I have a quick question about this monitor. I found it locally on Craigslist for $150, it says that there are only a few light scratches that can only be seen when the screen is totally white. It would be a great deal to get this (assuming it works, I'll be able to check it out in person before I buy it), correct? Currently I have a Dell E173EP 17" LCD monitor, it's not very good. Oh yes, and it would be for general computing and gaming, obviously. I have an X1950Pro if that matters.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
24" Widescreen CRT (FW900) From Ebay arrived,Comments.
- Thread starter mathesar
- Start date
Bummrus[H]a
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2007
- Messages
- 179
That sounds like a good deal to me Goose, especially if the scratches on the screen coating doesn't bother you.
I just purchased 2 FW900's through ebay for $200 each. The guy is located in Phily, and i think he has more. I'm hopefully going to pick them up today, so i'll let you guys know. It's a 2 hour drive each way for me, but i think it'll be worth it.
Oh yes, anyone have an emusicraft windas cable they want to sell?
And i think i'm going to get one of these, maybe...VGA -> BNC
So i picked up one of the monitors today. Sadly i couldn't fit them both in the car! Grr!
Overall i'm quite pleased. The screen displays very well. Text is really crisp at 1900x1200, even more so then my old Hitachi at 1600x1200. Geometry is perfect, and convergance is pretty good. I tweaked and tweaked but i couldn't get the corners to be perfect. I really expected to hurt my back by the way so many of you talked about how heavy it was. You wimps! I actually found it easier to move compared to my Hitachi SuperScan Elite 802 that the FW900 replaced. I just placed the screen against my chest/stomach and gave it a nice hug.
The guy i bought them from said he sells alot of them, and he seems to be getting them from the military. But he also said the hospitals snap them up quick, so he doesn't have anymore to sell atm. : \
This is my first trinitron tube, and those 2 support wires are annoying the hell out of me. I hope my brain learns to ignore them.
I just purchased 2 FW900's through ebay for $200 each. The guy is located in Phily, and i think he has more. I'm hopefully going to pick them up today, so i'll let you guys know. It's a 2 hour drive each way for me, but i think it'll be worth it.
Oh yes, anyone have an emusicraft windas cable they want to sell?
And i think i'm going to get one of these, maybe...VGA -> BNC
So i picked up one of the monitors today. Sadly i couldn't fit them both in the car! Grr!
Overall i'm quite pleased. The screen displays very well. Text is really crisp at 1900x1200, even more so then my old Hitachi at 1600x1200. Geometry is perfect, and convergance is pretty good. I tweaked and tweaked but i couldn't get the corners to be perfect. I really expected to hurt my back by the way so many of you talked about how heavy it was. You wimps!
I actually found it easier to move compared to my Hitachi SuperScan Elite 802 that the FW900 replaced. I just placed the screen against my chest/stomach and gave it a nice hug.The guy i bought them from said he sells alot of them, and he seems to be getting them from the military. But he also said the hospitals snap them up quick, so he doesn't have anymore to sell atm. : \
This is my first trinitron tube, and those 2 support wires are annoying the hell out of me. I hope my brain learns to ignore them.
Wow, I really really cannot believe I read it all, damn nearly 3000 posts.
So here are my experiences with the monitor.
I was really hooked on this monitor after having read only a few dozen pages, and so I decided to buy this monitor from a local dealer (through Craigslist, Los Angeles) and I got it for $350. They are located in Glendale, California if anyone from around here is still looking for one. I've had this monitor for a month now and I have to say, it's a good monitor and the dealers also have a good batch.
So when I got there, Dave and Joe (the dealers) already had one FW900 set up for me with their computer all set up and ready for me to test. I brought my laptop with CheckeMon and Nokia Monitor test programs to test the beauty and after about 1 hour, I left with one in my hands (or should I say arms?). While I was waiting for the monitor to warm up, I watched the game on their DTV + FW900 in the other room. If anyone's looking for the DTV + FW900 combo, it's a good deal, the quality is superb and the monitor doesn't stretch 4:3 commercials (shrunk to size and letter boxed), and displays 1080p commercials full screen, if you know what I mean. If could be their DTV, but who cares.
The monitor they brought out had an impeccable screen, but a few nicks on the side of the actual monitor. That's quite alright, the picture quality was good and that's all I cared for.
