Recommendations for 27" to 30" IPS.

Cyane

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
143
Hi,

Just wondering what IPS monitors in the 27-30" range would be great for things like Gaming (Crysis, SC2, Fallout, etc), Blu-Ray and the like. I was looking at the Dell U2711 and U3011, but I've read a lot of complaints about the input lag being fairly high. Could anyone suggest options that suit my prefs?

Also, regarding Dell purchases, I always see people mention coupons that give quite large discounts on Monitors, yet when I search for these coupons, I can never find them. Can anyone briefly explain how to find them and how often they're available (if there's any pattern, boxing week perhaps?).

Thanks in advance.

Cheers!
 

daveswantek

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 30, 2007
Messages
1,231
Blueray is worthless on a computer monitor. They are just not big enough. You need at least 46 inches to even notice the increased resolution. My laptop can play BD to its 17 inch screen, but it does not look anybetter than a DVD.

Seriously; movies look much better on a TV (LCD or Plasma) then they do on any computer monitor.

With regard to Coupons; go to eBay and search there. People with Premier accounts dump their coupons on eBay. Also if you join the Dell forums they will give you coupons. Once you use a EPP coupon even if it is from eBay you will be added to the EPP mailing list and you will get coupons that way.

If I had to replace my LCD right now I would go with the U3011. The stuff people say about input lag is BS or nitpicking at best. Some use it as an excuse for the fact that they can not afford an IPS display.

This is strictly my opinion, but I have been in this busniess a long time.

Dave
 

Vega

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
6,849
HP ZR30W is exactly what you are looking for. It has the lowest input lag of the 30"ers and is also one of the cheapest.
 

Darksword

Gawd
Joined
Dec 11, 2009
Messages
819
I'm enjoying my U3011. I've also read that the HPZR30W has lower input lag though. 16:10 ratio FTW though. :)
 

anodize

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 15, 2008
Messages
273
Get the zr30w if you are planning to use it for computers only. Otherwise get the u3011 for its multi input option.
 

Cyane

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
143
Now it's between the U3011 and the ZR30. The 16:10 aspect and the amount of inputs on the U3011 is swaying me heavily in that direction, I'm not going to be doing any competitive gaming, but for those that own the U3011, how do you find the responsiveness? I'll still be playing games frequently and if the lag is obvious, it could be a small issue.

Cheers!
 

Roliath

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 2, 2005
Messages
2,914
I'm partial to the 3008wfp, but the 3011 is very nice in person; although i've never seen a ZR30 in action.
 

Ashok0

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
507
Blueray is worthless on a computer monitor. They are just not big enough. You need at least 46 inches to even notice the increased resolution. My laptop can play BD to its 17 inch screen, but it does not look anybetter than a DVD.

Seriously; movies look much better on a TV (LCD or Plasma) then they do on any computer monitor.
Dave

Is this a joke post? This guy is either a comedian or legally blind. I haven't seen the ZR30W in person but I hear the monitor has less aggressive AG coating than the U3011, if you only care for PC usage.
 

daveswantek

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 30, 2007
Messages
1,231
Is this a joke post? This guy is either a comedian or legally blind. I haven't seen the ZR30W in person but I hear the monitor has less aggressive AG coating than the U3011, if you only care for PC usage.

Buy a decent TV, watch a blueray and then say that. If you have not seen a ZR30W, then why talk about it. The ZR30W uses the exact same LG panel as the U3011, so how can the AG coating be different. The AG coating is applied when the panel is made by LG. Dell, HP and the like have nothing to do with it. The coating can vary by production run, so it really comes down to luck of the draw.

I am filling for Albvion today. Where did he/she go anyway?

Dave
 

PC_User

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 15, 2007
Messages
5,022
No issues with gaming whatsoever.

Dell = 25ms
HP = 11ms

If you can honestly notice a visible difference between 25ms and 11ms, you should be getting a CRT.
 

umeng2002

Gawd
Joined
May 23, 2008
Messages
923
You don't need at least a 46" TV to see all of the 1080p detail. You just sit closer to the monitor.

I primarily watch blu-rays on my LP2475W. It looks fantastic.
 

joeshmoe

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
468
I think what daveswantek meant was that you won't be able to really see the benefits of Blu Ray on a small screen and it makes sense because on smaller displays all the pixels are squeezed tightly together so that quality is already high in that sense, however it seems to be a bigger issue on larger displays as they still using the same 1920x1080 mapping.
 

kcjay

n00b
Joined
Dec 9, 2006
Messages
26
The choice in this case seems to come down to the three most popular options.

1. The Dell U3011/U2711 - screen door ag coating but lots of inputs and has a scaler

2. HPZR30W - slightly less harsh ag coating as the dell, good inputs

3. 27" cinema display - glossy and only has mini dp input without a converter

It basically comes down to personal preference. If you want to use your monitor for a large variety of devices then the Dell might be your best bet as it has lots of inputs and a scaler but does have the AG coating which doesn't bother some people. The HP is kind of the middle of the road. The cinema display has a glossy panel which some people like but only one input and no scaler.

