*Absolute* Best Monitor?

[One_Hertz]

Alright my dad is tired of staring at his crappy LCD all day and he gave me a budget of 2000US to get him something that will have the best possible Image Quality and will be the easiest to look at. In other words so it is not as tiring. I am thinking a nice plasma screen... His preffered size is 19" but could be slightly bigger. Any ideas?

Edit: K 2000 was just a rough estimate he is willing to go sky high on this. he wants the best there is...

Edit2: I have hyundai 19" 8ms and it is slightly better then what he has, but he definately will not be satisfied with something of this level. If I make him happy maybe he'll buy me another gtx

[Cathar]

Buy a Samsung-based 4ms LCD panel.

No seriously, he probably really does have a crappy LCD in comparison.

Clarity on the <8ms LCD panels is something that I've not seen matched by any CRT, including my older Sony G400. Am presently using an 8ms BenQ FP937S+, which is built around the 8ms Samsung panel, and I would never go back to a CRT after this. With the older 12/16ms panels, yeah, I would say that some of the better CRT's would be better in comparison, but not any more.

[Ugly n Grey]

The best monitor is one that comes out next week right after you spent your cash on this weeks model.

Have you checked out the LCD buyers guide here on XS? http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...D+buyers+guide

[Turok]

What exactly are you looking for?
A monitor as a PC monitor, or a TV?

If it's for TV use:
If you wait until holidays, the first SED TVs will show up, which will basically stomp on any other technology to date. If you buy a plasma now, it will become obsolete in a few months.
SED is > CRT's speed + LCD's slimnest, lightness, and power efficiency + Plasma's image quality

Check out this article which gives you a nice preview of how good SED will be compared to the other products:
http://www.behardware.com/articles/5...-kind-sed.html

If it's for PC use:
DO NOT but a plasma for PC or Console Gaming use. Here are some reasons why:
1) Plasmas were only ment for movie enthusiast.
2) Plasmas are sensitive to screen burn-in.
3) Since plasmas run with natural gasses, these gasses have a half-life of about 40,000 hours (I think), so afther that time period, the Plasma screen will lose about half the image quality.

For PC use, its eather a LCD, a CRT, or a SED (when it releases)
Right now, a few new LCDs are going to show up with huge improvements in image quality and response time. I would also wait for holidays for this technology, since its still not certain which pannel will run the best. Its better to look at reviews before buying.

When SED TVs release on holidays, the smallest TV will probably be 36". If that's too big, then get a 20" - 24" wide screen VA LCD at 8ms
The 20" - 24" LCDs will cost between $500 - $1500, so if you purchase one, you will have a lot of money for other things like a B&W speakers system.
SED PC monitors are expected to release in 2007, so you could also buy a LCD monitor, and then save your money to update to a SED monitor.

[Mr. Manka]

30" apple HD monitor
or
21" Viewsonic CRT insane refresh rates

[z-design]

Just depends on his needs.

The LCDs displayed in my sig are pretty sweet, they're sony 23" premier pros.
These aren't mine, but as far as i've heard, theyre great for artwork and day usage.

up to you, be sure to check out the lcd buyers guide

[One_Hertz]

Yeah i read the guide twice and all the things there just dont seem good enough. That SED thing looks great. I am going to research some more into that. The monitor will be used for mostly reading things off of. Any more inputs?

[One_Hertz]

Read up on SEDs and they are coming out Jan 2007... Thats not fast enough

[TMM]

Wait for OLED :p

[Cathar]

Wait for OLED :p

Have they fixed the 5000hr blue life yet?

SED looks like it's gonna stomp OLED before OLED even gets out of the starting blocks. No doubt though that OLED does seem to have more hype though. OLED and SED are essentially two competing future technologies. SED seems superior in every way over OLED though. Will be a pity if OLED wins based upon what little we've heard about SED of late.

Oh, and the first SED TV's are coming in March 2006. http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000290058444/

[Turok]

Read up on SEDs and they are coming out Jan 2007... Thats not fast enough

I said above, wait for holidays for eather a SED 36" TV, or one of the new 8ms 20"-24" widescreen

Since you say your dad is going to monstly read on it, buy a 8ms LCD or wait for OLED LCDs.
THEN, update to a smaller SED monitor in 2007

[craig588]

Either the 30" Apple or a 21" Sony GDM-F520K.

The Apple has that native resolution and ghosting problem, but it's clear. The Sony is almost perfect except that it's small.