Couple notes on quality:
A few people in this thread really want the best/top-notch quality from their monitors and shelled out $30 - $40 for a BNC to VGA or BNC to DVI Cable but are then only disappointed in their purchase after their picture quality degraded or remained the same. I want to say that I originally had VGA to VGA cable connect from the Sony to my 7900GT via a DVI/VGA adapter. I noticed that I never quite got the text as clear and it was almost always blurry to a certain extent. So I purchased the VGA to DVI (directly with no adapter) with ferrite cores on either side from Newegg, and I was pleased to see that it made a hell of a lot of difference. Text became super sharp (even sharper for the corners where it wasn't as sharp before). So spend $16 on this cable ($23 shipped) and be happy with it.
Resolution:
The recommended resolution for this monitor (by Sony and a lot of people on here) is 1920 x 1200. However, since that resolution is for a perfect 16:10 screen, and this screen isn't a perfect 16:10 (pull out a ruler, you'll see), I went to my nVidia control and added a 1872 x 1200 resolution @ 95 Hz in order to perserve the near 16:10 while keeping 1200 vertical. I have to say, the icons and what not are not as squished as it used to be. Hey 28 pixels IS noticable!
Convergence:
I only noticed a bit of an off convergence in my bottom right corner, but that's quite alright, since 90% of the screen is pretty darn sharp. Of course I had to compromise a little using the convergence dots test, but it's a good compromise.
Color:
I did what a lot of people on this thread did with their nvidia cards. I kept my normal Brightness at 27-30, Contrast 72 for text, and then Brightness at 18-20 and contrast 90 for movies and games. Boosted the digital vibrance by a tinsy bit, a bit on the sharpening and everything on my monitor looks good. I don't know what color temperature I am using, since all I did was just go sRGB and then color restoration. If anyone knows how to tell, please tell me
Pictures! Everyone likes pictures, so I will show off some of mine:
Here is a picture of the chip
Here is a picture of the screwdriver I used to gain access to my focus pots from the outside of my monitor:
and here is a picture of it stuck in, btw it's convienent to have two screwdrivers that you can turn at the same time and not having to take it out and find the other hole.
Please forgive the image quality, as this digital camera is not so great at taking these kinds of pictures.
That's all for now, and I hope you all enjoyed reading this positive review!
So here are my experiences with the monitor.
I was really hooked on this monitor after having read only a few dozen pages, and so I decided to buy this monitor from a local dealer (through Craigslist, Los Angeles) and I got it for $350. They are located in Glendale, California if anyone from around here is still looking for one. I've had this monitor for a month now and I have to say, it's a good monitor and the dealers also have a good batch.
So when I got there, Dave and Joe (the dealers) already had one FW900 set up for me with their computer all set up and ready for me to test. I brought my laptop with CheckeMon and Nokia Monitor test programs to test the beauty and after about 1 hour, I left with one in my hands (or should I say arms?). While I was waiting for the monitor to warm up, I watched the game on their DTV + FW900 in the other room. If anyone's looking for the DTV + FW900 combo, it's a good deal, the quality is superb and the monitor doesn't stretch 4:3 commercials (shrunk to size and letter boxed), and displays 1080p commercials full screen, if you know what I mean. If could be their DTV, but who cares.
The monitor they brought out had an impeccable screen, but a few nicks on the side of the actual monitor. That's quite alright, the picture quality was good and that's all I cared for.
Couple notes on quality:
A few people in this thread really want the best/top-notch quality from their monitors and shelled out $30 - $40 for a BNC to VGA or BNC to DVI Cable but are then only disappointed in their purchase after their picture quality degraded or remained the same. I want to say that I originally had VGA to VGA cable connect from the Sony to my 7900GT via a DVI/VGA adapter. I noticed that I never quite got the text as clear and it was almost always blurry to a certain extent. So I purchased the VGA to DVI (directly with no adapter) with ferrite cores on either side from Newegg, and I was pleased to see that it made a hell of a lot of difference. Text became super sharp (even sharper for the corners where it wasn't as sharp before). So spend $16 on this cable ($23 shipped) and be happy with it.
Resolution:
The recommended resolution for this monitor (by Sony and a lot of people on here) is 1920 x 1200. However, since that resolution is for a perfect 16:10 screen, and this screen isn't a perfect 16:10 (pull out a ruler, you'll see), I went to my nVidia control and added a 1872 x 1200 resolution @ 95 Hz in order to perserve the near 16:10 while keeping 1200 vertical. I have to say, the icons and what not are not as squished as it used to be. Hey 28 pixels IS noticable!