Also, some people don't like the colors on the wide gamut monitors from Dell and HP. Certain applications the colors may be off. On the Dell this is somewhat compensated for with the sRGB mode I've heard.

I went with the cinema display because I couldn't stand the AG coating on the U2711 at microcenter and I usually don't have a ton of lights on around my computers so glare isn't an issue. I need to be able to read text on my screen a lot and the glossy panel and great resolution make for sharp text with no "sparkle".
 
Joined
Mar 15, 2010
Messages
55
I think what daveswantek meant was that you won't be able to really see the benefits of Blu Ray on a small screen and it makes sense because on smaller displays all the pixels are squeezed tightly together so that quality is already high in that sense, however it seems to be a bigger issue on larger displays as they still using the same 1920x1080 mapping.

I watch plenty of DVDs and Blu-rays on monitors and TV's (15.6" 1080p, 24" TN 1080p, samsung 55" LCD 120Hz 1080p w/Blu-Ray player).

You have to look deeper that pixel count. The places Blu-Ray shines are in resolution, but also in higher video and audio bit rates. You can see a VERY noticeable difference between the video bit rates on a DVD compared to a Blu-Ray on a monitor, and on a TV its noticeable-even on an upscaling DVD player or Blu-Ray player that upscales DVDs.

Though I will say TV's really shine when it comes to pirated Blu-Rays..TV's seem to be able to make the lowered, compressed bit-rate of pirated Blu-Rays and still make them look really nice (probably from all the processing the TV does) compared to a monitor.
 

applebook

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
259
I think what daveswantek meant was that you won't be able to really see the benefits of Blu Ray on a small screen and it makes sense because on smaller displays all the pixels are squeezed tightly together so that quality is already high in that sense, however it seems to be a bigger issue on larger displays as they still using the same 1920x1080 mapping.

I think what he meant is that he's a noob who knows nothing about optics, resolution, or anything related to HD.

Viewing details has everything to do with pixel pitch and the quality of the panel itself. A 37-inch 1080p TV with the exact same specs as a 60-inch TV will display the exact same amount of detail depending on how far one views the respective TVs.

At about 5 feet away from the 37-inch and 8-ft away from the 60-inch, detail will be exactly the same if the viewer has 20/20 or good vision!

I'm sick of hearing noobs spout about how 1080p is too HIGH resolution for anything below (INSERT ARBITRARY NUMBER) or is too LOW resolution for anything larger than (INSERT ARBITRARY NUMBER). Almost no resolution is too high if it's pixel pitch is under 326PPI or so, and nearly no resolution is too low as long as the viewing distance is appropriate.
 

applebook

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
259
I watch plenty of DVDs and Blu-rays on monitors and TV's (15.6" 1080p, 24" TN 1080p, samsung 55" LCD 120Hz 1080p w/Blu-Ray player).

Though I will say TV's really shine when it comes to pirated Blu-Rays..TV's seem to be able to make the lowered, compressed bit-rate of pirated Blu-Rays and still make them look really nice (probably from all the processing the TV does) compared to a monitor.

Probably because the pirates know how to rip Blu-RAY and use appropriate codecs ;)
 

PC_User

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 15, 2007
Messages
5,022
The choice in this case seems to come down to the three most popular options.

1. The Dell U3011/U2711 - screen door ag coating but lots of inputs and has a scaler

2. HPZR30W - slightly less harsh ag coating as the dell, good inputs

3. 27" cinema display - glossy and only has mini dp input without a converter

It basically comes down to personal preference. If you want to use your monitor for a large variety of devices then the Dell might be your best bet as it has lots of inputs and a scaler but does have the AG coating which doesn't bother some people. The HP is kind of the middle of the road. The cinema display has a glossy panel which some people like but only one input and no scaler.

Also, some people don't like the colors on the wide gamut monitors from Dell and HP. Certain applications the colors may be off. On the Dell this is somewhat compensated for with the sRGB mode I've heard.

I went with the cinema display because I couldn't stand the AG coating on the U2711 at microcenter and I usually don't have a ton of lights on around my computers so glare isn't an issue. I need to be able to read text on my screen a lot and the glossy panel and great resolution make for sharp text with no "sparkle".

You should also mention that the Dell comes factory calibrated and has a good sRGB mode with better color accuracy than the HP.

Also, what is this AG coating that people speak of? I really must not notice it.
 

kcjay

n00b
Joined
Dec 9, 2006
Messages
26
You should also mention that the Dell comes factory calibrated and has a good sRGB mode with better color accuracy than the HP.

Also, what is this AG coating that people speak of? I really must not notice it.

Good points on the Dell. As far as the anti glare coating, some people don't notice it. But for me, I went to the store and tried to read some pages with light colored background and black text and the "sparkle" effect sort of diffuses the text and makes it kind of blurry and its just annoying to me and others.

