looking for a good 24" monitor

They make noise, too.

Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee

godbreath
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 11:13 pm
Location: san jose

looking for a good 24" monitor

Post by godbreath » Sun Nov 30, 2008 12:19 am

need help finding a 24" monitor
I need one that is
not a TN panel
has 2 digital inputs (dvi or hdmi), one is okay but i would like to have 2
has 1 component input (could be vga)
24"

right now only monitors i can think of are the dell 24" ultrasharp 2408fpw and the old gateway 24" but it only has 1 digital input but its still fine

DaveLessnau
Posts: 192
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 7:01 am
Location: USA

Post by DaveLessnau » Sun Nov 30, 2008 4:48 am

Take a look at The LCD Thread

Dave Lessnau

psyopper
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 336
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 1:15 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon

Post by psyopper » Sun Nov 30, 2008 10:31 am

I vote for the Dell. I use the 22" version of this monitor at work and I absolutely love it. It has one of everything - Composite, Component, VGA, DVI, HDMI and each of them are an individually selectable input.

I lust after one of these for my home because

A - It's cheaper than a good quality 24" HDTV
B - It's got a higher native resolution than any 24" HDTV
C - It does EVERYTHING
D - Image quality is stellar
E - It has a fully adjustably stand - height, swivel, and tilt.
F - We have about 100 of these at work and not a single dead pixel in the bunch

lechuck
Posts: 86
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: EU

Post by lechuck » Sun Nov 30, 2008 2:41 pm

Maybe Eizo HD2442W?

1 x D-Sub (analog), 1 x DVI-D (digital), 2 x HDMI

... just bit expensive and according to tests at 'prad.de'
better than Dell.

godbreath
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 11:13 pm
Location: san jose

Post by godbreath » Sun Nov 30, 2008 3:11 pm

lechuck wrote:Maybe Eizo HD2442W?

1 x D-Sub (analog), 1 x DVI-D (digital), 2 x HDMI

... just bit expensive and according to tests at 'prad.de'
better than Dell.
i looked at that but thats a $1,300 monitor
way to expensive

nutball
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 1304
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2003 7:16 am
Location: en.gb.uk

Post by nutball » Sun Nov 30, 2008 3:36 pm

What's wrong with the Dell US2408WFP?

godbreath
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 11:13 pm
Location: san jose

Post by godbreath » Sun Nov 30, 2008 4:03 pm

nutball wrote:What's wrong with the Dell US2408WFP?
a bit too expensive
looking for something a little cheaper but with the same stuff

Aris
Posts: 2299
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 10:29 am
Location: Bellevue, Nebraska
Contact:

Post by Aris » Tue Dec 02, 2008 2:05 pm

godbreath wrote:looking for something a little cheaper but with the same stuff
cheaper = TN panels.

your going to have a hard time having your cake and eating it too.

Other than having a TN panel, this monitor fits your bill.

Samsung ToC T240HD

CA_Steve
Moderator
Posts: 7473
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 4:36 am
Location: St. Louis, MO

Post by CA_Steve » Tue Dec 02, 2008 2:59 pm


Aris
Posts: 2299
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 10:29 am
Location: Bellevue, Nebraska
Contact:

Post by Aris » Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:17 pm

Thats odd, cause when i went to that link, and read the summary, this is what they said:

"the T190, T220 and T240 are not just good, but among the leaders of their class."

But i could be wrong. "among the leaders of their class" could be unimpressive to some i suppose.

andyb
Patron of SPCR
Posts: 3307
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Essex, England

Post by andyb » Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:36 pm

Is my Samsung SyncMaster 245B a TN panel, if it is I cant imagine how much better non-Pro class of monitor would perform, if it is then it is very highly recommended.... Actually I would recommend this monitor anyway TN or not.

Please feel free to tell us what TN is, and why people dont like it.?


Andy

Aris
Posts: 2299
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 10:29 am
Location: Bellevue, Nebraska
Contact:

Post by Aris » Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:46 pm

andyb wrote:Please feel free to tell us what TN is, and why people dont like it.?Andy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TFT_LCD#TN_.2B_film

TN is cheaper with poorer visual qualities than say MVA or PVA panels.

