitor if I could find one, but all of the currently available ones have issues (wide gamut, insane brightness, or the high price and input lag of the NEC 2490).

If my CRT were to die right this moment, I'd probably order a BenQ V2400W (the G2400WD has become very hard to find here all of a sudden, and it isn't much more expensive). Like you, I'm not sure how I'll feel about the vertical viewing angles on a 24" TN but I guess I'll be finding out soon. It seems to have a pretty good reputation around here for a TN and is sRGB with low brightness, which is a major advantage over all of the other considerations in my opinion.

My requirements may be a little different from yours though, as I don't do any photo editing. I'd mostly be getting this for gaming and general desktop usage (web browsing and programming, two things that it should infinitely better than a CRT for at least).

Good luck finding a monitor you like. I've been searching for something decent for well over two years now, and still have yet to find anything that can match any of the good CRTs I've used back in the "days of glory", so you should probably be prepared to compromise a little if you're used to a high end CRT.
 
So I guess we will both be looking at the V2400W :) If you buy yours before I buy mine, let me know :)

BTW, my CRT started squeaking this morning. It's probably telling me "it's time to let me retire"...
 
I've had some make odd noises, but never anything I'd describe as squeaking other than from friction when adjusting the plastic base...
 
Sounds like you really want a CRT. So why not get one of the best monitors ever made, the Sony GDM-FW900/HP A7217A. Hopefully you live in the U.S. because here's all the craigslist posting. I'm sure there's one close to you and if it's not, it wont cost that much for shipping ($100 the most). You'll end up saving a lot of money and getting what you want.

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=952788

This thing's a beast.

http://sfbay.craigslist.org/search/sss?query=Sony%20GDM-FW900

http://miami.craigslist.org/mdc/ele/824329927.html

http://omaha.craigslist.org/sys/811424006.html

http://detroit.craigslist.org/search/sss?query=SONY%20GDM-%20FW900

http://nh.craigslist.org/search/sss?query=SONY%20GDM-%20FW900

http://houston.craigslist.org/sys/796214564.html

http://providence.craigslist.org/sys/786722016.html



http://cgi.ebay.com/24-GDM-FW900-Sony-Trinitron-Flat-Screen-Monitor-WOW_W0QQitemZ120302160893QQihZ002QQcategoryZ116347QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
 
As an eBay Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
I'd give my firstborn for a FW900, but I think my girlfriend might object to it ;)

My paycheck should arrive next week, so I'll go take a look at the V2400W. The more I read about it, the more I think it's going to be a good choice. Yeah, it's a TN, but my photo editing is very amateurish, nowhere near pro levels that would require perfect colour accuracy and viewing angles :)
 
* I'm from Croatia, and monitor choices are very slim here, plus everything is expensive
Click to expand...

NVM. That one got past me.

Well if anyone else is looking for a Sony GDM-FW900 then there you go.
 
Matija said:
am doing some very amateurish photo editing
Click to expand...

How funny and how sad it is to read about professional/non-professional, amateurish/non-amateurish "photo editing".

Do you buy food for cooking or for eating?
As a professional cook, you buy fresh bananas.
But as you are not a professional cook, rotten bananas are right for you!

Who cares about pro photo editing in this consumers' forum?

Yeah, it's a TN, but my photo editing is very amateurish, nowhere near pro levels that would require perfect colour accuracy and viewing angles
Click to expand...
Wonderful!
Another "scientific council" started with IPS and Apple and passed it's last fart with the conclusion that rotten bananas are acceptable for non-professional cooking.:)

What about non-professional eating?

Hey, whome are you going to persuade here? Yourself?
"Pro level" does not require anything.
Your eyes require everything.

The only reason for buying a TN has been BUDGET (and availability if you are from Africa).
Generally, if you want the best picture on your screen - you get IPS regardless who you are: a student, a pilot, an artist, a garbage truck driver.
VA is a mid-level.
TN is the bottom - whatever mumbling about "non-professional photo editing BS" you can read here.

Apple 23" is the best solution from what is accessible for you.
2475 is promising, but likely to suffer from wide gamut. How bad it is - we still don't know. Wait for more info.
Don't skip VA. Sure, they cannot compete IPS in photo quality, but they are still way above TN. Remember, latest TN also may have WG, so that will be the worst combination you can get.
 
