Does a mediocre S-IPS screen give better IQ and color than the best S-M/PVA screen?

The doublesight is hardly low end, being cheap=/=low end,

It sure beats the 200 bucks more planar, with 1080p over vga and with newer revisions containing an A-TW polarizer eliminating the white glow.

I'm pretty sure only LG Philips make monitor IPS screens anyway.
 
gtg465x said:
Lol those videos and images are beautiful, but they don't help your argument. The black crush effect in those images is exactly what I fixed by calibrating my monitor
Click to expand...

I am not going to argue.
Why?
Yesterday I read another thread.
A guy was looking for a high refresh rate LCD as 60Hz is not acceptable for him.
100 people told him that everything he can find now is 60Hz and explained why.
The guy said that all of them were ~ 8 years old retarded children~.
Finally he reported that managed to find an excellent monitor (19" wide)
with 85Hz refresh rate and he is happy now.

That's why I don't argue.
You have a *VA monitor without colorshift (which is loss of details in dark tones from front view plus limited viewing angles) and you are happy with it. Good for you.

P.S. Don't forget to calibrate Blue-ray player or PC3 as well. So you won't have colorshift on video either.
 
Hey, I had a 75Hz native res 17" monitor, and it's right in front of me.

It looks like crap at 60 Hz actually.
 
DRCRAWFISH said:
The doublesight is hardly low end, being cheap=/=low end,

It sure beats the 200 bucks more planar, with 1080p over vga and with newer revisions containing an A-TW polarizer eliminating the white glow.

I'm pretty sure only LG Philips make monitor IPS screens anyway.
Click to expand...

A-TW polarizer eliminating the white glow
Click to expand...
.
Let me ask. Have you seen a white glow you are talking about?
 
albovin said:
I am not going to argue.
Why?
Yesterday I read another thread.
A guy was looking for a high refresh rate LCD as 60Hz is not acceptable for him.
100 people told him that everything he can find now is 60Hz and explained why.
The guy said that all of them were ~ 8 years old retarded children~.
Finally he reported that managed to find an excellent monitor (19" wide)
with 85Hz refresh rate and he is happy now.

That's why I don't argue.
You have a *VA monitor without colorshift (which is loss of details in dark tones from front view plus limited viewing angles) and you are happy with it. Good for you.

P.S. Don't forget to calibrate Blue-ray player or PC3 as well. So you won't have colorshift on video either.
Click to expand...

OMG stop being retarded. I haven't once said that my monitor doesn't have color shift. In fact, I've said that it DOES. Learn to read (and write too). Color shift and black crush are DIFFERENT.

P.S. If you can't even spell Blu-Ray or PS3, then I don't think you're in a position to be correcting people.
 
gtg465x said:
Learn to read (and write too). Color shift and black crush are DIFFERENT.
Click to expand...
Ha-ha! Shame on you! That's all what you could find in my posts!
Well, I can misspell something, especially on a hurry. This is my second language.
But I don't fill the thread with stubborn childish ignorance.
Regardless how pure is your writing - go back learn alphabet of monitors and basics of LCD panels. It does not matter how you call colorshift - call it grape jelly if you want - all who read this thread understand all and well: *VA has it all - color shift, black crush, gamma shift and grape jelly.
 
albovin said:
Ha-ha! Shame on you! That's all what you could find in my posts!
Well, I can misspell something, especially on a hurry. This is my second language.
But I don't fill the thread with stubborn childish ignorance.
Regardless how pure is your writing - go back learn alphabet of monitors and basics of LCD panels. It does not matter how you call colorshift - call it grape jelly if you want - all who read this thread understand all and well: *VA has it all - color shift, black crush, gamma shift and grape jelly.
Click to expand...

Yay, you only quoted a small part of my response again. Mods, why isn't there a smiley face holding a gun and blowing its brains out? I would like to use it now.

P.S. When did I say *VA screens don't have color shift, gamma shift, or black crush? I'de like you to quote me saying those things.
 
gtg465x said:
Mods, why isn't there a smiley face holding a gun and blowing its brains out? I would like to use it now.
Click to expand...

:) Here it is, but no gun...
Well, good for fun.

To be serious, just pay attention to what Snowdog wrote.
It's exactly what he says.
 
LOL

Wow, great feedback guys.

Lemme see if I can summarize it ;-)

A S-IPS is more suitable for professional design than a VA panel
- not because the heads-on IQ or color reproduction is lower, that is on par;
- but because on a VA, because of color/gamma/tint shift and because of smaller viewing angles ánd less detail in blacks (black crush, which i guess is also caused by the shift limitation of this panel) you never get a consistent image or color, since this changes with every head movement you make....

