Printable View
Seems no one can get it completely right. This viewsonic one mentions nothing of displayport.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blacky
As well, I worry about TN on a panel that large. In a eyefinity config, the colors would probably get all washed or inverted.
What I want is a modern thin-bezel 24" CRT with digital input :D
ive had the same 26" IPS since early 2006 i think, paid 750 for it then, and im very glad this technology didnt drop to 100$ by now. makes me feel like i got a good investment
i also found out the colors on this monitor demolish my tv's, it just seems so pale on the tv and i dont know if i can adjust it to make them near the same
maybe on portrait mode, but not necessarily on landscape, however most of TN panel's their mount doesn't offers that flexibility to be able to run portrait mode, about display port I don't know by at this state most of companies are not including the DP feature, maybe because most of video cards with the exception of ATi 5xxx series which came few months ago doesn't have established that as a must have yet, or the majority of the people doesn't have a card with it, I could be wrong, I'm not sure if adding DP could bump up the display price, another observation is that the ones that currently posses this displays is high-end IPS panels for the most except Dell P2310H which is the cheapest TN panel and prolly the only with DP! and as you know all the current displays with DP (including ATi 5xxx) are obsolete by now, since now DP has announced rev1.2Quote:
Originally Posted by Rock&Roll
Yeah but it has to be larger than 24" to be a real upgrade. Don't plan on changing the monitor right now either. I got to get a new graphics card first and then get water cooling parts. So it will be some time until I change it but I really like the idea of 120Hz LCD's and I think the tech will be just right by the time I get one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blacky
I think with the new DP specs, we should see 2560x1600 @120hz in about a year or two! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Katanai
first affordable 16:10 E-IPS display without overdrive-crap is going to replace my old TN panel
my PVA display was a PITA for me due to the crappy black/white text quality and current IPS are not fast enough for gaming :(
I think every LCD monitor I've ever had, has had 800:1 static, never seen any LCD monitor with any other static contrast.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
I have no idea how this stuff works, but I always go for monitors with a good dynamic contrast (thats 20k+) since, after my experience, the colors are WAY better than monitors with lower dynamic contrast.
I'm sitting with a BenQ G2410D (40K) and a Samsung Syncmaster 206bw (3K), and there is a very clear difference in color quality. Whether this in reality is actually the dynamic contrast I don't know, but it's the only difference I can find (apart from 1 monitor being 24" and the other 21").
Eagerly waiting for the reviews. I might be in the market for that 24 inch monitor.
my understanding is that dynamic contrast is set by taking the static contrast, then multiplying it by how much darker and brighter the backlight can dim/glow when you turn on dynamic lighting. so if you have 1000:1 and your backlight can be 100x brighter than its darkest setting, you have a dynamic contrast of 100,000:1 this does not mean that one pixed on the screen can be 100,000x brighter than another in the same frame, but within a few frames yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by koksy
i actually hate having dynamic set on since its unrealistic i think. the movie will get darker all the sudden, and i cant see crap because black compressions are too pathetic in anything but a blueray.
does anyone enjoy watching tv with dynamic settings on?
I'm not sure whether I've ever HAD dynamic settings on, but as far as my experience goes the higher dynamic contrast the better color quality. Now I'd just like to hear something from someone that actually knows something about monitors.
16:10 is non native for video which 99% use today and it's the same for working actually or worse because humans naturally look left and right instead of up and down so more wider is always better for visual perception . There is no 16:10 use outside of these of these monitors, at least it's not 4:3Quote:
Originally Posted by gongo
at least it's something but still no hdmi to connect to lcdtv nativellyQuote:
Originally Posted by Rock&Roll
an hdmi to dvi cable should be able to connect to it without any problems right? ive hooked up my ps3 to monitors all the time before i got my hdtv
5ms IPS panel is definitely an e-IPS panel.
Nice to see LG.Philips stretching the huge gap there was between TN and IPS panels, but nothing to do with a good H-IPS panel from NEC or Eizo (although it's true that is more than twice the price).
Yes,video wise DVI and HDMI are basically the same,the only downside is that you can't pass audio trough and you loose some certifications if I remember correctly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
I'm quite sure neither Nec nor Eizo actually produce any panels. In fact i know that at least some of the cheaper NECs use LG panelsQuote:
Originally Posted by jfromeo
24" 16:10 IPS with good response. I'll take 3. It's a pity it's not 120hz with LED-backlight.
True, infact only Hitachi, LG and Philips produce all the IPS based panels themselves (and Panasonic for LCD TVs).Quote:
Originally Posted by BrowncoatGR
But it's on the electronic part where Eizo and NEC makes the difference. A monitor isn't only the panel, it's the correction sensors, internal luts, electrode plane layout, true polarizers...
If not nobody in his right mind would pay, say, >$900 for a NEC LCD2490WUXi2 when you could a get an HP LP2475W for <$500 which mounts exactly the same panel -on newer revisions- (H-IPS), and has exactly the same specs.
That starts to look promising. I just wish it was an IPS based panel with a 1920x1200 resolution. I guess I can't have everything I wish for, yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blacky
Oooh a new 24" 16:10 IPS at last. Been looking for a 1920x1200 for ages, hopefully these screens end up being a decent price in NZ
thinking 16:9 is an improvement over 16:10=Big Fail. No HDMI or displayport, whopdeefeendoo. They are both in TN trash price range so I think most people can deal even if they really didn't have it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tech Dav
I see you meant display by panel earlier :p: I fully agree with the above, though imo HP has quite decent electronics but not on par with NEC ofcourse.Quote:
Originally Posted by jfromeo
Forum running REALLY SLOW :( - sorry for Double Post!
Could be any: IPS, S-IPS, H-IPS, P-MVA or S-PVA... Don't know any HP model with E-IPS, but all HP models with one the above panel you see have: 178° for viewing angles at details.Quote:
Originally Posted by EnJoY
Among all brands I tried, HP is my favorite when it comes to LCD monitors. They have "some models" with a solid construction, good color reproduction and it's not just the panels, cause even other branded use similar panels yet don't look that Good (Dell is the 1'st the comes in my mind). I could even compared HP with Nec or Eizo at a more affordable price. If you add a good calorimeter to this equation, you have yourself a monitor good for a professional environment which is also good for video content and decent for games.
Was expecting some 120 Hz models for 2012 and few emerged but all of them use crappy TN panels, which i.m.h.o. it's very important for an LCD (panels type).
LE: I checked, both ZR22w and ZR24w use H-IPS panel.
2012? I want some 120 Hz models right now and preferably with a proper IPS based panel and pretty much no input lag. Or your '2012' was a typo, which wouldn't surprise me.Quote:
Originally Posted by XSAlliN
2010 :), yet 3 of them (all with TN panel) launched in 2009. Don't think they'll release IPS Monitors with 120 Hz RR, yet we might see more LCD's like Hitachi TVUT47-XP800.Quote:
Originally Posted by Helmore