puntoMX Posted September 20, 2007 Share Posted September 20, 2007 ... can compare both and the 16/9 is about 11% smaller than the 4/3. ...We are talking about pixels, not visible aria . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponch Posted September 20, 2007 Share Posted September 20, 2007 Pixel, area, proportionality, allloôo... I'll stop this discussion here as you seem to have no idea what we're talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puntoMX Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 That would be fine with us, correct yourself if you like...Just don’t ask questions you already know, why a 4:3 screen is more expensive to produce then a 16:10 screen, you know it has a bigger glass area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nmX.Memnoch Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 (edited) Here's what you need to know about widescreen LCD resolutions:17" - 19" widescreen = 1440x900 resolution20" - 22" widescreen = 1680x1050 resolution24" - 27" widescreen = 1920x1200 resolution30"+ widescreen = 2560x1600 resolution (exceptions are HDTV's being used as monitors, those are usually 1366x768)I find it odd that so many replies have been "wasted" discussing who's right or wrong about how much less area a widescreen vs. standard width monitor has, and not one single person has mentioned contrast ratio or response times. Let's get back to the discussion at hand... Ideally you want an LCD monitor that has a 1000:1 or higher contrast ratio. Be careful of some monitors though because they advertise a dynamic contrast ratio (Samsung is doing this with their latest LCD monitors). You want to look at the actual contrast ratio. Basically, the contrast ratio is the difference in brightness between the darkest dark and brightest white an LCD panel can produce. The higher the ratio, the closer to true black you'll get (assuming that the brightest white is true white to start with). I don't believe there's a single LCD monitor on the market right now that can produce a true black, but some are coming very close.As for response time, if you plan on doing any sort of gaming then you want the lowest response time you can afford. 5ms seems to be about the average, but you can find some as low as 2ms (again, I point to Samsung).Personally, I have the Dell UltraSharp 24" 2407WFP and couldn't be happier. If you look at Dell, do not look at anything other than their UltraSharp line. As for Viewsonic, I try to stay away from them. Their quality control has gone downhill in the last few years. Edited September 21, 2007 by nmX.Memnoch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andromeda43 Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 I set up new computers and monitors for people all the time as a part of my home computer repair business.LG seems to be one of the clearest and sharpest ones I've set up. Acer is the worst! It just seems too bright and I can't dim them down enough to get things to look right.I don't know who makes the Dell LCD monitors, but Sony made many of their CRT's. I'm using one now. The "Trinitron" logo in the upper frame was a dead give-away. It's a beautiful monitor.The best bet is to walk into a store and actually SEE what you're buying.To get a standard picture (Image) on a wide screen the image will usually be 'S-t-r-e-t-c-h-e-d' to fit the screen.I really hate that on the wide screen TV's! If you're just surfing the internet or playing games, no big problem, but if you're doing photo editing or running AutoCad, you might want to keep the original Aspect Ratio, where round things actually look ROUND and not oblong.In that case a standard shaped screen would serve you best.Good Luck on your quest,Andromeda43 B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponch Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 Tom's Hardware has some reviews from march '07 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicfly Posted September 30, 2007 Author Share Posted September 30, 2007 Friends, i need your last word, these are my choices:LG L204WS-SF 20" VGA Silver 5Ms Wide1. http://www.essedi.it/scheda_art.htm?SID=&a...T=_OM_&PRT=SAMSUNG 940NW 19" Wide2. http://www.essedi.it/scheda_art.htm?SID=&a...T=_OM_&PRT=ASUS VW193S 19" Wide Multimedia3. http://www.essedi.it/scheda_art.htm?SID=&a...T=_OM_&PRT=which one between these? THANKS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcarle Posted September 30, 2007 Share Posted September 30, 2007 (edited) You may want to consider the Acer AL2216W, I just bought one for a client. Beautiful monitor and it's at a great price at the moment. Edited September 30, 2007 by jcarle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Camarade_Tux Posted September 30, 2007 Share Posted September 30, 2007 I find it odd that so many replies have been "wasted" discussing who's right or wrong about how much less area a widescreen vs. standard width monitor has, and not one single person has mentioned contrast ratio or response times. Let's get back to the discussion at hand... Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcarle Posted September 30, 2007 Share Posted September 30, 2007 Camarade_Tux... awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puntoMX Posted September 30, 2007 Share Posted September 30, 2007 lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicfly Posted October 1, 2007 Author Share Posted October 1, 2007 cool!! what about the 3 monitors? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puntoMX Posted October 1, 2007 Share Posted October 1, 2007 Contrasto 5000:1 * taken form the specs of the LG L204WS-SFRight... in contrast to what? I would take the Samsung 19" as you don’t want a 20"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicfly Posted October 2, 2007 Author Share Posted October 2, 2007 Contrasto 5000:1 * taken form the specs of the LG L204WS-SFRight... in contrast to what? I would take the Samsung 19" as you don’t want a 20"...Thanks PuntoMX for all your replies, you're cool! According to quality/price ratio...what about between SAMSUNG 19" and LG 20"? I see LG beats Samsung in almost the characteristics....and at a lower price (-10 €)...i'm really undecided between these 2 now.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puntoMX Posted October 2, 2007 Share Posted October 2, 2007 I think I must be blind, that LGE is 20" .http://it.lge.com/products/model/detail/lcd_l204wssf.jhtml#I would personally go for a 20" screen, and it’s almost the same as the Philips, read LG(E)/Philips, I posted before but for a lower price.Remember that neither the LGE 20" or Samsung 19" screens have DVI, if you want DVI in Europe you pay extra taxes, this explains why the 200AW8FS/00 from Philips is more expensive, besides the small laptop like speakers in the back...Excuse me for not taking my time to look at your post with those 3 screens... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now