And since these are limitations of any VA screen (in some screens more visable than in others), in principle a VA screen will always be less suitable for color critical and imaging work.

Does that sum it up correctly????
 
Pretty much. Another VA consideration, and one of the reasons I'm thinking about swapping mine for IPS is that VA has a very non-linear response time. So they are extremely fast as doing dark to bright, and also fast at bright to bright. However they are pretty slow at dark to dark, even when overdriven. So what this means is the amount of ghosting you get depends on the game/movie you are looking at. WoW on my VA panel is just stunning. FEAR isn't as great. Don't get me wrong, it still looks good, but there is noticeable ghosting when the game gets real dark, which it likes to do. IPS on the other hand has a fairly consistent response time. So game will look pretty universally good (or bad) regardless of how bright they happen to be.

I will say that the VA colour shifting is noticeable in some various ways. One thing is that VAs look their best at a distance. The display is fine for normal use, but when I lay on my bed, like 10 feet away, man, now that is some nice colour. Just doesn't look quite as good up close. Part of the reason is that even when you are looking at a screen head on, you are looking at various parts at an angle. If you are close to a large widescreen you can be 45 degrees to the edges potentially. However you move back, and the angle at which you are viewing the screen narrows and thus it all get more consistent.

Again, don't get me wrong, VA is not crap. I've had a VA panel for a couple years now and I like it. I'm not even sure I'll be replacing it with an IPS panel. However, you are correct about the issues with it.
 
The colorshift and back crush issues I see clearly on my MacBook (which is TN I guess?).
However, my Dell 2405 (PVA) at work doesn't seem to be troubled too much with color/gamma shifting... or perhaps I just got used to it ;-)
 
idream said:
LOL

Wow, great feedback guys.

Lemme see if I can summarize it ;-)

A S-IPS is more suitable for professional design than a VA panel
- not because the heads-on IQ or color reproduction is lower, that is on par;
- but because on a VA, because of color/gamma/tint shift and because of smaller viewing angles ánd less detail in blacks (black crush, which i guess is also caused by the shift limitation of this panel) you never get a consistent image or color, since this changes with every head movement you make....

And since these are limitations of any VA screen (in some screens more visable than in others), in principle a VA screen will always be less suitable for color critical and imaging work.

Does that sum it up correctly????
Click to expand...

Almost.
With the correction regarding professional design - for any use where photo quality images are involved - from holiday pics to professional design.
But *VA may be good in other areas, depending on equipment and electronics of a particular model.
See more here.
 
SH1 said:
For example, black level and contrast ratio...
Click to expand...

I find that S-PVA panels have better whites than IPS panels (whites look gray on IPS), and a clearer and more vivid image. I strongly prefer S-PVA panels to IPS panels for text work such as word processing, programming, and web browsing. I find that S-PVA is much easier on the eyes and less tiring to look at for many hours a day.
 
visualguy said:
I find that S-PVA panels have better whites than IPS panels (whites look gray on IPS), and a clearer and more vivid image. I strongly prefer S-PVA panels to IPS panels for text work such as word processing, programming, and web browsing. I find that S-PVA is much easier on the eyes and less tiring to look at for many hours a day.
Click to expand...

This statement does not make sense unless you name models you compare.

Technically, IPS has little thicker interpixel net - some people can see that, the majority - not. This is the ONLY trace of disadvantage that can be attributed to IPS.

A sort of antiglare coating effect has no relationship with technologies.

About text on PVA.

I have never seen whiter white than on the NEC 2490 - in comparison with many PVA.

If you are talking about old 19"-20"-23" with low contrast - out of scope. We already kissed goodbye to them.
IPS now starts from 24".

IMO I find good PVA monitors very suitable for office use and I like them. But I need a universal multitask monitor, so I prefered 2490.
 
PVA monitors that I used include Samsung 204T, 243T, 305T, and XL30.

IPS monitors that I used include Dell 2001FP, 3007WFP, 3008WFP, and 30" Apple.

All of the above PVA monitors had better whites than all of the above IPS monitors. Also, the image was clearer, more vivid, and less tiring on the PVA monitos.

The annoying LG panel coating or whatever it is may not be related to IPS technology (I don't know), but it's certainly a lot more common on IPS panels than PVA (I've never seen it on PVA panels), and it is also a factor in my perference for PVA, but not the only factor.
 