Though more recently TN technology has gotten to the point where a lot of the original negatives have been ironed out. But ultimately it is a weaker technology to others.

andyb
Patron of SPCR
Posts: 3307
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Essex, England

Post by andyb » Tue Dec 02, 2008 4:18 pm

Thanks for the info.
TN is cheaper with poorer visual qualities than say MVA or PVA panels.
So it seems, I have just skipped through a few reviews, and I am now rather confused. I did quite a bit of research into the 24" monitor to buy, and my stipulations were DVI input, 1920x1200 resolution, true colour reproduction (8-bit), good responce time. This monitor ticked all of the boxes, yet some of the reviews I have just read state that it is a 6-bit panel. The classic tests for identifying 6-bit/8-bit panels were conclusive its 8-bit, and the best reproduction I have seen with only other 8-bit (also tested) panels coming in afterwards with the 6-bit panels coming in a distant 3rd place.
Though more recently TN technology has gotten to the point where a lot of the original negatives have been ironed out. But ultimately it is a weaker technology to others.
Could Samsungs 6-bit panels be difficult to tell apart from 8-bit native panels as the technology has moved forward.... Is there now such a small difference that only professional photographers can tell
(and 8-bit LCD test cant).? If so, is the price difference really worth it for a non-TN panel, and even then why not stump up the rest of the cash for a professional grade screen.?

I am not judging, I am just trying to understand the differences of opinion, fact and necessity. My monitor has made me perfectly happy but it might make you sad. The main drawback ass pointed out in every review is the viewing angle - poor.


Andy

Aris
Posts: 2299
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 10:29 am
Location: Bellevue, Nebraska
Contact:

Post by Aris » Tue Dec 02, 2008 4:39 pm

Viewing angles is one thing i never understood. Why does it matter for a monitor? your always sitting right in front of it. I can see it being an issue with a TV, where you may be sitting off to the side, but how often do you really use your monitor and your not sitting right in front of it.

i currently use the Viewsonic VG2230wm which is also a TN display. I love it. I have to date never seen an LCD i liked more. I play first person shooters with it and never notice any tearing or artifacts. Viewing angles seem fine to me, and its specifed as having 170x160 degrees. The theoretical max viewing angle is 179 degrees. So its not that far off. Now i personally refuse to use a monitor larger than 22", mostly because the native resolution then gets so high obove 22" monitors that i would be forced to use high end graphics cards to play games on them, which would run hotter, and thus ultimately create more noise. 1680x1050 seems to be the sweet spot.

andyb
Patron of SPCR
Posts: 3307
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Essex, England

Post by andyb » Tue Dec 02, 2008 4:55 pm

1680x1050 seems to be the sweet spot.
But you cant run 1920x1080 stuff on it.... I nearly bought a 22" but the draw of higher resolution got to me, and I gave in.
Viewing angles is one thing i never understood. Why does it matter for a monitor? your always sitting right in front of it.
I can see that as being a problem for photo buffs where the edges of a screen are at a different brightness level to the rest of the screen due to a poor viewing angle. If I look at a full-screen solid colour (except blue) I can see the difference, but whilst gaming, looking a photos and watching videos I rally cant see any difference. The value is down to the individual and their purpose.


Andy

CA_Steve
Moderator
Posts: 7473
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 4:36 am
Location: St. Louis, MO

Post by CA_Steve » Tue Dec 02, 2008 5:27 pm

Aris wrote:
Thats odd, cause when i went to that link, and read the summary, this is what they said:

"the T190, T220 and T240 are not just good, but among the leaders of their class."

But i could be wrong. "among the leaders of their class" could be unimpressive to some i suppose.
I guess these two paragraphs were the basis of my judgement:

"The T240 does not have response time compensation and its speed is rather low as the consequence. Its response time average is 14.6 milliseconds (GtG) with a maximum of 28.2 milliseconds. This is quite enough for office applications, movies and not-very-dynamic games, but devoted gamers may want to prefer a faster monitor.

