Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

What monitor would YOU choose?

D

Doju

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Jun 16, 2008
1,510
1
Hello Macrumorsers! Today, I come to you asking which monitor YOU would choose.

24 inch
1,000:1 contrast ratio
5ms (response time)
1920x1080 res
no mic/webcam
no USB ports

http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/...4471&lid=566643&acd=10550055-2026489-#reviews

23 inch
80,000:1 contrast ratio
2ms (response time)
2048 x 1152 res
webcam, mic
touch buttons
4 usb ports

http://accessories.dell.com/sna/pro...tdetail.aspx?c=ca&l=en&cs=cadhs1&sku=320-7641

I know a 1 inch difference is superficial, but it's killing me. The 23 inch is obviously better, right? (And just a tad bit more expensive.) I might as well go an inch smaller and get the higher res and everything else, no?
 
get the second one for SURE! The contrast ratio is 80 times better! Also, everything in general is better!
 
Doju said:
Could you explain? :confused:
Click to expand...

Moving from a system that displays a static motionless image to a system that displays a dynamic, changing picture slightly complicates the definition of the contrast ratio, because of the need to take into account the extra temporal dimension to the measuring process. Thus the ratio of the luminosity of the brightest and the darkest color the system is capable of producing simultaneously at any instant of time is called static contrast ratio, while the ratio of the luminosity of the brightest and the darkest color the system is capable of producing over time is called dynamic contrast ratio.

...

Dynamic contrast ratio

A notable recent development in the LCD technology is the so called "dynamic contrast" (DC). When there is a need to display a dark image, the display would underpower the backlight lamp (or decrease the aperture of the projector's lens using an iris), but will proportionately amplify the transmission through the LCD panel. This gives the benefit of realizing the potential static contrast ratio of the LCD panel in dark scenes, when the image is watched in a dark room. The drawback is that if a dark scene does contain small areas of superbright light, image quality may be over exposed.
The trick for the display is to determine how much of the highlights may be unnoticeably blown out in a given image under the given ambient lighting conditions.
Brightness, as it is most often used in marketing literature, refers to the emitted luminous intensity on screen measured in candela per square metre (cd/m2). The higher the number, the brighter the screen.
It is also common to market only the dynamic contrast ratio capability of a display (when it is better than its static contrast ratio), which should not be directly compared to the static contrast ratio. A plasma display with a static 5000:1 contrast ratio will show superior contrast to an LCD display with 5000:1 dynamic and 1000:1 static contrast ratio when the input signal contains full range of brightnesses from 0 to 100% simultaneously. However they will be on par when input signal ranges only from 0 to 20% brightness.
Click to expand...

- Wikipedia

Think of it being similar to turning your display completely off then turning it on and maximizing the white and claiming that it has OMGWTFAWESOEM contrast ratio, whereas in a realistic situation it can't display contrast differences that high.
 
Doju said:
Could you explain? :confused:
Click to expand...

Dynamic contrast ratio is used to make displays look better to consumers. The Static contrast ratio of that display is much less then 80,000:1. When dynamic contrast is measured, the display under-powers the backlight, thus making the contrast ratio higher, but this can cause some brigther components to be over exposed in an image. You won't need to worry about it unless, you make a living off of graphics design/photography.

EDIT: Aea beat me to it.

Don
 
Cheers.

So, perhaps a stupid question, but which would be better? 1000:1 static, or 80,000:1 dynamic?

Oh, and it's cheaper too. Recommended? Come to think of it, the inch smaller wouldn't matter because the res is larger. :p
 
Doju said:
Cheers.

So, perhaps a stupid question, but which would be better? 1000:1 static, or 80,000:1 dynamic?

Oh, and it's cheaper too. Recommended? Come to think of it, the inch smaller wouldn't matter because the res is larger. :p
Click to expand...

I would still go with the second.

Don
 
Okay, but just to ease my spirits, which of the contrast ratios is better?
 
It probably has the same regular contrast ratio, there should be a way to turn it off like there is on TVs.

You always want to turn off dynamic contrast, it makes everything look horrible.

I would say neither are very good monitors because they use TN. Get a refurbished or old gen 24" Ultrasharp from the dell outlet section.
 
stainlessliquid said:
It probably has the same regular contrast ratio, there should be a way to turn it off like there is on TVs.

You always want to turn off dynamic contrast, it makes everything look horrible.

I would say neither are very good monitors because they use TN. Get a refurbished or old gen 24" Ultrasharp from the dell outlet section.
Click to expand...

But for the average home user, a TN panel is fine. I personally regret getting a 20" iMac, because of the TN panel. Most people don't even notice the difference though.

Don
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back