8 replies to this topic

[Cheryl_27]

Looks like after < 6 yrs of (not) hard use, my Viewsonic VA1930 bit the dust. Was a present, but NOT an inexpensive monitor at the time.

Don't really game, but DO care about my eyes & clarity of screen, text, etc. I was satisfied w/ the overall picture of this Viewsonic.
Not looking for a $100 monitor, but won't pay $300 either. Quality of ALL electronics mfgs changes over time according to their mkt strategy.

Heard some new terms (new to me). Some LCDs are backlit, some not. I thought they all were backlit?

The ISP models may be a little out of price range - not sure.

Also wondered about color / clarity of matte vs the shiny LCD screens (what do they call that??). Glare really isn't a problem in my home office.

Without spending $300 - 600 for a 19, 20" monitor, which companies have come to the front of the pack over last few yrs, with good durability & respectable video quality?

I have a decent GPU, so difference in cheapo vs respectable quality monitors would be noticeable.

Thanks.

[Stetson]

Cheryl_27, on 08 August 2012 - 02:26, said:

Heard some new terms (new to me). Some LCDs are backlit, some not. I thought they all were backlit?

All standard LCD monitors are backlit. Some are backlit by flourescent tubes, and newer ones use LEDs as backlighting. LEDs should have a longer lifespan.

Cheryl_27, on 08 August 2012 - 02:26, said:

The ISP models may be a little out of price range - not sure.

Also wondered about color / clarity of matte vs the shiny LCD screens (what do they call that??). Glare really isn't a problem in my home office.

Some people prefer glossy screens for having colors that 'pop' more. I think you will see the biggest difference in color quality and viewing angles by going with IPS.

I would check out the Dell Ultrasharp line. Here's a 21.5" model, 1920x1080, IPS, LED backlit, $209

http://accessories.u...hs&sku=320-2736

They also have a 23" model for $30 more, same resolution:

http://accessories.u...hs&sku=320-2807

[.fahim]

Dell generally are great for good reliability/value/quality.
Although I would recommend you go for a 24" monitor, rather than a 19/20".

I have had 2 20" Dell value monitors (TN panel, CCFL backlight) for 5 years and they are going strong.
My main monitor is a 27" Dell Ultrasharp (IPS panel, CCFL backlight) and it is an absolute joy to use.

If glare isn't an issue, consider glossy, but I am not a fan. I want to see my picture, not my reflection.

[Cheryl_27]

Thanks for helpful input / suggestions. Shows how things have changed if Dell are considered reliable / quality. Monitors vs laptops aren't same, but in 2007, researching quality of higher end laptops, reviewers & experienced uses on forums practically begged me not to buy a Dell. One thing - WAY back - some Dell monitors used proprietary power cord = more $ for replacement / extension. Hopefully, a thing of the past, - I often need longer cord.

Question on the Dell's (or any brand) 21.5" model mentioned - response time. Is that the SAME response time measurement that decent monitors are often around 3 - 4 ms?

Quote

Response Time:
8ms (gray to gray)

May be a non issue due to newer technology (no idea) - IPS, because it's LED or other?

Suggestions for non - paid monitor review sites - in this size / price range?
Unless other stores are carrying Dell locally (not aware), only place to try before buy is a mall Dell Kiosk, that has limited stock. I'm a "try before buy" fan.

[.fahim]

Cheryl_27, on 08 August 2012 - 13:29, said:

Thanks for helpful input / suggestions. Shows how things have changed if Dell are considered reliable / quality. Monitors vs laptops aren't same, but in 2007, researching quality of higher end laptops, reviewers & experienced uses on forums practically begged me not to buy a Dell. One thing - WAY back - some Dell monitors used proprietary power cord = more $ for replacement / extension. Hopefully, a thing of the past, - I often need longer cord.

Question on the Dell's (or any brand) 21.5" model mentioned - response time. Is that the SAME response time measurement that decent monitors are often around 3 - 4 ms?

May be a non issue due to newer technology (no idea) - IPS, because it's LED or other?

Unless other stores are carrying Dell locally (not aware), only place to try before by is a mall Dell Kiosk, that has limited stock. I'm a "try before buy" fan.

Yes, I'd agree that Dell Laptops do suck, and badly. But their monitors are very decent. Mine use standard kettle leads for power.

Why are you interested in the grey-to-grey time for a monitor being used for a home office? It's not really relevant unless you are playing games or watching movies.

[Stetson]

Cheryl_27, on 08 August 2012 - 13:29, said:

Thanks for helpful input / suggestions. Shows how things have changed if Dell are considered reliable / quality. Monitors vs laptops aren't same, but in 2007, researching quality of higher end laptops, reviewers & experienced uses on forums practically begged me not to buy a Dell. One thing - WAY back - some Dell monitors used proprietary power cord = more $ for replacement / extension. Hopefully, a thing of the past, - I often need longer cord.

Question on the Dell's (or any brand) 21.5" model mentioned - response time. Is that the SAME response time measurement that decent monitors are often around 3 - 4 ms?

May be a non issue due to newer technology (no idea) - IPS, because it's LED or other?

Suggestions for non - paid monitor review sites - in this size / price range?
Unless other stores are carrying Dell locally (not aware), only place to try before buy is a mall Dell Kiosk, that has limited stock. I'm a "try before buy" fan.

Dell definitely has a good reputation with their Ultrasharp line. The response time is generally a bit lower with IPS displays, but as .fahim mentioned it probably won't make a real-world difference.

[Cheryl_27]

Not saying I don't watch movies, just rarely game. So, quality of movies is A concern.

I've not compared a 3 - 4 ms response monitor directly to an 8 ms one, nor read well done, unbiased reviews on that one measurement. But most all decent monitors I've ever looked at specs, had 5 ms & more often less. That said, mfgs DO fudge on reported specs, but don't think Dell would OVER estimate response time.

Wonder what type of movie / game specs would need (FPS, etc.) before you'd see noticeable diff in 8 ms vs 4 ms response?

[HawkMan]

you should ignore the response time on a monitor at least if it's below 10 or 8. those who say they are 5 and below aren't actually, they measure in a way that allows them to cheap and doesn't change color completely, while the 8-16 monitors will measure properly from white to black to white, or variations thereof, basically the full sequence of completely on to completely off and back.

So in fact low response time monitors generally have worse color saturation and contrast.

and you wouldn't see any difference between 4 and 8 ms. anything measure properly from 16 and below you won't notice (and today, that's every monitor mad.e 5 years ago. some monitors fudged on the 16 and 8 values and didn't use the full cycle on them, but that's only done on the cheap TN gaming monitors with 2 ms response today. which in reality is probably closer to 8, if you turn of gaming mode to get some proper colors).

Also most LED panels are infact not "backlit", technically they are but the LED's are int he sides lighting onto a special diffuser plate which give an "even ish" backlight, but will, especially on cheaper models, give edge bleeding and ghosting. More expensive models have actual backlight LED's and the best ones are backlight with local dimming.

[Cheryl_27]

Thanks HawkMan - technically, I'm not sure my current Viewsonic (~5.5 yrs, mod. use) going bad has anything to do w/ it being fluorescent tube vs newer LED types, or just the electronics (of course, still sell lots of tube models). (my post 8/7/12 - "one third of monitor blurry").

Some say LED may have longer life than tube models, which if fine - if picture quality is as good or better than a decent tube model. You mention edge bleeding & ghosting on cheaper LED models, which I never saw on this Viewsonic (tube type).
How "cheap" of LED models & brands (say, 19, 20, 21"), before bleeding & ghosting becomes fairly common (& noticeable) issue?