LCD contrast question.

T

towert7

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 18, 2003
Messages
2,930
Hi all, a few LCD questions.

Im looking at LCD's 19" and larger.

Now, ive read a few "FAQ's" and they said to look for a moniter with a 500:1 contrast ratio or greater.

But the Dell FP2001 has a contrast ratio of 400:1, and people still love it (i will assume the pixle pitch accounts for most of their like'ing). Is there a noticible diffrence between a 400:1 and a 750:1 (such as a samsung).

Next question, is there a noticble diffrence between a pixle pitch of 0.294 and 0.27? What about 0.294 and 0.255?

Lastly, the viewsonic PRO's are one of the very few cheap moiniters ive seen to support HDTV (up to 720p). But they don't say the pixle pitch. Is it safe to assume that it is high quality, if it can process HDTV signals?

~Thanks!

p.s., for those who have a dell moniter, what is their warrenty on the product (such as FP2001)?
 
A little off the question, but can anyone vouch for the samsung 213T. Looks like a good moniter from the specs........ and i like the size.

Compusa has a sale, 1200$, 10% off, + 100 mail in rebate.......... so about 980$ for a 21". Only good for today though.
 
Comp USA has the worst return policy I have ever encountered for hardware, they want 15% restocking for a refund, If you want a full refund its only in the form of a store credit. Beware! They are not flexible I tried 3 times.
Dell has good return policy, or satisfaction policy, so if you got bad pixels return it if you want, they will foot the bill and send to you before you ship old back. They shipped mine next day air and payed for it all, return shipping and everything. They will keep it up until you are happy. I got my 21" Dell 2001 FP for $750 so 900 plus is out of the question for me. The contrast ratio is different, but even in Anandtechs poor review he stated the contrast ratio spec was more truthful than others. Even at 400:1 it makes my crt look like crap. I had to tone down the picture because it was way too bright. Beware of Dell phone support you may as well randomly dial a phone number and talk to a stranger. If you need to communicate with Dell, use Emails. Its better than being on hold for hours! Dont know about different pixel pitches doubt you would notice though. I didnt when I had a Planar LCD before this one. I did notice the contrast ration difference but it was negligable. Hope this helped and happy hunting.
 
Originally posted by towert7
Hi all, a few LCD questions.
Click to expand...


Ok, so lets answer these questions one at a time...

1. But the Dell FP2001 has a contrast ratio of 400:1, and people still love it (i will assume the pixle pitch accounts for most of their like'ing). Is there a noticible diffrence between a 400:1 and a 750:1 (such as a samsung).

Remember this has to due with blacks and grays displayed on the screen, so more than 400 is better, but it really depends upon the person sitting in front of the screen, and if they can tell the difference (or lack of) additional blacks or greys on the screen. Not really that big a deal for non-Graphics artists, but again your milage may vary.

2. Next question, is there a noticble diffrence between a pixle pitch of 0.294 and 0.27? What about 0.294 and 0.255?

This really depends upon the size of the Panel being compared. If you have two 19" panels, one with 0.294 and the other with 0.27 pixel pitch, the one with 0.27 would have text appear a little sharper than the other panel. However, if your comparing a 19" LCD with 0.255 and a 20" LCD with 0.294, they might actually look the same, as the larger LCD has more pixels than the smaller one, which makes up the actual difference in Pixel Pitch.

3. Lastly, the viewsonic PRO's are one of the very few cheap moiniters ive seen to support HDTV (up to 720p). But they don't say the pixle pitch. Is it safe to assume that it is high quality, if it can process HDTV signals?

Nope. Typically your average LCD blows away HDTV specs. Think about this, Im running my screen at 1600x1200 (which I guess would be 1600P in HDTV specs). Heck, even 1024x768 is better than 720p. Basically an HDTV with 720p would look better than a typical TV set, as long as you could actually view HDTV signals in the stations you watch (and those stations supported 720p, but thats another story), but they don't really compare to the average computer monitor which is far more sharp and clear.

4. p.s., for those who have a dell moniter, what is their warrenty on the product (such as FP2001)?

Dell's warrenty is excellent. Basically, if there is only one dead pixel, Dell will replace, or refund your money on it. With most online sites, usually it's between 4-6 dead or stuck pixels, and even more subpixels. Also, lots of the online stores will charge you a restocking fee, which Dell doesn't.
 
hm, very interesting.

Yea, i read on newegg they say no returns with less then 8 dead pixles (hate to have 7.........).

Better then hdtv 720p, HM............ that's very interesting. But it makes sense, because the TV pixles are soooo much bigger then moniter pixles.

yea, also a diffrence in 0.04mm does'nt seem like to much... I had a dell notebook for a while which had a pixle pitch of close to 0.25mm, and my sony trinitron is about 0.294...... and i could'nt tell a diffrence. Actually, with my trinitron, i can't complain about the text, it looks sharp enough for me.

As for the color, I LOVE COLOR, and graphics. And, if it was possible, i would like a moniter that could reproduce colors with the best accuracy. My currenty trinitron can't do pure blacks, it adds a red/pink tint to it.....

I do a little graphics work, nothing serious, but for fun......... you know, photoshop, illustrator... that stuff.


Basically, I will be getting a moniter for college, and i would like one to last 4 years at least. I would bring my 19" CRT, but i don't have room in the little dorms. This new computer will be replaceing a TV and DVD, and thus i would like a nice moniter.

I went to a circuicity, and saw some discontinued 191T's........ they looked very impressive..... and as far as specs go, the New 191T+'s are even better. I am also aim'ing for AT LEAST 19", and up to 21", while staying below 1000$.



LOL@Ramfart. HAHA, is'nt it sooooooo TRUE????? Dell phone support suckes so much. for me, its usually 20 mins at least to contact someone, then you can't understand them.......... they can't understand you, and then when they "transfer" you (cough cough) they hang up. and about 89 times out of 100 they don't even know how to use a computer........ much less understand what im asking.... :SIGH:, i miss the days where dell tech support was actually good......

I hate dell, so if i can stay away from them, ill try. That's why im looking at diffrent moniters that might be as good.

~Thanks for all your help
 
For LCDs, pixel pitch is a worthless statistic as it is exactly the same for every monitor of a given size and native resolution. It's simple math, really: If you know the area of the screen surface and the number of same-size pixels that are supposed to fit inside of that space, you can easily figure out the pixel pitch yourself.
 
That's nice to know.

Now, i have another question.

I have been told by many people that LCD moniters do not have a Refresh rate, because they do not use electromagnetic particles, but instead use a backlight.

I must agree, because when i goto a store, and put the LCD at 60hz, i can not notice any black lines, whereas 60Hz on a CRT moniter is soooooooo noticible.

But then, here is my question.

WHy in god's name do these companies and reviewers still say they have refresh rates in Hz? What does this mean? Usually, you don't have a pointless spec, but is this just another pointless spec?
(p.s., not talking about response time in MS, talking about actual Refresh rates at Hz)..

An example of this is some spec's taking from a samsung T213 LCD mointer.
FREQUENCY Horiz. Rate (Analog) 30-93
Horiz. Rate (Digital) 30-81
Vertical Rate 56-75

What do these stats mean?

~Thanks
 
Originally posted by towert7
Now, i have another question.

~Thanks
Click to expand...


I read somewhere (can't remember where unfortunatly), that having a refresh rate on LCD's was needed, so they are compatible with current video cards and some software applications.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top