DescentBB

Been holding off upgrading my 2 19\" Samsung LCD monitors, and saving my pennies. With all the sales going coming up, I'll be targeting 2 new monitors, hopefully 25\" or so. Most monitors I see are the widescreens, but I think I'd like to stay with a 16:10 if possible. I looked into this about a year ago, but
these
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6824001281
are no longer available.

Anyone have any recommendations?
I'll use the monitors for mostly office work and flight sims (and some RTS games).

Thanks!

16:10 seems to be on its way out, probably because you can reach the same diagonal on a smaller and cheaper panel with 16:9. A quick newegg search still turns up a few though:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6824236047

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6824001371

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6824254036

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6824254052

Aren't too far off the mark. One note: I've picked up 4 or 5 Hanns-G monitors for people and they do work well so far, not one dead pixel yet. However they still have a general \"cheap\" feel about them, the stands are clunky with pretty limited adjustments and the controls/OSD aren't much to write home about either.

I like the Samsung
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6824001371

I sure would like to see more 16:10 monitors. Everything I see is 1080 (16:9) though.
It's pretty much just the viewing area that is affected by 16:9, right?

would there be any reason NOT to get a 16:10 monitor?

Price, that's about it that I could think of.

ReadyMan wrote:would there be any reason NOT to get a 16:10 monitor?

None other than price, the only other reason I could even think of going for a smaller screen would be grabbing one of those 120 Hz refresh rate LCDs because they are all only smaller 1680x1050 screens so far (which is still 16:10 anyway). Who knows how long it will be before someone makes a 1920x1200 @ 120 Hz screen, I'm not holding my breath for one at any rate.

Found the same monitor (as far as I can tell) on Amazon which gives free shipping.




anyone see anything wrong with this monitor? (or have any suggestions?)

I keep seeing references to TN monitors, but I dont know what that is...or if this one is even a \"TN\".

http://www.pchardwarehelp.com/guides/lc ... -types.php

Pretty much everything on the market is TN (Twisted Nematic) these days, other LCD types are extremely rare because they are more expensive.

Was just thinking that perhaps instead of buying 2 $400 monitors, 1 large $800 might be the key (I have 2 19\" samsung LCDs here, which could be used as a second monitor).
Any opinions on this?
Any BIG monitors that anyone recommends and would do well with flight sims?

Am trying to research as many as monitors as possible.
This one seems to really stand out:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6824176177

It's a 30\" with 2560 x 1600 (that's 16:10, right?) and 7ms (not sure what to make of this, as many claim to be 2ms or 5ms, but I seem to recall that there is no standard testing for this...would hate to have ghosting...

Got this one. Paid 900, happy as a clam.

Nice!
I cant find a 30\", or anything smaller for $800 (my max atm), with a 16:10 ratio.
Looks like it's back to the 24\"...

I sure like using 2 monitors, so perhaps a 30\" and a 19\" would be irritating.

I did find a 24\" S-IPS hp monitor for $399 though:



Grendel, are you only using 1 monitor? Any input on going from 2 small to 1 large monitor?

One. Never used two so I don't really have any input for that. I picked the U2711 because of photography, needed more res than the puny 1920x1200 and a better color space. The U2711 plays D3 & videos just fine BTW.

I'm running into an issue where shipping is a problem. Many companies wont ship a large monitor to Hawaii, and the ones that do, want $125 or more....
I might have to go with a cheaper 24\" that can be sent to a local store like bestbuy.
I had my hopes up for one of those S-IPS monitors...seems they blow away all TN type models.

Question:
are all HDTVs 16:9 ?

I believe so, yes.

Well, I've researched and read all about the available 24\" monitors, and the HP LP2475w 24\" IPS Widescreen seems to be the best bang for the buck.



It's got an updated model, the HP ZR24w 24\" S-IPS, for $100 cheaper, but the reviews are actually better from the 2475.
Amazon ships the 2475 for free, and wants $125 to ship the ZR24.

FWIW, IPS seems to be the way to go...

If I cant gather enough clams for the 30\", this monitor seems to be the best choice.

What do you intend on using your monitors for?

I do alot of graphics where I work, and I've been very content with my Samsung (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... er%20p2350). It's extremely sharp. Like a week after I bought this model, the 24\" with HDMI went on sale @ Tiger Direct for the same price.

If you're not a diehard graphic artist, don't waste your money.

Just ignore him.

Just like with TVs, manufacturers keep changing the screen finish. For my money, I would never EVER again buy a monitor that doesn't have a flat-type satin'y finish. Compared to that one aspect, nothing else even comes close. I don't care what kind of spec it has otherwise... any glossy monitor completely sucks from my perspective.

Thenior wrote:What do you intend on using your monitors for?

I do alot of graphics where I work, and I've been very content with my Samsung (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... er%20p2350). It's extremely sharp. Like a week after I bought this model, the 24" with HDMI went on sale @ Tiger Direct for the same price.

If you're not a diehard graphic artist, don't waste your money.

I'll use the monitors for mostly office work and flight sims (and some RTS games).

I'm not going to do any graphics work. However, I need/want a 1920 x 1200 ratio or 16:10 for the desktop space.
The monitor you linked is a 1920 x 1080...
I do wonder if I'm going a bit overboard with the IPS monitor, as a regular TN panel can be had for $130 cheaper...(like the LA2405wg from HP, or the SAMSUNG 2443BWT-1).
But the IPS monitors apparently are quite outstanding with color and depth...many reviewers state that once you have one, you wont be able to go back to a TN.