Visualguy, don't worry about albovin. He'll say anything to defend his purchase. He just doesn't want to admit that a monitor 1/5th the price of his can match or exceed its performance in one or two aspects.
 
visualguy said:
I find that S-PVA panels have better whites than IPS panels (whites look gray on IPS), and a clearer and more vivid image. I strongly prefer S-PVA panels to IPS panels for text work such as word processing, programming, and web browsing. I find that S-PVA is much easier on the eyes and less tiring to look at for many hours a day.
Click to expand...



IPS panels have a SOFTER white, and do not have that in your face sun blaring brightness of other panels.
whites on an IPS are closest to a CRT, actually. the whites on my nec are 6500K sunlight white, as natural a white as you can get on an lcd. nothing gray about it.
 
visualguy said:
PVA monitors that I used include Samsung 204T, 243T, 305T, and XL30.

IPS monitors that I used include Dell 2001FP, 3007WFP, 3008WFP, and 30" Apple.

All of the above PVA monitors had better whites than all of the above IPS monitors. Also, the image was clearer, more vivid, and less tiring on the PVA monitos.

The annoying LG panel coating or whatever it is may not be related to IPS technology (I don't know), but it's certainly a lot more common on IPS panels than PVA (I've never seen it on PVA panels), and it is also a factor in my perference for PVA, but not the only factor.
Click to expand...

Samsung 204T, 243T, 305T, and XL30.
IPS monitors that I used include Dell 2001FP, 3007WFP, 3008WFP, and 30" Apple.
Click to expand...

Well, 305T and 3008 can be compared if you put them side by side.

305T - I like this panel. Good for office. Same cristal effect though.
XL30 - this expensive crap (no other word suits it better) may be whiter, yes.
3008 is interesting, but I haven't seen it yet.
Try H-IPS.

Also, the image was clearer, more vivid, and less tiring on the PVA monitos
Click to expand...
.
Please, we talk about separate items. Other than that - LOL.
Regarding image - more vivid on XL30 - yes, it must be. For others - :confused:.

panel coating or whatever it is may not be related to IPS technology (I don't know)
Click to expand...
Yes, you know. :) You either know this or you know nothing.

less tiring on the PVA monitos.
Click to expand...
This is your personal opinion with nothing measurable or technically reasonable to justify it. Others may say opposite.
As I said, I like PVA in some areas.
 
gtg465x said:
Visualguy, don't worry about albovin. He'll say anything to defend his purchase. He just doesn't want to admit that a monitor 1/5th the price of his can match or exceed its performance in one or two aspects.
Click to expand...

Try to understand the difference between a purchase and a choice.
If you make an informative choice, you don't have to defend garbage that you purchased.

He just doesn't want to admit that a monitor 1/5th the price of his can match or exceed its performance in one or two aspects
Click to expand...
Sorry to see your imagination limited to this.
I have published what I admit.
 
albovin said:
Try to understand the difference between a purchase and a choice.
If you make an informative choice, you don't have to defend garbage that you purchased.
Click to expand...

You know, the world isn't all black and white. Something not being the best in all possible ways does not make it garbage, nor only suitable only for light office tasks. You ought to try to see the shades of grey, dare I say calibrate your view of the world. ;)
 
farfromhome said:
You know, the world isn't all black and white. Something not being the best in all possible ways does not make it garbage, nor only suitable only for light office tasks. You ought to try to see the shades of grey, dare I say calibrate your view of the world. ;)
Click to expand...

You don't have to teach me as I have never said that.
Even more.
Read my reviews where I say exactly what you mean.:)
 
visualguy said:
All of the above PVA monitors had better whites than all of the above IPS monitors. Also, the image was clearer, more vivid, and less tiring on the PVA monitos.
Click to expand...

I prefer accurate to vivid. Properly calibrated and in the proper color space, the color and white point should be about even.

PVA monitors were by far the most tiring I have ever used. Because of the high horizontal gamma/tone shifts and the resulting false 3d effect (different angle to each eye), it is like looking at one of those magic eye posters for long periods. Annoying distracting and tiring. That and it puts an odd glare/fluorescent effect on what should be subdued mid-tones as the neared the side of the screen. The grays on this forum turn from grey in the screen center to glowy silver by the sides.

I wish someone had done a thorough review like Albovin did before I got suckered into buying my first PVA after reading about its great "178 degree viewing" angles, which is a bald faced lie.
 
I have a 40 inch S-PVA about 4 feet from me. I don't see a 3d effect. I hadn't heard of this before as a common complaint.