Convergence:
I only noticed a bit of an off convergence in my bottom right corner, but that's quite alright, since 90% of the screen is pretty darn sharp. Of course I had to compromise a little using the convergence dots test, but it's a good compromise.
Color:
I did what a lot of people on this thread did with their nvidia cards. I kept my normal Brightness at 27-30, Contrast 72 for text, and then Brightness at 18-20 and contrast 90 for movies and games. Boosted the digital vibrance by a tinsy bit, a bit on the sharpening and everything on my monitor looks good. I don't know what color temperature I am using, since all I did was just go sRGB and then color restoration. If anyone knows how to tell, please tell me
Pictures! Everyone likes pictures, so I will show off some of mine:
Here is a picture of the chip
Here is a picture of the screwdriver I used to gain access to my focus pots from the outside of my monitor:
and here is a picture of it stuck in, btw it's convienent to have two screwdrivers that you can turn at the same time and not having to take it out and find the other hole.
Please forgive the image quality, as this digital camera is not so great at taking these kinds of pictures.
That's all for now, and I hope you all enjoyed reading this positive review!
I thought that using the BNC of this monitor was better than using the VGA? Better quality and such... and given the fact that most current top of the line videocards only have DVI ports on them... well... nuff said... was just curious if there was a DVI ( from the port of the videocard ) to BNC ( the connectors on this monitor ) cable out there? One that would be recommended...
Yes, I did google such a thing but all I got were crap sites that I ain't ever heard of before... and every site I hit up did NOT have a DVI to BNC cable... they had DVI to VGA of course...
Yes, I did google such a thing but all I got were crap sites that I ain't ever heard of before... and every site I hit up did NOT have a DVI to BNC cable... they had DVI to VGA of course...
True, you're right, BNC is part of a lot of professional line monitors back in the day, but nowadays, videocards' output quality is just a lot better than before. You can buy a BNC cable and maybe fool yourself into thinking you'll get a better quality out of it, but I personally think it's a "mental" quality increase. but that's just me.
The part where you lose a bit of video quality is through the adapter. Your best bet is to go cable to cable, don't use any connectors, extensions, or adapters in between. So for me, I have two DVI ports on my 7900 GT, then I would use a cable like the one I am using now, a direct DVI to VGA cable. I would not use the DVI->VGA adapter that came with my card, because it has an extra conversion step and has a chance of degrading video quality.
Yeah there is, but I don't know where to get them, and almost everyone on this thread has claimed they don't see a difference in picture quality.
1878 by 1200 would be the precise resolution, if the videocard will do it. (Screen is 482 by 308 mm).
I don't know if ferrite cores are a good thing. Maybe it depends on the overall design of the cable.
Digital vibrance produces a nice effect. However, against a test pattern I've actually found that it causes some of the colors to drop out.
Ok...enough of my nitpicking.
I'm sure you'll enjoy the monitor -- Sony's beautiful Trinitron masterpiece, and gone too soon...
I don't know if ferrite cores are a good thing. Maybe it depends on the overall design of the cable.
Digital vibrance produces a nice effect. However, against a test pattern I've actually found that it causes some of the colors to drop out.
Ok...enough of my nitpicking.
I'm sure you'll enjoy the monitor -- Sony's beautiful Trinitron masterpiece, and gone too soon...
I'm no expert on this. I've heard ferrite cores have the side effect of attenuating part of the signal going through, whereas I would rather throw the whole signal at the monitor and have a cable with other shielding and such to take care of noise reduction.
But this might be splitting hairs and I don't know. And I think it really depends on the overall cable. If the text is finely focused and all, it sounds like you must have a pretty good cable. And eliminating the adapter is certainly an advantage as you mention.
haste
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2005
- Messages
- 8,022
i just got an 8800gtx and gaming in 2304x1440 is amazing on this monitor...
im in heaven
im in heaven
Spare-Flair
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2003
- Messages
- 7,471
I wish that I could find one or a dealer with one in Canada. Even contemplating shipping one of these from the U.S. is purely insane.
just about any CRT is going to look better than any LCD unless that LCD is uber expensive made for pro's, and then it'll look AS GOOD but most likely not better.
not sure about the other question, but i got my HP A7217A (same as the sony, only with an HP name) used about 2 years ago and its still holding up fine, but then again its not on 24/7, i turn my units off when not in use.
haste
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2005
- Messages
- 8,022
ive had my monitor for almost a 1 1/2 years now, still going stong. it was mfg'ed in 2002 and has the hp logo on it also...