I use a bunch of F520s and F500s. I can't rationalize a 4000$ monitor, so I don't use any of the Apples.

[[XC] leviathan18]

if it is just for readin apple cinema 30"

[wisedude]

Hertz just checking, what the hell is your dad's job? lol already has a 19 inch LCD and decides he wants a newone for 2,000 dollars then tells his son to spend about an hour or two looking it up and he will buy a 500 dollar card for him! WOW lol

[One_Hertz]

lol yeah I found him some nice lcd for about 800 with 1000:1 contrast 0.25 dot pitch etc. Should be here tomorrow. My dad owns 4 corporations as of right now and his fourth one just started up is a multi million one. He recently bought an H2 hummer with maxxed out options for cash...lol

[[XC] leviathan18]

your dad doesnt need an adoptive son???? help the third world childrens LOL

[texuspete00]

I'd get a 24" Sony tinitron off of ebay and wait for OLED. I like big screens. A large LCD as fast as say, the VP191b does not exist. This is if you graph out the response rate... not that meaningless drivel they put on the box.

Guy from Lawrence MA always has them up with good "Buy it now" prices. HP equivalent is $225 + $100 shipping usually. Sony is $300.

Edit: Sorry. Damn I'm hungover! By the time I got to the bottom I forgot what application we were talking about. I only think about games! Hell for text my 2405FPW is great. Lots of real estate. It may not be the best out there but I don't want to spend a heck of a lot more for little benefit. There is a nice HP that is pretty close to it's price, but not really when Dell drops their coupon bombs. If he doesn't game a ton I really can't think of anything about this that would dissapoint him. The blacks and sharpness are fantastic. ASk him if he would mind only saving $1k+ or so.

[Serra]

SED and OLED technologies each suck. Do not wait for them, their benefits are a hideous lie.

SED was abandoned by Sony awhile ago as a potential screen type because it was too testy and didn't offer the quality, plus came at too high of a cost. You won't be seeing it around.

OLED. Where to start. How about this link:
http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/200409/04-048E/
Oh yeah, that REALLY rivals Plasmas. First off, it's contrast ratio is less than 1/3 that of a good Plasma, and the viewing angles aren't as good. Yeah, that's REALLY amazing.
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure it will replace the desktop LCD market... but it is NOT a plasma alternative, and the cost is ridiculous. Additionally, the OLED screens (and PLED) have a notoriously short half-life (the time it takes until you have to increase the brightness for the first time).
And just for those who say it will be better by the time it gets here: Sony (and all other manufacturers, I just like to pick on Sony) order their screens and parts from asia more than 9 months before they ever start seeing releases here... so the specs on that Asian model, albeit about a year old, should be relatively accurate for what you'll see here.

Anyway, don't bother with a 4ms LCD screen. For your dad, I'd say a 12 should be fine. My reasoning is that you can get much more impressive brightness out of screens by going with slower response times, and you will not see a difference in the response time. For example, I don't really play a lot of fast-paced games or watch TV on mine... so I went with a 26ms response time about a year and a half ago and got one with an 800:1 contrast ratio (still above anything an 8ms can do). So find yourself a 12ms (or better) response LCD with a contrast of 700:1 (or better) as a minimum.

Plasma is no good because they don't come in sizes smaller than 37" by any half-decent manufacturers, and definitely not in desktop-sizes (which is strange, because inch for inch, plasma is cheaper).

EDIT:
In response to Turoks comments: I pretty well agree, but will add this about plasmas. The half-life is about 60k hours (we'll say 40k in the average home), but that isn't to when the quality is reduced, that is a measurement to when you will have to turn up the brightness for the first time, after which you can expect it to get darker at an increasing rate until it is unwatchable. Still, 40k hours is about 15 years of regular use....

~ Serra

[texuspete00]

You can't make small high-res plasmas.... so it's not strange at all. They can't make the dot pitch small enough. Where you been man? We are not even close to being able to make say a 24" plasma with 1920*1200 res. I'm still kind of a display noob but I'm learning. Plasma is unsuitable for a desktop PC monitor. Not even close enough that we can even begin to speculate if and when it will ever get there. A 1080p plasma would HAVE to be large. They may be the best at what they do. But that is being a BIG television set.

I myself have much to learn about the upcoming technologies, but I admit that. In my gaming centric post I should have said "wait for something better" instead of for OLED since I have to check them out some more.