Anyone still using CRT's?

[Think]

Found a Sony GDM-FW900 24" 100lb monitor for $350 used. Just wondering if I should jump on this. I still have my old 21" Viewsonic but I have a buyer for $60.00.

If you don't know what it is, it's a wide screen 24" CRT by sony that the mafia use to sink there 'luggage' at the bottom of a lake

Any thoughts?

[zalbard]

It was a dream of mine 7 years ago.
I probably wouldn't get it now, though, LCD monitors beat CRTs by brightness and weight + size these days, this will be VERY noticeable... Only good thing is decent colours (comparing to bad TNs) and slightly better response time.
Also LCDs are better for your eyes for sure, no flickering ftw.
I'd just get a decent new 24" TN monitor for the same price. Or spent some more and got ISP / MVA one.

[Think]

It was a dream of mine 7 years ago.
I probably wouldn't get it now, though, LCD monitors beat CRTs by brightness and weight + size these days, this will be VERY noticeable... Only good thing is decent colours (comparing to bad TNs) and slightly better response time.
Also LCDs are better for your eyes for sure, no flickering ftw.
I'd just get a decent new 24" TN monitor for the same price. Or spent some more and got ISP / MVA one.

I think your right. I can't handle a TN screen after using my NEC 20WMGX for so long but trying to find a good quality IPS screen is very difficult to say the least. I tried the Dell U2410 and was disappointed.

Going to look into the HP LP2475W but read that people have had problems with these as well...color hues, etc.

[Damian^]

CRT's are better IMO....for quake live (or a 120hz monitor FTW)

[[XC] Oj101]

When I saw this thread two things came to mind.

Graphical work
Quake 3

[Think]

When I saw this thread two things came to mind.

Graphical work
Quake 3

Graphical work = Yes
Quake 3 = why not

[[XC] Oj101]

I still use a big old CRT for those two things, an LCD just can't compete yet no matter how good the panel or how well calibrated.

[AndrewZorn]

im sorry, i usually side on "better is better", but i think CRT is pretty dead.

120hz LCDs exist (if it really even improves the quality/success of gaming)
good quality LCD is not sluggish
good quality LCD has good colors
CRT is being left in the dark feature and compatibility wise (as much as i hate HDCP, it does exist)

and the "graphical design" thing...
think of your audience
you can perfect colors all day on an awesome CRT
but when a majority of your audience does not have an awesome CRT, what is the point?

i wont even get into convenience, power savings, or eye strain
but im sure everyone out there defending CRTs will tell me "what eye strain?"

[Frag Maniac]

The FW900 is a great monitor, and I still use a CRT myself. I had a Viewsonic f220b, but it went out on me recently and I lucked out and found a PC part recycle shop that had a Dell P1230 they swapped for free.

$350 is a bit high for the FW900 though. A while back there was lots of them available via power sellers on eBay for $250 with 2 yrs still left on the warranty. As old as it is now, you'd basically have no warranty, so if anything you should be paying LESS than $250.

Note that the actual viewable size of an FW900 is more like 22.5".

http://cgi.ebay.com/24-SONY-GDM-FW90...item3ca8faf42a

[Think]

All valid points and I've opted not to proceed with the purchase.

Thanks all for you input; it's much appreciated.

[RPGWiZaRD]

I would use a CRT if they still manufactured trinitron/diamondtron CRTs today and would pay reasonably as well (~$350) but I don't want a 24" beast, but a 21" would do fine, such as Dell P1130 for example.

The only 120Hz LCDs that's out so far suck pretty much compared to good IPS options such as 2209WA. Struggling to get used to the excessive BLB on my VX2268wm and hopefully there will be some better quality 120Hz LCDs soon.

[zanzabar]

$350 is steep for a crt as they all should be past their half life if they are used and trinitors are only good for 6 years for what ive had

im sorry, i usually side on "better is better", but i think CRT is pretty dead.

120hz LCDs exist (if it really even improves the quality/success of gaming)
good quality LCD is not sluggish
good quality LCD has good colors
CRT is being left in the dark feature and compatibility wise (as much as i hate HDCP, it does exist)

and the "graphical design" thing...
think of your audience
you can perfect colors all day on an awesome CRT
but when a majority of your audience does not have an awesome CRT, what is the point?

i wont even get into convenience, power savings, or eye strain
but im sure everyone out there defending CRTs will tell me "what eye strain?"

the is one 120hz lcd on the market and its a 22" pos (atleast until affter ces)
lcs are slow and have motion blur or aura artifacts its just how they work with the current models
u need to spend $500+ to get ok colors and u need an ips
HDCP is not needed for anything but blue rays and who watches blue rays without ripping them or buying the $100 software to do it, and if u buy the right software to view them it can force the hdcp requirement flag off


for graphic design, if u dont work on a crt u need to print everything or check it on a crt for ghosting/artifacts for the low color range on anything that is not a 100%+ gambit ips, and 2 if u are doing actual graphic design a crt is the only way to get a balanced color field to ensure that u wont have bad gradients when its printed (unless u buy a $1-2k lcd)

[Frag Maniac]

I would use a CRT if they still manufactured trinitron/diamondtron CRTs today and would pay reasonably as well (~$350) but I don't want a 24" beast, but a 21" would do fine, such as Dell P1130 for example.

