StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Just recently bought a Sylvania 17" flat panel to replace my old NEC 17". I am not exactly pleased with what I have. This thing reminds me of a laptop monitor from three years ago. Its not exactly sharp and when there is fast movement things kinda blur out. Is this normal for flat panels, or is it just the brand I got? Its got integrated speakers that I don't use. I was seriously thinking of a NEC monitor, would I be getting better quality? I ask these questions just because I don't know about how LCD flat panels are supposed to work.

Thats what you get for buying a Sylvania

Alyeska wrote:Just recently bought a Sylvania 17" flat panel to replace my old NEC 17". I am not exactly pleased with what I have. This thing reminds me of a laptop monitor from three years ago. Its not exactly sharp and when there is fast movement things kinda blur out. Is this normal for flat panels, or is it just the brand I got? Its got integrated speakers that I don't use. I was seriously thinking of a NEC monitor, would I be getting better quality? I ask these questions just because I don't know about how LCD flat panels are supposed to work.

LCD's are stuck at 60 Hz refresh rates, so you're naturally going to see some blurring during high motion. As for the sharpness, that's what stops me from buying a LCD. Lots of LCD's have this blurring filter that goes across the screen, which I hate. The bitch of it is that, when you turn off the "smoothness," you get a pixelated mess. The only respectable LCD's I've seen have been from Sony, ViewSonic and Apple. Everything else is cheap for a reason, and the color accuracy sucks, to boot.

LCD ghosting is a common problem, but it is not unresolvable. Decent LCD projector units do not display this ghosting characteristic (plus they're incredible for watching movies; all you need is an adapter cable to go from your DVD player's component outputs to a VGA plug).

I have a 21" viewable Sony Trinitron - I don't care if it does take up half of my desk space, I still have yet to see an LCD screen that beats it in sharpness, crispness, and rich true colors.

It's going to be a long while before I go with a flat screen.

The high-end DLP units are the best trade-off between size and clarity, although I haven't heard of any DLP monitors; only projectors. They would probably cost a huge amount of money, if DLP is even suitable for monitors at all.

Darth Wong wrote:The high-end DLP units are the best trade-off between size and clarity, although I haven't heard of any DLP monitors; only projectors. They would probably cost a huge amount of money, if DLP is even suitable for monitors at all.

AFAIK, DLP cannot be used for monitors (hence Digital Light Projection).

Alyeska wrote:Just recently bought a Sylvania 17" flat panel to replace my old NEC 17". I am not exactly pleased with what I have. This thing reminds me of a laptop monitor from three years ago. Its not exactly sharp and when there is fast movement things kinda blur out. Is this normal for flat panels, or is it just the brand I got? Its got integrated speakers that I don't use. I was seriously thinking of a NEC monitor, would I be getting better quality? I ask these questions just because I don't know about how LCD flat panels are supposed to work.

If their 15" LCD is similar in performance, well, you got screwed. These are cheap LCDs.

The 15" has a 350:1 contrast ratio and 40ms refresh time and analog-input only. The 350:1 ratio isn't too bad, but the rest are. Analog inputs in particular will degrade an LCD's image quality.

A good Samsung LCD has a 500:1 contrast ratio and a 20-25ms refresh time along with digital inputs.

BrYaN19kc wrote:I have a 21" viewable Sony Trinitron - I don't care if it does take up half of my desk space, I still have yet to see an LCD screen that beats it in sharpness, crispness, and rich true colors.

It's going to be a long while before I go with a flat screen.

OTOH, not many people can afford a high-quality Sony or NEC/Mitsubishi monitor - which often cost more than LCDs of similar size. I've seen a high-quality Sony in person - they're amazing.

phongn wrote:

BrYaN19kc wrote:I have a 21" viewable Sony Trinitron - I don't care if it does take up half of my desk space, I still have yet to see an LCD screen that beats it in sharpness, crispness, and rich true colors.

It's going to be a long while before I go with a flat screen.

OTOH, not many people can afford a high-quality Sony or NEC/Mitsubishi monitor - which often cost more than LCDs of similar size. I've seen a high-quality Sony in person - they're amazing.

The only way I was able to get that Sony was because I work in the computer center on our campus and was able to get a student discount. I still had to use two credit cards to pay for it. HEHE... After all the time it took me to pay it off, I'll definitely have it for a long time. BUT, for as much time as I'm in front of it, I'm definitely glad that I spent the money on it. It is huge though. LOL!

Years ago when my dad worked for AT&T Paradyne, he brought home what was then a top-of-the-line 20" MultiSync 5D. Absolutely amazing for the time - 0.31 dp, up to 72Hz @ 1152x864 and 60Hz @ 1280x1024.

We coupled it with an ATI mach64GX 4MB VRAM (not that silly DRAM that was commonly used) and it screamed. We later got a Matrox Millennium I 4MB, and OMG it rocked.

Well, that solves it. I am packing this thing up and staying with my 17" NEC monitor. Saves me a ton of money and works better at that.

It would seem that the LCD monitor I bought would be great for any average computer user. The problem is I am not a standard computer user. I am rebuilding my PC from the ground up using high end components just for game play. I would certainly notice significant problems in the future.

Alyeska: Keep this in mind when buying a monitor. If you're going to do alot of graphics work, then LCD monitors are for you. You'll be hard pressed to find a CRT to beat the clarity of a good LCD monitor. If you're into gaming, CRT is the way to go. Like Mike said, the ghosting issue isn't an unresolvable one, but the LCD monitors that have decent refresh times are rediculously expensive by comparison. I can get a 17" CTX monitor with a .20mm dot pitch for under $100 at the local Sams Club. You'll be hard pressed to find a good LCD monitor for under $400 at the same size.