I like my bananas green and I like other people's VAs far away from my eyes ;)

By the way, the 23" Cinema Display costs $1500 in this country. Send half that amount over, and I'll go buy it :)
 
IPS is the best technology IMO, but I don't agree with people who slag TN panels. Mostly it is lack of knowledge and faulty assumptions (color sucks because it is 6bit). Or plain old fashion elitism.

A good quality TN panel is fine for most people and that is why they have taken over the market. TNs have the best response and least lag of any technology. The have among the sharpest clearest text as well. Horizontal viewing angles are second only to IPS and the have the best price.

The downsides are how they create 16million colors (they use 6bit native + FRC time domain dithering) which in the end delivers practically the same result. So this is largely a myth at this point.

The real downside is the vertical viewing angle shifts can be annoying at times. That is really about it. I consider VA panels a step up in price for just a different set of tradeoffs. VAs have more horizontal viewing angle shift, responds slower, have more lag and cost more money. Not worth it IMO. If you want to spend more money for more quality go IPS to really go all the way, otherwise TN is fine.

As far as color. I compared my expensive NEC 2490 with 12bit LUT internally calibrated IPS panel to my uncalibrated cheap TN panel and they were essentially identical.

http://www.hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1032929442&postcount=4
 
Thanks for the link :) The yellow has a slight green tint on that TN and weaker reds, though, I can tell even with my poor CRT ;)

I think I'll be happy with the BenQ.
 
albovin said:
How funny and how sad it is to read about professional/non-professional, amateurish/non-amateurish "photo editing".

Do you buy food for cooking or for eating?
As a professional cook, you buy fresh bananas.
But as you are not a professional cook, rotten bananas are right for you!

Who cares about pro photo editing in this consumers' forum?
Click to expand...

As a professional photog, someone buys a $10,000+ camera and regularly spends $1,000+ for lenses. Does this mean we all should throw out our cheaper models?

Bad analogy.
 
ashmedai said:
As a professional photog, someone buys a $10,000+ camera and regularly spends $1,000+ for lenses. Does this mean we all should throw out our cheaper models?

Bad analogy.
Click to expand...

You are out of topic. You read upright down.
Nobody is talking about pro fotog in this households forum.
What I am saying: skip pro/non-pro blah-blah when you go to the local grocery store to buy a monitor. Just buy it. This sort of shopping requires neither scientific explanations nor new threads in forums.

Good food is not for cooks. It's for eaters.
Good monitors are not for professional photo editors. They are for consumers.
Good cars are not for professional drivers. They are for regular people.
Make more sense?
 
From "Monitortest.blogspot.com" comes a quote:

General Image Quality

A special note: there will be quite a bit of photo and video images of the Dell 2408 in this review.
All those images are not intended to represent the monitor picture quality in regard to brightness, contrast, color accuracy, sharpness or color tone.
Trying to get a perfect photo of something on a monitor screen IMO is useless, as it never comes close enough to what is actually seen unless the photographer is a good professional. For a monitor review it’s just wasting time.
Pictures provided here are to show disproportions - things that are clearly seen in comparison and/or something obvious – like a distorted screen format.

This is your review and your words. We have all agreed that a camera will always highly amplify visual anomalies and characteristics of monitors.

There are days when you are very good at making a point succinctly and quickly.

This is perhaps not one of them.


albovin said:
I hope so.

BenQ V2400W (the original image is on the R)
Just TN
Click to expand...
 
My BenQ V2400W arrived just two days ago, and so far I love it. IMO the picture on this thing is identical to my CRT, though not quite as detailed when sharking around for details. It looked great out of the box, though it was set far too bright for my liking. I noticed some minute colour banding with the high brightness, but some minor tweaks have fixed that. I also notice ghosting in my sports videogames, but otherwise it's fine. There is supposedly some input lag, but I haven't noticed any.

With my laptop and my 360 I've had virtually no problems. My only complaints are as follows:

1) The buttons are touch sensitive, not tactile.
2) Occasionally when I turn the monitor on, it shows horrid amounts of lag and image tearing. Turning it off and on again fixes the problem.
3) The stand isn't great. The monitor won't swivel or turn (only tilt up/down), and if you go very heavy on your keyboard you'll notice that the monitor starts to wobble.

