LCD vs CRT

Z

Zorg

n00b
Joined
Nov 23, 2008
Messages
24
Sounds like a thread back in 2005 :)

Anyway, I currently have a 4 year old LG Flatron CRT.
It is small (17''), bulky and doesn't belong to this century anymore...but I still like it.
The black is really black, colors don't bleed, it's fairly sharp etc

When it comes to watching a video/divX/DVD or photos will I be better off with a 24'' LCD (like the BenQ FP241VW or the Dell 2408WFP)?
Obviously bigger is better but what about image quality?
(poor view angle is not a concern in my case)

Thanks
 
2408WFP will give you better color clarity, however, you can't really game on it, as it has a high input lag.
 
In a darkened room, CRTs have a much greater dynamic range and can thus show you a much greater variation between the brightest and darkest scenes. (A partial way around these limitations of LCD panels that some displays use is to vary the backlight...)

That said, 17" is on the small side these days. That LCDs can be so much bigger does help make up for the loss of the CRT's virtues...
 
Well they both have their pros and cons, but for me I go to a lot of lan parties and lugging around my old Sony Trinitron was a bit of a problem.
 
IMO, just 19" is a big difference than even 17". Specific example is 1280x960 res @ both screen sizes. It seems to upgrade from a 17-19" mon @ 1280x960 res etc. to a mon w/ comparable "dot-pitch", it would be a 22" 1680x1050+ res or bigger monitor.

If you're strapped for cash or something, I'd like to suggest the Acer X223Wbd 22" for $150 w/ free ship'n. *Black Friday special, ends 11/30. 2 or 3 for the price of some other monitors. :eek:
 
I'm with ya on the CRT man! haha. I didn't know you could have input lag on a monitor and have it mess up gaming. What about the Acer 19"? I just bought one off of newegg.com since it was so cheap for black friday.
 
Money is not my main concern (I can spend $500 for this LCD) but I don't want to buy a new LCD just for the sake of buying a newer model.

I enjoy watching a DVD/DivX in a dark room (pitch black in winter) on my CRT and I don't want to compromise on the quality of the image for a bigger screen.

Same with photos
Here is a pic I took. It looks good on a CRT but I've seen it from a few (lower end TN) LCD and it just doesn't look the same.
http://i33.tinypic.com/352lvh0.jpg
 
if you value good black retention you wont find any PC LCD's close to what a CRT is capable of, unfortunately they haven't carried over all the recent improvements of LCD HDTVs to the PC LCD market yet.

My brother recently bought a 22" Samsung LCD which had the best black level rating for a TN panel and yet it still pales in comparison to my CRT, especially when viewing movies in a darkened room.

In a darkened room, CRTs have a much greater dynamic range and can thus show you a much greater variation between the brightest and darkest scenes. (A partial way around these limitations of LCD panels that some displays use is to vary the backlight...)
Click to expand...

This is exactly what we noticed as well, for example when viewing these 2 photo's on the LCD they both look pretty close in brightness output but on the CRT the differance is like night and day, Pic A is A LOT darker.

Pic A
slingblade.jpg


Pic B
slingblade2.jpg
 
Those are pics of daytime though.


The CRT image looks like shit IMO. When people are talking about differences in darkness they're talking about black images.

Notice how the LCD image is a lot clearer as well.


Even todays cheap LCD's make CRT's look terrible.
 
I didn't know the difference would be that pronounciated, it's not that it's a lot but it is a bit noticeable :eek:
ecstatic.gif
 
Snotrocket said:
Those are pics of daytime though.


The CRT image looks like shit IMO. When people are talking about differences in darkness they're talking about black images.

Notice how the LCD image is a lot clearer as well.


Even todays cheap LCD's make CRT's look terrible.
Click to expand...

What? Those are direct pictures not shots from a LCD or CRT, all I did was take the orignial picture (Pic A) and give it more contrast and then saved it as Pic B. All I was saying is the difference between both pictures isn't as pronounced when viewing them on the LCD.
 
mathesar said:
What? Those are direct pictures not shots from a LCD or CRT, all I did was take the orignial picture (Pic A) and give it more contrast and then saved it as Pic B. All I was saying is the difference between both pictures isn't as pronounced when viewing them on the LCD.
Click to expand...

So you doctored up some pics and are trying to prove what?

I'm viewing them on a 24inch LCD and the top pic looks like hell.
 
Snotrocket, u gotta have a nice CRT to understand i guess, its not the fact that the pic looks bad, its just there for comparison. meathesar is right, noticable difference here on my fw900 compared to my laptop.

You just keep using your LCD and be happy with it.
 
For me, clarity is paramount with my screens so I will never own another CRT. I like my screen bright with crisp corners... and besides the high pitched wine annoys the $*#* outta me.
 
SH1 said:
In a darkened room, CRTs have a much greater dynamic range and can thus show you a much greater variation between the brightest and darkest scenes. (A partial way around these limitations of LCD panels that some displays use is to vary the backlight...)

That said, 17" is on the small side these days. That LCDs can be so much bigger does help make up for the loss of the CRT's virtues...
Click to expand...

That is probably the best sum up of the main advantage of CRT over LCD , good post.

Input lag is another factor but it really takes a picky person to notice smaller input lag values (15-30ms) .

People should just upgrade to LCD's for all kinds of reasons, if anything its better power usage wise for the enviroment and is made with far less lead/mercury than CRT's.
 
Dynamic range for a CRT: 15,000 to 1 or more...
For LCD: Less than 2,000 to 1, often much less...

(It's only with the LED backed selectively dimming sets that you're seeing LCD displays compete in this regard. But those so far have been televisions, at least in the consumer space...)
 
I often forget my monitors on because I have blank screensaver. It is impossible to tell if they're on or off in a darkened room if they display a black picture.
 
Godmachine said:
That is probably the best sum up of the main advantage of CRT over LCD , good post.

Input lag is another factor but it really takes a picky person to notice smaller input lag values (15-30ms) .

People should just upgrade to LCD's for all kinds of reasons, if anything its better power usage wise for the enviroment and is made with far less lead/mercury than CRT's.
Click to expand...

Thank you.

I've switched to a 40" LCD TV panel as my main computer display. (Went for quantity...)

Would have loved to have seen successors to Sony's GDM-FW900 CRT though...alas....
 
Long live the FW900. I will be sad the day mine dies.

I owned a 22" Samsung LCD and it sucked (225bw if i rememer) and i use LCDs at work all the time. I have a sigh of relief everytime I step into my office at home...

I have done lots of research on monitors and still haven't found ONE that I want to replace my FW900 with, good luck OP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top