The pros/cons of LCD monitors aside, do your research before buying. Read the reviews, and then go to a local store that has them and see how they look to you. If its hooked up to one of those multi-display boxes, ask an employee to hook one up strait to the computer and then see how it looks to your eyes. Unlike your computer, your monitor is something that will last you for many, many years. Choose carefully.

On a related topic, what do you think will replace normal CRT TV sets in the near future? My dad keeps saying plasma screens (essentially normal TVs without the need for a bulky CRT) but I keep seeing LCDs come down in price and get better as they become more common. Plasma screens are still extortionately expensive at around £2500 for a cheap set.

My samsung syncmaster 17' works quite well.

And what's this about the refresh rates being locked at 60hz? My monitor is running at 75hz

Well it seems the price is going to be a lot higher then I originaly thought. I am just going to forgoe the Flat-Panel monitor for now. My current 17" is working just fine and its been paid for for almost 2 years. Maybe another 2 years I will think about a Flat-Panel provided they quality increases and the prices decrease.

Alyeska wrote:It would seem that the LCD monitor I bought would be great for any average computer user. The problem is I am not a standard computer user. I am rebuilding my PC from the ground up using high end components just for game play. I would certainly notice significant problems in the future.

The fun part is that I'd actually want one of those above what I have today... or at least I think so. My current screen is too hard on the eyes, which makes for difficult writing session; a built-in filter might just be what the doctor ordered.

Eleas wrote:

Alyeska wrote:It would seem that the LCD monitor I bought would be great for any average computer user. The problem is I am not a standard computer user. I am rebuilding my PC from the ground up using high end components just for game play. I would certainly notice significant problems in the future.

The fun part is that I'd actually want one of those above what I have today... or at least I think so. My current screen is too hard on the eyes, which makes for difficult writing session; a built-in filter might just be what the doctor ordered.

Well it depends on what your using the computer for. The monitor I bought would be perfect for either of my parents. They watch the occasional movie, do work, and surf on the internet with their computers. A LCD Flat-Panel would save space on the desk and looks damn cool. Their visual quality wouldn't be compromised worth a damn. Myself on the other hand. I want a machine that will portray a game in very clear quality. I have to stay with my 17".

Alyeska wrote: Well it depends on what your using the computer for. The monitor I bought would be perfect for either of my parents. They watch the occasional movie, do work, and surf on the internet with their computers. A LCD Flat-Panel would save space on the desk and looks damn cool. Their visual quality wouldn't be compromised worth a damn. Myself on the other hand. I want a machine that will portray a game in very clear quality. I have to stay with my 17".

You live in France, don't you? Because I'm seriously thinking about asking you if you'd be willing to sell me that monitor...

Awkward, I know, and not too cheap to transport it either. But it was an idea. *g*

Eleas wrote:

Alyeska wrote: Well it depends on what your using the computer for. The monitor I bought would be perfect for either of my parents. They watch the occasional movie, do work, and surf on the internet with their computers. A LCD Flat-Panel would save space on the desk and looks damn cool. Their visual quality wouldn't be compromised worth a damn. Myself on the other hand. I want a machine that will portray a game in very clear quality. I have to stay with my 17".

You live in France, don't you? Because I'm seriously thinking about asking you if you'd be willing to sell me that monitor...

Awkward, I know, and not too cheap to transport it either. But it was an idea. *g*

Try America.

Faram wrote:My samsung syncmaster 17' works quite well.

And what's this about the refresh rates being locked at 60hz? My monitor is running at 75hz

LCDs have a minimum refresh fate (on the order of 20-25 ms, or 40-50 Hz). There's absolutely no point in running an LCD at greater than 60 Hz.

Admiral Valdemar wrote:On a related topic, what do you think will replace normal CRT TV sets in the near future? My dad keeps saying plasma screens (essentially normal TVs without the need for a bulky CRT) but I keep seeing LCDs come down in price and get better as they become more common. Plasma screens are still extortionately expensive at around £2500 for a cheap set.

Plasma screens do not show a true black, and that alone turns me off of them. Their contrast ratio isn't so hot compared to a CRT or rear projector either.

Vertigo1 wrote:Alyeska: Keep this in mind when buying a monitor. If you're going to do alot of graphics work, then LCD monitors are for you. You'll be hard pressed to find a CRT to beat the clarity of a good LCD monitor. If you're into gaming, CRT is the way to go. Like Mike said, the ghosting issue isn't an unresolvable one, but the LCD monitors that have decent refresh times are rediculously expensive by comparison. I can get a 17" CTX monitor with a .20mm dot pitch for under $100 at the local Sams Club. You'll be hard pressed to find a good LCD monitor for under $400 at the same size.

OTOH, finding a color-calibrated LCD is not easy to find and they cost a pretty penny. Same goes for high-end CRTs as well, of course.

phongn wrote:

Admiral Valdemar wrote:On a related topic, what do you think will replace normal CRT TV sets in the near future? My dad keeps saying plasma screens (essentially normal TVs without the need for a bulky CRT) but I keep seeing LCDs come down in price and get better as they become more common. Plasma screens are still extortionately expensive at around £2500 for a cheap set.

Plasma screens do not show a true black, and that alone turns me off of them. Their contrast ratio isn't so hot compared to a CRT or rear projector either.

I noticed that too, their resolution can suck too and their contrast and colour balance can be awful.

But LCDs need to be really high end to make a decent telly I guess. They'll come down, plasma seems a gimmick.