I got mine for ~ $400CAD (plus shipping and taxes, came upto $486), so $700 sounds like a bit of a rip-off IMHO.
 
albovin said:
What I am saying: skip pro/non-pro blah-blah when you go to the local grocery store to buy a monitor. Just buy it. This sort of shopping requires neither scientific explanations nor new threads in forums.
Click to expand...
Actually, it does. I've mentioned my very amateurish photo editing, as well as the inability to obtain a calibrator, because it implies that I need a monitor with decently accurate colours out of the box instead of something that averages a dE of 10 uncalibrated (but 0.5 dE calibrated).

I'll repeat once again: I don't have many choices. You have a 2490 and can choose between NEC, Planar, DoubleSight and Apple, with an Eye-One to calibrate them? More power to you! Unfortunately, I don't and I can't. If you want me to buy the 23" Apple, please send the money over. The monitor costs more than I earn in a month, and adding a calibrator into the mix gets very close to not one, but two paychecks.

Get off your high horse, please, and take your anti-TN crusade somewhere else.


noobman said:
I got mine for ~ $400CAD (plus shipping and taxes, came upto $486), so $700 sounds like a bit of a rip-off IMHO.
Click to expand...
Yeah, we're a small market and people don't have much cash to spend, so imports are small in quantity and prices thus go up :)
 
10e said:
From "Monitortest.blogspot.com" comes a quote:

Pictures provided here are to show disproportions - things that are clearly seen in comparison and/or something obvious – like a distorted screen format.

This is your review and your words. We have all agreed that a camera will always highly amplify visual anomalies and characteristics of monitors.
Click to expand...

LOL!
Literally: "things that are clearly seen in comparison and/or something obvious – like a distorted screen format" ... I can continue ... colorshifting, glow, poor viewing angles, backlight uniformity issues, etc.

These photos clearly show image reproduction defects.
BenQ V2400W (the original image is on the R)
Just TN

There are days when you are very good at making a point succinctly and quickly.
This is perhaps not one of them
Click to expand...
:) Surely you need to check calendars more carefully.
 
No Albovin, you are fooling yourself to think that the person WHO CREATED the original image can be so easily swayed. Remember where this image came from please.

Out of a number of images in my V2400W review you chose one, added a "so-called reference" image next to it, and peddled/pimped it as a prime example of TN viewing angles and vertical color shift (which it is not).

This cannot be a reference image because there is no TRUE monitor next to the V2400W, just a GIF/JPG that has been re-sized. I have already said that this shot was not accurate in regards to color/contrast, and was only used for understanding WHAT aspect ratio scaling was supposed to look like.

In each shot you have provided additionally you HAVE A TRUE reference monitor sitting next to it, in the same room, under the same lighting conditions, except for the BLB shot, which needs no real reference. Or does it?

Instead of coming into a thread and passing off your "information" as being the word of God's bananas while you look down your banana at everyone else, maybe you can pull back the very fruity shenanigans and provide useful information to someone who has very specifically stated his/her need(s) and a twist, not of lemon :)



albovin said:
LOL!
Literally: "things that are clearly seen in comparison and/or something obvious – like a distorted screen format" ... I can continue ... colorshifting, glow, poor viewing angles, backlight uniformity issues, etc.

These photos clearly show image reproduction defects.
BenQ V2400W (the original image is on the R)
Just TN


:) Surely you need to check calendars more carefully.
Click to expand...
 
1) It can go very dim. As listed in www.prad.de review of the V2400W:

"The maximum achievable brightness is 248 cd/m² and therefore just misses out on the manufacturer’s indication of 250 cd/m². The minimum brightness of the monitor is an incredible 16 cd/m²."

The following matches what I wrote in my review (again here from Prad):

"If the brightness is set to zero and the contrast left at 50, it is still possible to achieve brightness of 92 cd/m², which should leave nothing to be desired. By reducing the "Contrast" setting to zero, it really is possible to achieve brightness of just 16 cd/m²."

The best part is that because the backlight is naturally lower than others, the 90 cdm/2 white can be reached without causing excessive flickering, which I have tested on my own with 120 volts electricity of Canada, not 220/240v of Europe.

2) Text is very sharp. In fact sharper than an Apple Cinema display, which still has that horrible, grainy anti-glare coating which looks like someone emptied a vacuum on it. The BenQ does not suffer from this.

3) Colors are good without calibration. You have mentioned that TN doesn't bother you so we won't go into that here :)

If you were to ask me which display I would buy with my needs, I would lean towards the HP as well, but because your needs are what they are, I fully recommend the V2400W to you.
 
10e,
Just don't waste your and our time to find references for TN images.
Everyone knows what TN is and what it is for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top