TFT/LCD 19" 1600x1200 recommendations?

  Mysticnas 16:25 17 Dec 2005

Hi all,

I'm in search for a monitor to to replace my iiyama 19" VM Pro 454 CRT. The image quality on this monitor have been brilliant.

However, commeth the time that i'm begining to accept that the CRT is the cause of my headaches... I'm looking for a suitable TFT/LCD.

These are my requirements:

19" 1600x1200 res, with image quality to at least match my current CRT.

I do a lot of multimedia design work and so I can't really use anything less than a 1600x1200 19". I thought i'd check out the iiyama website. Their graphics LCD 19" comes out at about £470 with VAT on top of that! so that's out of the question.

I've recently heard that LG make the best LCD TV's. There are only 3 companies that actually manufacture LCD TV's and LG is one of them. Sony i think isn't one. Anyway, i thought i'd check out the image quality on these TV's. And sue enough the LG plasma TV's even had a better picture than the sony LCD's, with LG LCD's even better still.

So seeing as LG seem to make the best LCD's would this also be the case for the computer LCD's???

Thanks for any iput.

  Mysticnas 17:01 17 Dec 2005

20" are also considered.

  DieSse 18:09 17 Dec 2005

*However, commeth the time that i'm begining to accept that the CRT is the cause of my headaches*

There's no intrinsic reason why a TFT should be better for your headache problem than a TFT. Perhaps you've not got your monitor set up ideally.

All the 19" TFTs I've seen (or a quick google shows) are 1280x1024 native resolution. Running a TFT in a non-native resolution will give a less than ideal picture - some worse than others. The *native resolution* is where the actual number of pixels manufactured into the panel.

I suspect that if you do find a 19" with a higher NR, it's going to cost an arm and a leg.

I have seen a Samsung 21.3" TFT with a native res of 1600x1200 - so I think this is the size you would have to go for. There are even larger ones with even higher resolutions - but beware that the prices shoot up as soon as you start getting larger than 19" and more than 1280x1024 NR

  Diemmess 18:33 17 Dec 2005

I bet I'm your senior by quite a few years and my sight isn't what it was!

Monitor specifications aside for the moment. Are you sure in these short winter days that you have adequate background lighting? Nothing upsets my eyes faster than to struggle on, depending only on light from the monitor. When commonsense breaks through it seems worthwhile to have sufficient ambiant light to make the monitor seem a trifle dull.

  Mr Mistoffelees 20:21 17 Dec 2005

This appears to be what you are looking for click here

  DieSse 20:30 17 Dec 2005

You're missing the point - it's still a native res of 1280x1024

  Wilham 20:53 17 Dec 2005

RCA type shadow mask or trinitron grid, every crt generates xrays. Albeit the level should be weak.

Isn't it just possible that some people are more sensitive than others to this low level emission of secondary radiation?

  Mr Mistoffelees 20:53 17 Dec 2005

Wrong link, try this:- click here

  Mr Mistoffelees 20:55 17 Dec 2005

Not sure what "downscale" means, might mean it doesn't truely display 1600x1200.

  DieSse 20:59 17 Dec 2005

Never seen this before - however the pixel pitch is still the normal one for a regular 19" unit.

And it's £500 - more than the one he already thought was too pricey!

  Mr Mistoffelees 21:00 17 Dec 2005

20" seems to be the way to go.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

OnePlus 5T review

How to draw a mandala

iPhone X review

Musique en streaming : Spotify vs Deezer