However, as I was warned on this forum, the middle zone is darker. I wish it wasn't, but overall, when it came time to decide whether to keep this thing or not, I found the black level, contrast, clarity, and sheer size for the money, compelling.

(The size increase was important, because it's harder to feel good about LCD coming from a GDM-F520 CRT, except that LCD can trounce CRT in size...)
 
SH1 said:
I have a 40 inch S-PVA about 4 feet from me. I don't see a 3d effect. I hadn't heard of this before as a common complaint.
Click to expand...

It isn't, people vary in what they notice and in what bothers them. I have only seen a handful of people bothered by this (including me). I am very sensitive to visual anomalies.

An example of how it varies: someone asked a question about LCDs on my work forum, and one guy recommended what he bought, he gushed heavy praise with TEN exclamation marks! and claimed it was the best LCD image he has ever seen. The monitor was a samsung 22" TN panel.

People run the gamut from blissfully oblivious, to very sensitive and picky. I am definitely on the picky end of the scale.

When I bought my first LCD I read glowing reviews of the Dell 2405 and bought one. Immediately I was struck by the how it smeared motion, had this horrible lag that made it feel like my mouse was dragging in molasses, a backlight that would give you a sunburn, and all kinds of weird viewing angle problems. I noticed all of this within ten minutes of turning it on, yet none of it was in the reviews I read. Are monitor reviewers 85 years old with cataracts and a drinking problems. How could they not see/notice these issues?? Over time it dawned on my that most people are blissfully oblivious.

IMO if want to review something you should be on the picky end of the scale. If you are oblivious, you should not be reviewing products, or you should at least have a designated "picky bastard" on staff to give a second opinion. Reviews that love everything SUCK.
 
what do u consider mediocre? there are no "cheap" SIPS monitors

I have a dell 2001FP and I bought a 2405FP, I sold the 2405 within a week :p
 
Yeah, vivid.

Just because they pump the gamut to 112% on dells doesn't mean the panel is more vivid.

I'm sure IPS could make higher gamuts than that if they wanted too and you'd be drooling over 212% gamut. 212% gamut would be crazy actually xd
 
albovin said:
If you make an informative choice, you don't have to defend garbage that you purchased.
Click to expand...

Good thing I didn't purchase garbage then :p. What constitutes an informative choice anyways? If all panel types were the same price, then we would obviously all buy IPS. However, for people who aren't made of money, the informative choice would be to get a *VA screen for $300 instead of a marginally better IPS screen for $700.

Anyways... back to the thread topic... which monitor is considered to be the best *VA screen? It would be nice to know this before answering this question once and for all.
 
gtg465x said:
However, for people who aren't made of money, the informative choice would be to get a *VA screen for $300 instead of a marginally better IPS screen for $700.
Click to expand...
You can currently get an IPS for $200 or $400. (in the US, at least)

The informative choice would to be get a 20" IPS instead of a 24" *VA.
 
Yelnats said:
The informative choice would to be get a 20" IPS instead of a 24" *VA.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. The informed choice is to know the advantages and disadvantages of all possible choices, and pick the one that best meets your needs given your budget.

I do not doubt that there are some people (you, albovin, Snowdog, professional photographers or graphics artists) for whom panel quality is paramount to absolutely everything else. For them a 20" IPS would indeed be superior to a 24" VA. For people whom screen size is the absolute greatest concern, a 28" TN might actually make them happier than either a 20" IPS or a 24" VA. For people like me that want a balance of picture quality and screen size, and for whom the benefits of VA outweigh the defects, the 24" VA is the sweet spot. All the supposed problems with VA monitors do not bother me in the least except for gamma shift, and I'll take that over the TN problems, and over the price of a similarly-sized IPS, and the screen size really does matter to me. Not to mention the cheap IPS monitors can't pivot to portrait mode, but my $250 VA monitor can. Which shows that there are other factors besides just panel quality to consider. If there really were one size that fit all, there wouldn't be so many monitors on the market.
 
Yeah, that's true. I was mostly speaking of people who come on this board saying they want a 22" or 24" for photo/video editing. Most of them would be best served with a smaller IPS monitor instead.

They claim image quality is the most important factor, but then won't budge a couple of inches on size.
 
In that scenario, I agree. Anyone who is serious about visual media editing, especially photography, should definitely go for an IPS, even if they have to sacrifice a couple of inches of screen space to do so.
 
gtg465x said:
If all panel types were the same price, then we would obviously all buy IPS. However, for people who aren't made of money, the informative choice would be to get a *VA screen for $300 instead of a marginally better IPS screen for $700.
Click to expand...