Spare-Flair
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2003
- Messages
- 7,471
A CRT will always trump an LCD in color accuracy, black levels, response time, almost everything across the board by many many times, except raw focus and sharpness.
Raw focus and sharpness? That seems like it would be important. I read a lot of text and web pages. Will I notice any problems?
haste
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2005
- Messages
- 8,022
Blazestorm
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2007
- Messages
- 6,940
There's one locally for $300... might be able to get it down to $250-275
Think I should go for it?
I'm really interested in it now... I have a 19" VX922... but a widescreen CRT would be heaven for gaming / movies
Think I should go for it?
I'm really interested in it now... I have a 19" VX922... but a widescreen CRT would be heaven for gaming / movies
You can never compare CRT Text with LCD, because LCD is going to win every time. If you use native/recommended resolution, your LCD will have much more clarity in text, since it's individual "pixels" and not a bunch of phosphors.
EDIT: My mistake, changed last CRT to LCD.
Well, if you guys say it'll have a better picture than the NEC, I'm getting one!!
Does using a VGA connection degrade the quality picture at all? Should I get an adapter?
If you want to keep using the same cable, an adapter might work for you. Some combinations of adapters and cables can cause ghosting. So it might be worth trying several.
If 1920 by 1200 is not clear enough for you, you could run it at 1600 by 1024, to get it closer to LCD like clarity. (Such a lower resolution will allow more room for error.)
Sure you can always step it up, but I think he was referring to about the same sized monitor, comparing the same resolutions. Then, the LCD would have more clarity. But as always an advantage with CRTs and more so with this FW900, you can have many nice resolutions to choose from.
Blazestorm
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2007
- Messages
- 6,940
Well fine... don't care...
Bought it for $250... flawless condition...
Gotta get used to a CRT again but it's perfect... little stress marks on the plastic of the base... but overall it's good so far... I'll tweak it if I need to but it looks fine...
Bought it for $250... flawless condition...
Gotta get used to a CRT again but it's perfect... little stress marks on the plastic of the base... but overall it's good so far... I'll tweak it if I need to but it looks fine...
Is this the FW900? It looks good.
http://www.accurateit.com/details.asp?iid=156#
If I understand correctly from the above posts, the text might not be as good as an LCD but it can be adjusted to be as good?
Thanks for the help.
http://www.accurateit.com/details.asp?iid=156#
If I understand correctly from the above posts, the text might not be as good as an LCD but it can be adjusted to be as good?
Thanks for the help.
Is this the FW900? It looks good.
http://www.accurateit.com/details.asp?iid=156#
If I understand correctly from the above posts, the text might not be as good as an LCD but it can be adjusted to be as good?
Thanks for the help.
No, to clarify, at the same resolution with same to similar sized monitors, LCD text is always superior to CRT's. Only advantage CRT has LCDs on text is you can step down to a bigger resolution, one that will take advantage of the 0.23 dot pitch.
For example. this 24'' monitor (at 22.5'' viewable) compared side by side with a Dell 2407fpw (or similar 24'' LCDs) will most definitely loose to the LCD in text clarity. But it will win in every other department such as colors, backlighting, etc.
As noted by someone else on the dot pitch, the 0.23 dot pitch (and that's only at the center) at higher resolutions will blur the text because the text will be smaller than the dot pitch. So if you go to a bigger resolution (i.e. 1600x XXXX, vs 18XX x 1200), your text will become just as clear at the LCD's, albiet a little bigger.
Also, I made a mistake in my previous post, quoted below. I apologize if that's what threw you off.
Blazestorm
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2007
- Messages
- 6,940
Mine
It's not fading off on the right, it's just the background.
That photoshop window was 1280 x 1024 on my old monitor (full screen)... now look at it... haha
Very nice! i'm glad vista has some drivers for it, and that you got it working nicely.http://www.lousyheros.com/pics/crt.jpg
Mine
It's not fading off on the right, it's just the background.
That photoshop window was 1280 x 1024 on my old monitor (full screen)... now look at it... haha
Thanks!
Ok, I think I got it now. Since I usually lower the resolution (make things bigger) on all the monitors I use I should be able to get the clarity and crispness of the LCD with my CRT.
I have my finger on the trigger to buy one tonight. . . . .