So, the T240 is a good product, boasting not only the pretty looks typical of the ToC series but also superb setup quality. Its only downsides are the rather high response time and the notable nonuniformity of brightness."

Aris
Posts: 2299
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 10:29 am
Location: Bellevue, Nebraska
Contact:

Post by Aris » Tue Dec 02, 2008 5:37 pm

A 22" monitor will output a 1080p signal, it will just downsize it a bit. Though at such a small viewing size you wont be able to tell the difference until you put your nose right up against the screen. You have to remember that 1080p is designed for 50+ inch TV's, not a 22" monitor. Even though your seated position is closer than to a TV, its still not enough to be able to see a visual degredation.

1680x1050 is a 16*10 aspect ratio. 1080p is a 16*9 aspect ratio. So you can fit the 16*9 inside the 16*10 without changing the aspect ratio. So you'll have slim back bars on the top/bottom but the picture quality doesnt get degrated as much as if you would change the aspect ratio.

The only important factor is that it WILL output 1080p signal without dumping it down to 1080i or 720p. And unless your face is virtually touching the monitor you wont see any picture quality difference.

Nick Geraedts
SPCR Reviewer
Posts: 561
Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC

Post by Nick Geraedts » Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:43 pm

Aris... re-read what you just typed. A monitor doesn't output anything. It accepts video signals as input.

That being said, a 1680x1050 monitor simply cannot display a proper 1080i/p image. The only way you can get proper 1080 display is by buying a screen that does 1920x1080 or higher (WUXGA displays fit into this category).

Now, the image quality of 1080p video on a WSXGA+ screen depends entirely on the video player and what kind of interpolation it does. Nothing matches the exact 1:1 pixel mapping that you get when viewing the video on a monitor of equal or higher resolution - everything else is literally an approximation (and yes, there is a difference in quality between 720 and 1080).

xan_user
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 2269
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 9:09 am
Location: Northern California.

Post by xan_user » Tue Dec 02, 2008 9:11 pm

Nick Geraedts wrote:Aris... re-read what you just typed. A monitor doesn't output anything. It accepts video signals as input.
Yes they do.

They output light, into your eyes. Colored light at that.

:D

But you are right about a 1680*1050 not being "true HD 1080p" .

And Aris is also right about it not mattering on a 22".

Even at 32" the dif between a quality 720 and a "True 1080" is a placebo, at best. (at the proper viewing distance)

Bakkone
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2008 9:59 am
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

Post by Bakkone » Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:49 am

Bad viewing angles is a big problem even for non-pro-colour-geek-people.

When looking what to buy you most often compare to your present monitor. Most of the time this is a smaller monitor. So a lot of people compare their 24" wide to a 19". When sitting in front a 19" angles won't be a problem. However, when you expand as much horizontally as you do with a 24", fact is most people will see quite a difference in colour.

Me, I don't see the point of getting a big monitor if the inches on the sides are pretty much useless, then I'd say go for smaller.

Wibla
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 779
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 12:03 am
Location: Norway

Post by Wibla » Wed Dec 03, 2008 7:41 am

look no further: HP LP2475W

Aris
Posts: 2299
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 10:29 am
Location: Bellevue, Nebraska
Contact:

Post by Aris » Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:55 pm

Nick Geraedts wrote:Aris... re-read what you just typed. A monitor doesn't output anything. It accepts video signals as input.
Idunno about your monitor, but mine accepts a video signal as input and then OUTPUTS a picture on the screen.

Monitors are an output device. An example of an input device would be a keyboard. You do not input anything with a monitor, except maybe if you have a touchscreen.
Bakkone wrote:Me, I don't see the point of getting a big monitor if the inches on the sides are pretty much useless, then I'd say go for smaller.
I have a 22" wide aspect LCD with "bad TN viewing angles", and i cannot see any difference at the edges compared to the center of the screen.

godbreath
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 11:13 pm
Location: san jose

Post by godbreath » Wed Dec 03, 2008 11:08 pm

Aris wrote: Idunno about your monitor, but mine accepts a video signal as input and then OUTPUTS a picture on the screen.