IPS choices are clearly limited, but you can get the following:

A Dell 2007wfp for under $400 which will most likely be IPS (cursed Dell Lotto), this is the cheapest new IPS and it Pivots BTW.

Or you can get a DoubleSight 263N for about $700. I guess this is the $700 IPS you refer to. So where is the 26" $300 *VA screen that is marginally worse?

Or you can get a $1000 NEC 2490 which is not marginally better, but stunningly better than just about any other monitor on the market.

Or if really cash strapped you can get a highly regarded NEC 20wmgx2 refurb, for $200.
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1287827

But as I usually indicate, monitor preference is EXTREMELY subjective. Asking what monitor you will like, is close to asking what flavor of ice cream that I think you would like best. I am not you, so I don't know. For me *VA is the worse choice. If I want quality, I will get IPS, if I want cheap, I will get TN. I won't touch *VA unless they drastically change the technology and it no longer has horizontal gamma shift, but it probably wouldn't be called *VA anymore in that case.
 
I notice in your list that there is a gaping hole: there is no good price/performance 24" IPS. You jump straight from the 20" Dell and NEC refurbs to the $700 26". A $400-$600 IPS 24" would make a killer deal. Right now the best deal for a 24" IPS would ironically be an iMac, but you've got to buy a whole computer with it. :D

Snowdog said:
A Dell 2007wfp for under $400 which will most likely be IPS (cursed Dell Lotto), this is the cheapest new IPS and it Pivots BTW.
Click to expand...

I forgot about the Dell (was mostly thinking about the NEC refurb). If I were happy with a 20" screen, I probably would have ended up with that. :) I also like all the connectivity that the Dells tend to have.

Snowdog said:
But as I usually indicate, monitor preference is EXTREMELY subjective. Asking what monitor you will like, is close to asking what flavor of ice cream that I think you would like best. I am not you, so I don't know.
Click to expand...

QFT. I don't know why so many people treat it like a religious war.

Snowdog said:
For me *VA is the worse choice. If I want quality, I will get IPS, if I want cheap, I will get TN. I won't touch *VA unless they drastically change the technology and it no longer has horizontal gamma shift, but it probably wouldn't be called *VA anymore in that case.
Click to expand...

It would then probably be called *HA, and people would complain about the vertical gamma shift then instead. ;)
 
farfromhome said:
I notice in your list that there is a gaping hole: there is no good price/performance 24" IPS. You jump straight from the 20" Dell and NEC refurbs to the $700 26". A $400-$600 IPS 24" would make a killer deal. Right now the best deal for a 24" IPS would ironically be an iMac, but you've got to buy a whole computer with it. :D
Click to expand...

Big time. When a doublesight/planar comes out with a 26 inch IPS, my first question is: do they have a 24" IPS? It would probably be $600 minimum though. The one company that has both (NEC) only has about $100 difference between them. I prefer the 24" for two reasons, I like smaller pixel pitch and I prefer the normal sRGB to wider gamut(and all its problems).

Perhaps the iMac contract is keeping excess 24" IPS panels from hitting the market.
 
wasserkool said:
we can see albovin's intelligence when he called the XL30 expensive garbage.
Click to expand...

Link.

Originally Posted by Karma
I thought LED Backlighting was going to be the new thing to look for (starting 2H of '07). But it just seemed to disappear. Anyone know why it's not being used (if ever)?

visualguy:

There are multiple reasons for this:

1. CCFL technology has improved to the point where it can provide a color gamut which is very close to that of the best RGB LED BLU.

2. The other advantages of LED aren't all that significant: somewhat lower power usage, less heat, fast warm-up, no mercury.

3. LED BLU is significantly more expensive than CCFL, mostly because of lower volumes, and that's a chicken-and-the-egg problem when LED doesn't offer a strong advantage to make it worth the higher price.

4. Technical difficulties. It's actually pretty tricky to get an LED BLU to work in a large monitor. There are all kinds of issues such as heat dissipation (LEDs generate less heat than CCFL, but it's very concentrated and it degrades brightness and kills LEDs quickly). That's why LED LCD monitors have a fan. Maintaining brightness and color uniformity and stability is another challenge.

5. Lower brightness. Vendors compete on how bright their monitors are (don't ask me why), and LED BLU is not as bright as current-generation CCFL.
Click to expand...

Now add all the problems of *VA technology and look at the price of this single-input monitor $4500. Compare to $2200 for the NEC 3090WQXi.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top