I havent seen one, so I'm going off the reviewers comments (and I've read A LOT of them).

One can adapt pretty quickly to a TN panel, I have two monitors: One is a 19\" CRT, the other is a 20\" (4:3) TN LCD. The LCD looks perfectly fine as long as I avoid solid colors. I wouldn't use a TN panel for graphics work though for the same reason that I avoid solid color backgrounds. The vertical viewing angle on a TN panel is simply not acceptable for graphics work. The gradient between the top and bottom is plainly visible on virtually any solid color and the larger the screen or the closer you sit to the screen the worse the effect is.

ReadyMan wrote:But the IPS monitors apparently are quite outstanding with color and depth...many reviewers state that once you have one, you wont be able to go back to a TN.

I would agree w/ that statement.

Krom wrote:One can adapt pretty quickly to a TN panel, I have two monitors: One is a 19" CRT, the other is a 20" (4:3) TN LCD. The LCD looks perfectly fine as long as I avoid solid colors. I wouldn't use a TN panel for graphics work though for the same reason that I avoid solid color backgrounds. The vertical viewing angle on a TN panel is simply not acceptable for graphics work. The gradient between the top and bottom is plainly visible on virtually any solid color and the larger the screen or the closer you sit to the screen the worse the effect is.

Krom, what exactly do you do for a living? Because you always seem to know everything about technology...

I was discussing this with a friend who was also in the market for a new monitor.
He bought this:



Which says this:

ASUS VW266H features a 25.5-inch 16:10 widescreen display with an 1920x1200 resolution that enables 1080p Full HD playback and beyond.

Can that be right? Can it do 1920x1200, yet be 1080 as well?
Would this be a decent monitor for gaming (It's $200 less than the 24\" I was planning on purchasing.)

1200 is greater than 1080 so yeah it counts as supporting 1080. It just means that there will be black bars on the top and bottom for bluray playback. Granted many films are recorded in 1.85:1 or the even more extreme 2.35:1 these days instead of 1.78:1 (16:9) so there are black bars even on a proper 16:9 screen.

I'm likely not going to use the monitor for bluray, but am interested in another option for a 16:10 monitor.
From what I can find on the net, 24\" and 30\" in is pretty much the only option...and expensive.
Do you think that monitor would be good for pc use/gaming?

Grendel wrote:Got this one. Paid 900, happy as a clam.

Although I won't have an extra $900 to drop on a monitor anytime soon, I took a look at the page, for kicks. It looks like a great screen, though I question the "over a billion colors" claim. Even if it was cabable, the human eye can only distingush a certain number of colors, and I'm reasonably certain it's less than a billion.

These displays that can handle a billion colors generally need it because they have a wider gamut than lesser displays. A wider gamut means that the monitor can have brighter or more extreme colors than something with a smaller gamut. With the wider gamut the 256 individual shades of red, green or blue that are available in 16.7 million color modes (8 bits per channel) could easily become apparent to the human eye. Thus you get 10 bits per channel in panels like that; with 1024 shades each for red, green and blue it is no longer possible for the human eye to perceive the differences between each individual level.

I see.... so it's simply a matter that although the brain can't distinguish individual colors, it makes it easy to get in between colors, much like the resolution of an image of a circle can show if the circle appears smooth, or jagged?

Its more like if you put two colors that were only one step away from each other each filling half the screen, say green #200 and then #201 you would be able to see the difference on a 8 bit panel. While on a 10 bit panel the difference between #800 (same brightness as #200 on an 8 bit) and #801 would be imperceptible to even the best human eye. That allows the 10 bit panel to display gradients without any perceptible banding where the 8 bit cannot.

Makes quite a difference if you work w/ 14b/channel pictures

Neat...

Like I said, incredably expensive, and unneeded for my current purposes, but neat

For gaming purposes, do you think the TN monitors are sufficient and the IPS monitors are overkill?

TN panels are generally a hair faster than IPS panels so they actually make better gaming screens, especially the latest 120 Hz refresh ones. The only thing that can reliably beat them at speed/gaming is a high quality CRT.

Well, I decided on the LA2405wg.
I have a question though. It's a 1920x1200 native resolution (16:10) according to the specs at the hp site:

http://h18004.www1.hp.com/products/quic ... 44_na.html


However, I'm going to get it thru Bestbuy.com since I can then return it to their store if it has bad pixels, etc.

But the Best Buy spec sheet says the aspect ratio is 16:9 for some reason.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/HP+-+24%22+ ... 8162690493


That must be a misprint/mistake since it has to be a 16:10 right? Anyone see anything at the BB site that might suggest this is actually a 16:9 monitor?

Thanks!

RM

anyone?

Best buy only gives a damn about the extra warranties they can dump on people.

If HP says its 16:10, its 16:10. Best-Buy says its 16:9 so its sales drones can compare it to 50\" tv's

Do the math…

yeah, that's what I thought.
Just wanted to be sure in case I missed something.
Thanks!

The LA2405wg arrived and it's beautiful!
The colors are so much more vivid on this than on my old samsung syncmaster 931bf.

Great upgrade, and trying to decide how I can get another (using the old 19\" samsung as the 2nd monitor now).

No dead pixels that I can see, but glad that I can just take it to the local Best Buy if I have an issue.

Thanks for all the input!

RM

ahh I'm glad you're not a cheapskate like most ppl :)

Then again, I've never seen a superhero who is <3