Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

Going LCD at last....


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#1 of 23 OFFLINE   DaveMcS

DaveMcS

    Second Unit



  • 317 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 30 2001

Posted June 01 2006 - 03:41 AM

Newegg has a few Open Box specials on their site today: Viewsonic 191B Viewsonic VX924 Sceptre X9G-komodo VII Sceptre X20G Naga III Any of one these stand out as "superior" to the others for typical home/gaming useages? If not any of those clearance units...what new 19" would be a good choice to replace my CRT monitor?

#2 of 23 OFFLINE   Ken Chui

Ken Chui

    Supporting Actor



  • 976 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 20 2003

Posted June 01 2006 - 04:57 AM

The Viewsonic VX924 would be my pick of the four; the 5ms response time is ideal for gaming (although 2ms options are available, albeit at higher prices). Is there a reason why you chose Sceptre over Samsung (besides price)?

#3 of 23 OFFLINE   DaveMcS

DaveMcS

    Second Unit



  • 317 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 30 2001

Posted June 01 2006 - 05:09 AM

No...no particular preference as to Brand Names. Performance and warranty over style and "name brand recognition"

#4 of 23 OFFLINE   Ken Chui

Ken Chui

    Supporting Actor



  • 976 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 20 2003

Posted June 01 2006 - 07:44 AM

Dave: What is your budget (including tax & shipping cost)? Also, I assume that you're set on it being a 19" monitor?

#5 of 23 OFFLINE   Scott L

Scott L

    Producer



  • 4,466 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 29 2000

Posted June 01 2006 - 10:19 AM

The VX922 is actually a bit faster at 2ms response time and the price should be the same. I bought the 922 a couple weeks ago and am satisfied. Can't even tell if it trails on games. I have a 4 year old Viewsonic VA 15" and it still works perfectly to this day with no dead or stuck pixels. Even after a few drops and hits while it was on its LCD arm. Horrible response time (~30ms) but the colors are great. Faster response time affects colors and contrast. You'll definitely notice a lack of contrast going from CRT to and fast LCD. In the end I think it's worth it.

#6 of 23 OFFLINE   DaveMcS

DaveMcS

    Second Unit



  • 317 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 30 2001

Posted June 01 2006 - 11:47 AM

I'm looking $300 ish. Optimally from all my research..I'd like a Viewsonic 191B which seems to be the Caddy of monitors..but they are discontinued and hard to find (pricey too if found) I think the 930B is supposed to be close to the 191B..but more reserch is needed to suss that out

#7 of 23 OFFLINE   Joe D

Joe D

    Supporting Actor



  • 839 posts
  • Join Date: May 21 1999

Posted June 01 2006 - 02:00 PM

I also just made the switch from a 17" CRT to a 19" LCD screen. I bought a BenQ FP93GX for $250 with free shipping and a $30 rebate from newegg.com. 2ms respone time and good specs all around. I receive it Friday so I can't comment yet, but I'm looking forward to it.

#8 of 23 OFFLINE   Ray Chuang

Ray Chuang

    Screenwriter



  • 1,055 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 26 2002

Posted June 01 2006 - 03:22 PM

If you're willing to spend a little more, get the Samsung Syncmaster 930BF. I've seen the 930BF and it has excellent picture quality and only 4 ms response time. Posted Image
Raymond in Sacramento, CA USA

#9 of 23 OFFLINE   Dennis*G

Dennis*G

    Supporting Actor



  • 524 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 07 2003

Posted June 02 2006 - 01:22 AM

I would forgo the 19" lcd with there junk 1280*1024 resolution and either just go 17" LCD (1280*1024) or 20.1 LCD (1200*1600). the 19 inch is the bastard stepchild until someone comes out with a 1200*1600 resolution for one, unless of course you like big/chunky icons/windows or your eyes are bad. Also, unless you are a gamer, the response time will make no difference to you at all, just get something with good brightness.

#10 of 23 OFFLINE   Nathan_F

Nathan_F

    Second Unit



  • 269 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 06 2001
  • Real Name:Nathan
  • LocationFishers, IN

Posted June 02 2006 - 02:43 AM

I recently went LCD as well... picked up a Dell 1907FP for $250 on a sale that included a $30 coupon. I was concerned with it for gaming purposes, but I have seen no issues so far (games include RTS, Sports, and Sim-games). I am extremely happy with it.

#11 of 23 OFFLINE   Ray Chuang

Ray Chuang

    Screenwriter



  • 1,055 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 26 2002

Posted June 02 2006 - 04:43 AM


HUH?! Posted Image

Having actually played around with the Samsung Syncmaster 930B/930BF, Viewsonic VX924, Sony SDM-HS95B, and NEC MultiSync 90GX2, they're anything BUT junk monitors. With one good reason: 1280x1024 native resolution is very readable, unlike 17" LCD's, where 1280x1024 native resolution is difficult to read for people with poor vision. Also, 1600x1200 on a 20" LCD is not really that desirable, since you run smack into the same problem that plagues 17" monitors--the graphics are too small to read at native resolution. Posted Image
Raymond in Sacramento, CA USA

#12 of 23 OFFLINE   Dennis*G

Dennis*G

    Supporting Actor



  • 524 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 07 2003

Posted June 03 2006 - 09:45 AM

Ray,

You and I are just the opposite then. I absolutly love the 1600*1200 of my 20" and can not stand to go any lower.