EDIT:
I see a HP A7217A on Accurate IT but it doesn't say it's the same as the FW900. Is that the correct model number for the HP version? The Sony version they have (grade a-) is $699 and the HP version (grade a-) is only $499. $200 difference for the name . . ?
mathesar
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2005
- Messages
- 1,590
Text is nicer on LCDs but I prefer using the CRT for Games & Movies due to the superior response time / resolution flexibilitly & true black levels
Ok, I guess a better question for me to ask is there anybody here who doesn't like reading text on their monitor or, if they only used it for surfing (no games), would trade their FW900 in for a LCD?
I'm sorry about all the questions. I just want to make the best decision I can without being able to see the monitor.
Thanks.
I'm sorry about all the questions. I just want to make the best decision I can without being able to see the monitor.
Thanks.
GreenMonkey
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2006
- Messages
- 2,159
I like websurfing on my fw900. 1920x1200 = 2 internet windows side by side.
If you do no games and no movies on it, you might as well get an LCD. LCDs do win out for sharpness for general desktop usage and text and they are likely cheaper or close to the FW900 price these days anyway. So, if that's all you're doing, you should get an LCD. What need do you have for a CRT then?
DaneGuy, to confirm your indecisiveness, the HP A7217A is the same as the Sony FW900.
Both monitors perform identically, they are just cosmetically different. So your only concern right now should be, "Should I spend 200 more on a silver casing or instead, save 200 and stick with the white one."
Good luck
EDIT: Besides the bleeding obvious of why this CRT is better than LCD, I think you just want some reassurance from someone who was similarly in your position before. So it looks like you are having the same concerns as I did when I bought mine. Let me just tell what I went through before I bought mine. Like i said earlier, if you want to match the text clarity of CRT to LCD (same size) you need to up your resolution on your CRT, but your font will look slightly bigger, but you said you're okay with that. I don't play that many games, but I got rid of my 20 in LCD for this 24in beauty. Reason I did it was it can perform 1900x1200 with readable text, and many more flexible resolutions. For me that important, because if my video card cannot handle some of the new games, then I have to lower the resolution so my game can run semi-smoothly. You can't do that on the LCD and expect to get good results. And sometimes, after a long day of work for me, my eyes are tired, I like to sit back farther from my screen and view my e-mail news from a distance. So I have to make the resolution bigger (usually 16xx X 10xx will do), and I feel comfortable reading it. Again, with LCD's, you're stuck at native res.
Blazestorm
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2007
- Messages
- 6,940
I have my FW900 as my main monitor for videos/games/forums. and my VX922 for a second monitor for Vegas (movie editing) and chat boxes... aim/xfire/IRC
LCD Does win in brightness and text clarity... that's about it...
Another thing with the FW900... like all trinitrons there are a couple very faint lines visible.. I had a 17" Trinitron... (forgot the model... E200 I think) for a few years... I loved it... then went to the VX922... and now back to a trinitron.
Either way... if you're going to use it for text/web browsing/whatever. Get a 22" WS LCD... it's better for your situation... movies and games will be O.K. but the FW900 would be better.
Anyways... mine came with the focus almost perfect, I tried to adjust it but ended up where I started... I'm impressed... anyone know the length of life these have?
LCD Does win in brightness and text clarity... that's about it...
Another thing with the FW900... like all trinitrons there are a couple very faint lines visible.. I had a 17" Trinitron... (forgot the model... E200 I think) for a few years... I loved it... then went to the VX922... and now back to a trinitron.
Either way... if you're going to use it for text/web browsing/whatever. Get a 22" WS LCD... it's better for your situation... movies and games will be O.K. but the FW900 would be better.
Anyways... mine came with the focus almost perfect, I tried to adjust it but ended up where I started... I'm impressed... anyone know the length of life these have?
Thanks for the excellent responses!
EDIT: I think I'm gonna do it!! I've been looking at text on CRTs for years and I haven't been suffering so how bad could it be. As long as there's no ghosting/shadows of characters I'm happy. (not sure I know what ghosting means but that's what it looks like on my current monitor when I look at text).
Question: What cables do I need? How do I calibrate? What settings should I choose?
Thanks.
EDIT: I think I'm gonna do it!!
I've been looking at text on CRTs for years and I haven't been suffering so how bad could it be. As long as there's no ghosting/shadows of characters I'm happy. (not sure I know what ghosting means but that's what it looks like on my current monitor when I look at text). Question: What cables do I need? How do I calibrate? What settings should I choose?
Thanks.