Monitors are an output device. An example of an input device would be a keyboard. You do not input anything with a monitor, except maybe if you have a touchscreen.
With regards to the computer, the monitor outputs the signal from the computer, but with regards to the monitor, the monitor receives a video signal, making the video signal as an input.
Aris wrote: I have a 22" wide aspect LCD with "bad TN viewing angles", and i cannot see any difference at the edges compared to the center of the screen.
Try filling your entire monitor with a solid color and see if the edges change color or anything.

And I just bought the dell utlrasharp 2408wfp for $350. Hope that wasnt a bad choice.

ame
Posts: 488
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2007 10:35 pm
Location: Israel

Post by ame » Thu Dec 04, 2008 12:28 am

godbreath wrote: And I just bought the dell utlrasharp 2408wfp for $350. Hope that wasnt a bad choice.
Very good choice. But really the only choice for someone looking for a 24" thast is reasonably priced AND still has all the features you require = not a TN panel + the extra inputs

Bakkone
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2008 9:59 am
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

Post by Bakkone » Tue Dec 09, 2008 7:18 am

Aris, thats great for you. But a lot of people sit closer to their screens and want even bigger screens. Im not saying everyone will have the problem, but it IS a problem that a lot of people don't notice untill its too late.

Wedge
Posts: 1360
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 10:59 pm
Location: NorthEast Arkansas, USA

Post by Wedge » Wed Dec 10, 2008 6:48 pm

Nick Geraedts wrote:Aris... re-read what you just typed. A monitor doesn't output anything. It accepts video signals as input.
I'm sorry? Maybe it's just my mood, but I really can't let that go without comment. Please re-read what YOU just wrote, and if you don't have an epiphany, see next quote:
Aris wrote:Monitors are an output device. An example of an input device would be a keyboard. You do not input anything with a monitor, except maybe if you have a touchscreen.
To reinforce: as a general rule, most devices that receive input have some form of output.

I'm not trying to sound like an a$$hole, but i'm thinking you were attempting to make an insightful point, and that you came up short in explanation. The video card does the number crunching maybe...and the monitor is just the medium that transmits the results. If that's what you meant, then yes, true. But the monitor is outputting. To say otherwise is not correct.

Wedge
Posts: 1360
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 10:59 pm
Location: NorthEast Arkansas, USA

Post by Wedge » Wed Dec 10, 2008 6:54 pm

Back on topic...

godbreath, what is your top dollar you are willing to spend? I can show you great non-TN panels, but none will get to your doorstep for less than ~$400, except if we can find something with rebates or a cashback through liveDOTcom search.

MikeC
Site Admin
Posts: 12283
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:26 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Contact:

Post by MikeC » Wed Dec 10, 2008 8:53 pm

Here's a simple recommendation: BenQ G2400W. 24" D-SUB, DVI and HDMI inputs. Good but not exceptional image quality, according to reviews... still looks very good to me. Excellent text legibility and sharpness. Great value: I paid well under CA$400.

porkchop
Posts: 496
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 1:19 am
Location: Australia

Post by porkchop » Wed Dec 10, 2008 10:02 pm

i recommend my dell s2409w, especially if you can get it cheap- i got mine for a bargain basement price of 255aud delivered :D
- one of the best tn panels i've ever used.
- hdcp, with hdmi dvi and vga connections.
- light weight
- good looking 8)

as with all tn panels i've ever used though, viewing angles aren't good :(
try dragging something colourful (like say the blue title bar of an xp window) from the top edge to the bottom edge of your screen- you will see painfully clearly how it gets lighter at the bottom and darker at the top.

rpsgc
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 1630
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 1:59 am
Location: Portugal

Post by rpsgc » Thu Dec 11, 2008 1:51 am

MikeC wrote:Here's a simple recommendation: BenQ G2400W. 24" D-SUB, DVI and HDMI inputs. Good but not exceptional image quality, according to reviews... still looks very good to me. Excellent text legibility and sharpness. Great value: I paid well under CA$400.
But... but... it whines!

Post Reply