So I guess it all depends on your eyes Posted Image

#13 of 23 OFFLINE   Ken Chan

Ken Chan

    Producer



  • 3,302 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 11 1999

Posted June 03 2006 - 09:53 AM

At high resolutions like 1600x1200, DVI helps because it makes each (really small) pixel dead-on. With analog, you may have all or part of the screen slightly off, making it look fuzzy and difficult to read. I also like 20" monitors, both 4:3 and 16:10 (1680x1050)

#14 of 23 OFFLINE   Ray Chuang

Ray Chuang

    Screenwriter



  • 1,055 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 26 2002

Posted June 03 2006 - 03:37 PM


Well, you have to remember that I have 20/625 left eye and 20/675 right nearsighted vision. Even with corrective glasses 1280x1024 on a 17" LCD borders on unreadable for me. Posted Image The same applies for 1600x1200 on a 20" LCD. Posted Image

Interestingly enough, the Viewsonic VP2330wb is quite readable for me, mostly because of the big 23" diagonal size screen even at 1920x1200 native resolution; Posted Image this is similar to 23" Apple Cinema Display.
Raymond in Sacramento, CA USA

#15 of 23 OFFLINE   DaveMcS

DaveMcS

    Second Unit



  • 317 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 30 2001

Posted June 06 2006 - 01:07 AM

I opted for the Viewsonic VX922 from Newegg. 265.00 shipped threee day UPs...which is actually 2 day for me if its shipped from Jersey!

#16 of 23 OFFLINE   Ken Chui

Ken Chui

    Supporting Actor



  • 976 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 20 2003

Posted June 06 2006 - 04:23 AM

It's a matter of personal preference, I guess. My eyesight is just as bad as yours, but I prefer the optimum resolutions of my CRT and LCD monitors: both 17" running at 1280x1024. I have used 1024x768 for gaming purposes, but that was largely a constraint of my previous video card, as I had to balance detail vs. framerate.

#17 of 23 OFFLINE   Ken Chui

Ken Chui

    Supporting Actor



  • 976 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 20 2003

Posted June 06 2006 - 04:25 AM


Dave:
I think you made a solid purchase. Posted Image Be sure to post your impressions after you've spent some time with it.

#18 of 23 OFFLINE   DaveMcS

DaveMcS

    Second Unit



  • 317 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 30 2001

Posted June 22 2006 - 04:40 AM

The three day shipping turned into overnight..I love Newegg! the VX922 was simple to install..even if I had to be quiet as my daughters were sleeping. PC seems to boot quicker now withe the DVI connection. Screen is SUPER bright..probably too bright, but I have yet to play around with the factory set settings. HalfLife2 and HL2:Episode 1 both look AMAZING no ghosting and lag... Detail and colors are so much greater than the Gateway monitor I was using. Takes up SO much less room on the desktop..but b/c its smaller I can set it up right in from of me.rather than canted off to one side..so now it blocks the window! thats my only complaint..but one I'll gladly suffer!

#19 of 23 OFFLINE   Patrick Sun

Patrick Sun

    Studio Mogul



  • 38,048 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 30 1999

Posted June 22 2006 - 05:11 AM

Ack, my screensaver mode got buggered up by some pop-unders that kept it from triggering and now I have burn-in on my LCD (not even half a year old). So, just fair warning.
"Jee-sus, it's like Iwo Jima out there" - Roger Sterling on "Mad Men"
Patcave | 2006 Films | 2007 Films | Flickr | Comic-Con 2012 | Dragon*Con 2012

#20 of 23 OFFLINE   Will_B

Will_B

    Producer



  • 4,733 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 06 2001

Posted June 22 2006 - 10:52 AM

Quoted from elsewhere, Patrick, but surely meant for you: Apple has posted a helpful tutorial for removing image persistence on Apple LCDs (though the basic principle should work for any LCD). 1. Create an all-white screen in a graphics application such as AppleWorks or Photoshop, and save it as a JPEG file. 2. Use this as the image displayed by the screen saver. 3. Turn the display brightness down (but not off) to preserve backlight bulb life. They recommend that you display this white image for as long as the persistent image was displayed. This may not fix things entirely, but it should help remove some of that unsightly burn-in. --- Patrick, this is essentially the same advice that was given to old video cameras that used tubes (20 years ago). If you pointed a tube video camera at a spotlight or the sun and got a burn, you'd leave it pointed at a sheet of white paper for many hours. That would attract the magical fairy elf that would fix or at least minimize the problem.
"Scientists are saying the future is going to be far more futuristic than they originally predicted." -Krysta Now




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users