Screen ratio Vs Price

Discussion in 'Mac Accessories' started by NStocks, Oct 5, 2010.

  1. NStocks macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Location:
    England
    #1
    So I'm looking for a external monitor to go with my 17" Macbook Pro (on a Mstand and Apple BT Keyboard). I had the intention to buy a 1920 x 1200 resolution screen because I've read that it gives you more 'room' to work AKA more pixels. It also matches the resolution of my Mac.

    What I've found (and probably isn't new to anyone) is that on average a 16:10 screen is at least £100 for the equivalent 16:9 counterpart.

    I work from my computer for my studies (Architecture) and sit at a desk for around 10 hours a day, so I'm sure 2 screens will increase productivity. I just need to justify/tell myself that the extra £100 or so is worth it... Also, I have found that most screens these days are TFT, which is a great technology but IPS is far superior. However, I will be mounting the screen to a wall to save desk space, so would the less-than-great viewing angle of the TFT/LCD suffice?

    I'm looking at at least 22" monitor, prices £130-£200 (which is a small budget I know!)

    I appreciate any advice

    Thank You
     
  2. ovrlrd macrumors 65816

    ovrlrd

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2009
    #2
    TFT is not the panel specification, it stands for Thin-Film Transistors, which is what all modern LCD technologies use. They all use a matrix of Thin-Film Transistors. The technology used to create the matrix of TFTs is what denotes the type of panel used.

    All IPS panels use TFT, just like all PVA panels use TFT, and all TN panels use TFT. They just have different types of active matrix technology to create the panel.

    When you read somewhere that says it uses TFT, it's basically the same thing as saying it's an LCD panel. Companies add the "TFT" part to confuse people (clearly it worked on you) to make them think it's something different.

    Each type of active matrix technology has it's strengths and weaknesses. I think the common preference is for IPS though because it has the best viewing angle and color accuracy. Some people might prefer a display with the fastest response time, and they might buy a TN panel instead (these panels can also offer true 120hz refresh rates). It all depends on what you need.

    As far as aspect ratio goes, a 16:10 display will indeed offer more resolution than a 16:9 display of a similar horizontal resolution (1920 in your example is the horizontal resolution, so 16:10 would be 1920x1200 and 16:9 would be 1920x1080). This can be worth it for some people, but many people don't really mind the 16:9 aspect ratio. Some people even prefer it for watching widescreen video because it does not produce black bars.

    In my opinion from what it sounds like you are looking for, you should probably get an IPS panel. The aspect ratio is up to you to decide.
     
  3. rprebel macrumors 6502

    rprebel

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2010
    Location:
    Where the bluebonnets bloom
    #3
    Seconding this.

    The black bar thing is one of the reasons I went for a 16:9. The price difference was the other. I couldn't justify an extra $100-$200 for 120 pixels. Ultimately, it comes down to personal preference. If you want the 16:10, get the 16:10. The price difference for getting an IPS is worth it, though.
     
  4. NStocks thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Location:
    England
    #4
    I don't watch movies that often, though part of the reason of a external monitor is so that I can watch TV etc. on my Mac and work on the external...

    So would you say the screen quality (IPS) is worth more that the resolution? I may have got this wrong but if 16:10 is higher resolution, wouldn't that be a plus for a larger screen over the screen technology? I know the IPS is more of the panel technology in terms of colour, contrast and clarity, not the resolution of pixels...

    One reason for contemplating the 16:10 is because the extra 'inch' (not realistic) of height accommodates for toolbars in CAD programs which apparently makes a lot of difference.

    Can anyone reccomend, or even find a IPS monitor for less that £250 in the UK? eBuyer has a poor search function :p
     
  5. rprebel macrumors 6502

    rprebel

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2010
    Location:
    Where the bluebonnets bloom
    #5
    I would say the screen quality is worth more than the resolution...to me. Whether it's worth more to you is a question for you.;)
     
  6. dissolve macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    #6
    I'm not familiar with UK pricing, but the Dell 2408wfp is a highly recommended 24" 16:10 IPS monitor. Is color accuracy or viewing angle important to you? Those are the primary reasons to get an IPS.
     
  7. NStocks thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Location:
    England
    #7
    That model isn't in the UK but the closest model is the u2410 which is over £400.

    The main importance is screen real estate. I'm leaning towards the 16:10 for sure. I've just compared my Mac screen to my Brother Samsung P2250 which is 1920 x 1080 and it cuts at least 2 inches off which is vital for me...I print to an Epson R2880 printer which is professional-grade... as long as the screen is accurate enough to colour match then I should be ok. I would say that 40% of my work is with black lines anyway (text or lines)

    The screen will most likely be mounted on the wall to save desk space so I'm not sure viewing angles will be of any concern. However, if the monitor is very thing, then it will stay on the desk.

    I can't say a IPS display is possible unfortunately. They are prices over £300 which is way too much for me, even though I can potentially afford it. (the money can go to more thing like materials for Uni etc.)

    For that reason, the most likley candidate would be: http://www.ebuyer.com/product/150964

    It looks like a great monitor, it;s just not IPS.
     
  8. alust2013 macrumors 601

    alust2013

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Location:
    On the fence
    #8
    That one looks very nice. You definitely do want 16:10 if you are doing CAD as well. I highly prefer that myself anyhow, and luckily I got one of the last few inexpensive ones. TN panels really aren't that bad in my experience. Sure they don't have the best color or viewing angles, but you don't really need that unless you're a photographer/videographer, etc.
     