The Dell P1230 I have now is not really any bigger than my 21" Viewsonic was. They say it's 22" but it's only about 20" viewable like the f220b.

As for Trinitrons only lasting 6 yrs, says who? I gave a neighbor of mine my 20" Sony Trinitron TV a few yrs ago when it was 16 yrs old and it's still going strong. If anything the monitors are even sturdier. I can tell just by the sound of the degaussing when I switch it on that this Dell with Trinitron is built like a tank compared to my previous Viewsonic.

[lutjens]

The FW900 was the top dog back in the day. However, with the new features and low cost of today's comparably sized flat panels, I wouldn't bother. Not to mention the grotesque weight of that particular monitor...the back injury isn't worth it.

[zanzabar]

all of my trinitrons only go about 6 years then they get color imbalanceing and will drop to blue or red only until u cycle solid colors on them for 2-10mins

[AndrewZorn]

HDCP is not needed for anything but blue rays and who watches blue rays without ripping them or buying the $100 software to do it, and if u buy the right software to view them it can force the hdcp requirement flag off

for graphic design, if u dont work on a crt u need to print everything or check it on a crt for ghosting/artifacts for the low color range on anything that is not a 100%+ gambit ips, and 2 if u are doing actual graphic design a crt is the only way to get a balanced color field to ensure that u wont have bad gradients when its printed (unless u buy a $1-2k lcd)

i had to replace my monitor for one with HDCP because of my PS3. i know it isnt what you were expecting though. "who watches blurays"? how can you argue about small details of displays and not watch high quality video?

the second part again, i just cant really believe. im sure it is done some places, but i cannot imagine everyone in graphic design even thinks about using a CRT. most small independent business type graphic designers are the types to go on and on about how great their mac is, anyway.

why would you need to print something to check for artifacts? that makes no sense. zoom, use software tools. sitting back 3' from a static image is not the only way to check your work (assuming the problem is as bad as you make it out to be, or even exists)

EDIT and now i know what i was trying to remember a moment ago, this old argument came up elsewhere too. same points and pros and cons...

[-n7-]

God no.

I gladly got rid of my CRT many many years ago, back when $500 was a hot deal for a 17" LCD

[zanzabar]

i have a ps3 also but i have a vga box ($20 from xocide when they went out of biz) but computer wise blu ray works on it with the right software even if the hdcp flag is switched (not that ive found one that the ps3 didnt play in 1080 over composite). and like i said u need a high gambit lcd (so expensive ips) and it needs to have a balanced back lite or a crt. for biz use they would most likely have expensive balanced panels

[Skakruk]

My H-IPS HP LP2475w sucks arse. Every time I lay eyes on my old Sony G420 or my brothers Mitsubishi 2070SB, I curse myself at having been so stupid as to waste NZD$1200 on that pathetic LCD.

Errr... what I meant to say was; if the FW900 is in good condition, for Christs sake buy it! To this day, I would still kill for one of those displays.

[Behemot]

Pity there is no 24'' 4:3 CRT. I'd go for one immediatelly

Now I feel still very comfortable with my Eizo 21'' CRT.

[SoulsCollective]

I used to have a FW900. Replaced it, never looked back - my eyes feel much better, the colours are just as good on my 2408WFP, and I can carry it around. The one thing I miss is really, really deep blacks, but everything else outweighs that particular negative by far.

[Skakruk]

...my eyes feel much better...

You know, it's funny you should say that because I have observed the exact opposite; ever since I started using this LP2475w I've experienced more eye strain (thus headaches), and also dry eyes (which I never got with my CRTs). That's during gaming. For text, it's another story - the LCD is obviously better there, but I'm only concerned with gaming and for that the LCD has been very disappointing.

In fact, today I decided to sell this horrible LP2475w. I'll use my G420 until something decent is available (hope it doesn't die on me).

[SoulsCollective]

You know, it's funny you should say that because I have observed the exact opposite; ever since I started using this LP2475w I've experienced more eye strain (thus headaches), and also dry eyes (which I never got with my CRTs). That's during gaming. For text, it's another story - the LCD is obviously better there, but I'm only concerned with gaming and for that the LCD has been very disappointing.

I was experiencing something similar until I adjusted the brightness - I'm currently my 2408WFP at 0 brightness, 50 contrast. If I raise the brightness even to 10 I get more colour "pop", but I can guarantee that within an hour my eyes will be telling me about it.

[Skakruk]

I was experiencing something similar until I adjusted the brightness - I'm currently my 2408WFP at 0 brightness, 50 contrast. If I raise the brightness even to 10 I get more colour "pop", but I can guarantee that within an hour my eyes will be telling me about it.

Brightness 0 here.

[SoulsCollective]

Interesting. What's your view distance? Mine is elevated about 20cm off the desk (measuring from the desk to the bottom of the stand), and about a metre from my eyes. Of course, different monitors are not directly comparable.