  9. No1nfoProvided macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2009
    #9
    I think you wanted to compare TN vs IPS panels in the OP, but that's besides the point. That panel that you linked to is a TN panel (under specifications - TFT technology). Anyways for more information on this, you should see this link and look at the types.

    As for which monitor you should buy and at what resolution, the difference between 16:10 and 16:9 isn't that much. I like standards and I think it's better that computer monitors are moving towards 16:9 resolution to match the aspect ratios of TVs and film, etc. Be sure to do a lot of research on the monitor you decide to buy because there might be issues that other people experience. There are way too many monitors out there for me to make a recommendation.
     
  10. NStocks thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Location:
    England
    #10
    There's definitely more to look into, after all the display is the most important component.

    I'm almost certain that I want a 16:10 ratio. Although to most consumers it won't matter, like what alust2013 said, CAD work does look better on a 16:10.

    I've just run a CAD program on a samsung TV screen that is 26", 16:9 and though the screen is twice as large as my Mac, there isn't enough working space... It's quite shocking really but that's what I've found.

    Not sure if anyone is 'in' the display market but what is the likelihood of me getting a 16:10 IPS for under £250? There are far too many to choose from but if I can rule that out, then I have a better chance of being realistic. I'd rather have a high-end TN that I can work on, rather than a under-sized IPS.

    PS I'm also a hobbyist photographer and I work with colour a lot... If the TN is that 'bad' I could always review the work on my Mac before print. (after all my printer and Mac are on the same desk so it's no problem!

    Thank You
     
  11. No1nfoProvided macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2009
    #11
    I'm almost certain that the Samsung TV you were looking at was 720p which is not even close to the 1920x1080 resolution of a 1080p TV. The resolution, not the size, is the most important spec when trying to discern working space. I have a 28" monitor with 1920x1200 resolution, but the working space is the same as any other 16:10 resolution monitor (from size 15"-25") if it has the same resolution. Things would just look bigger on my monitor, which could be important to you.

    In terms of color, just be sure your monitor is calibrated correctly, and it should be fine. Your mac should work fine for review if you're certain it matches the settings of printer and everything.
     
  12. NStocks thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Location:
    England
    #12
    Yes, I know that the resolution is the important factor, I was just speaking hypothetically... a screen twice as large give less working space.

    In terms of colour, I guess the only factor that is making the prints accurate is that I use colour management and the correct profiles for my printer. I have found that the default profile matches my prints quite accurately. (they are always going to be darker as prints aren't back-llit like the screen)

    Manufactures like to boast about having a 5000:1 contrast but what would actually work for me in terms of colour accuracy? Are all TFT/LCD panels pretty much the same in terms of colour?

    Thank You.

    Oh, which display do you have, just out of interest.
     
  13. Time Clock macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2004
    Location:
    Hemet, CA
    #13
    What about a Dell Ultrasharp U2211h? I bought it because it's an ips display that got decent reviews, is inexpensive, and its resolution is greater than any 16:10 display in its size that I found. Its resolution is 1920x1080 compared to the 1680x1050 found on other similar monitors.
     
  14. NStocks thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Location:
    England
    #14
    Nice monitor but it's still a 16:9 which means less working space..The fundamental for me is the working space.

    Thanks anyway.
     
  15. barkmonster macrumors 68020

    barkmonster

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2001
    Location:
    Lancashire
    #15
    I use a 23" 1920 x 1080 LG screen I got for about £160 last December, it was a replacement for a 19" 1280 x 1024 Samsung screen I damaged while moving and I still have another 19" 1280 x 1024 screen as a second display.

    I wouldn't go back to a lower resolution screen but to be honest my eyes wouldn't take the DPI of a 1080p display at any less than 23" anyway. Even though I have the screen about arms length from my seating position.

    I did a quick Google search and it's just over £140 now: http://www.google.co.uk/products?q=...ent=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wf
     
  16. No1nfoProvided macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2009
    #16
    I have a Hanns-G HG281D and I wouldn't recommend it unless you only game on it. It has pretty bad backlight bleeding and calibration settings are minimal so movie watching and photoediting are no go on this thing. But I got it pretty cheap for such a big monitor. If I could go back, I woulda bought a Dell 2408WFP I saw for $275 refurb on ebay (and an additional 8% off due to Bing Cashback). Contrast is a pretty poor judge of a monitor's specs unless it was measured and reported by a 3rd party. This is because there are no standards for reporting contrast ratios, you see companies with what you believe to be insane contrast ratios, but in reality, it's pretty normal. I'm not sure how dynamic contrast ratio works too, but Samsung likes to report these insanely high 30,000:1 dynamic contrast ratios. I wish you a lot of luck on your monitor decision though; lol. Having been through it myself, I know how difficult of a decision it is.
     
  17. Time Clock macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2004
    Location:
    Hemet, CA
    #17
    It's resolution gives it more width and a little more vertical workspace than other similarly sized monitors that are 16x10.
     
  18. NStocks thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Location:
    England
    #18
    Yep but it's the vertical space that I prefer. Toolbars in CAD programs take a lot of space...
     
  19. Time Clock macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2004
    Location:
    Hemet, CA
    #19
    That may be true, but most displays that are around the size that you're looking into are either some form of 16:9 or about 1680x1050. You could look into a used 23" Apple Cinema Display.
     
  20. NStocks thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Location:
    England
    #20
    I'm now considering a IPS display, due to the fact that I do use quite a lot of colour and because the panel overall is much better.

    However, I have not seen a 1920x1200 IPS monitor for around £250 and is also wall-mountable. Any help here?

    I continue to look as I'm ver eager to order (today) so that I can be more productive!

    Thank You
     

Share This Page