Displays are like women, cars, food. For the most part there are certain qualities that people generally love, but there are a TON of qualities that are subjective and preferences vary greatly from person to person.

We can talk about specs and compare and contrast things all day long but in the end its up to the person to decide what they want/like.
 

daveswantek

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 30, 2007
Messages
1,231
I think what daveswantek meant was that you won't be able to really see the benefits of Blu Ray on a small screen and it makes sense because on smaller displays all the pixels are squeezed tightly together so that quality is already high in that sense, however it seems to be a bigger issue on larger displays as they still using the same 1920x1080 mapping.

Correct. That and the measured CR on any computer display is <800:1, on a good Plasma screen like Pio Kuro or Pany Viera it will measure at >50k:1. This is what is known as dynamic range or image fidelity.

I think what he meant is that he's a noob who knows nothing about optics, resolution, or anything related to HD.

Viewing details has everything to do with pixel pitch and the quality of the panel itself. A 37-inch 1080p TV with the exact same specs as a 60-inch TV will display the exact same amount of detail depending on how far one views the respective TVs.

At about 5 feet away from the 37-inch and 8-ft away from the 60-inch, detail will be exactly the same if the viewer has 20/20 or good vision!

I'm sick of hearing noobs spout about how 1080p is too HIGH resolution for anything below (INSERT ARBITRARY NUMBER) or is too LOW resolution for anything larger than (INSERT ARBITRARY NUMBER). Almost no resolution is too high if it's pixel pitch is under 326PPI or so, and nearly no resolution is too low as long as the viewing distance is appropriate.


Lame; Spend some time over at AVS read and learn. You obviously have no clue.

You cannot get a high quality TV under 40 inches. Plasmas cannot do a tight enough dotpitch and LCD venders use lesser quality panels below 40 inches mostly TNs.

As far as moving closer to a 30/27 inch IPS computer LCD; good luck. Have we forgotten about the dreaded white glow, which is part of why the CR sucks. Video and pics require a solid white and black point with a wide dynamic range, all of which are missing on computer LCDs and many LCD TVs as well. The only exception is a good CRT like my Sony GDM f520 and it is still way to small to truley enjoy a good BD.

I know a lot of people would like to have it all in one display, but that is just a not possable given current technoloigy

Merry Christmas

Dave
 

Ashok0

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
507
Lame; Spend some time over at AVS read and learn. You obviously have no clue.

You cannot get a high quality TV under 40 inches. Plasmas cannot do a tight enough dotpitch and LCD venders use lesser quality panels below 40 inches mostly TNs.

As far as moving closer to a 30/27 inch IPS computer LCD; good luck. Have we forgotten about the dreaded white glow, which is part of why the CR sucks. Video and pics require a solid white and black point with a wide dynamic range, all of which are missing on computer LCDs and many LCD TVs as well. The only exception is a good CRT like my Sony GDM f520 and it is still way to small to truley enjoy a good BD.

I know a lot of people would like to have it all in one display, but that is just a not possable given current technoloigy

Merry Christmas

Dave
How on earth is a 40" 1920x1080 HDTV @ 55.07ppi higher quality than a 27" 2560x1440 monitor @ 108ppi? A 27" or 30" LaCie or EIZO display will completely destroy any 40" HDTV on the market in terms of clarity. I bought a 27" IPS display and Blu-Ray Discs looks GORGEOUS. The comparison from a DVD is like night and day, and @ 108ppi, let's just say I'll never downgrade to a 40" HDTV.
 

Zangmonkey

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
4,386
Blueray is worthless on a computer monitor. They are just not big enough. You need at least 46 inches to even notice the increased resolution. My laptop can play BD to its 17 inch screen, but it does not look anybetter than a DVD.

Seriously; movies look much better on a TV (LCD or Plasma) then they do on any computer monitor.

With regard to Coupons; go to eBay and search there. People with Premier accounts dump their coupons on eBay. Also if you join the Dell forums they will give you coupons. Once you use a EPP coupon even if it is from eBay you will be added to the EPP mailing list and you will get coupons that way.

If I had to replace my LCD right now I would go with the U3011. The stuff people say about input lag is BS or nitpicking at best. Some use it as an excuse for the fact that they can not afford an IPS display.

This is strictly my opinion, but I have been in this busniess a long time.

Dave


Your eye is perfectly capable of resolving higher resolutions at the distance many people look at their screens.... otherwise there would be absolutely no purpose for higher-res screens at all.

I can absolutely tell the difference between a 480 and 1080 video on my monitor....
That doesn't mean I'd ever want to watch a movie on it (I have a nice TV for that!) but to say there's no difference between a bluray and a DVD is ridiculous.
Many people watch bluray on quality large monitors with high-end headphones just fine.

That being said, contrast ratios can be much better on large-format displays mostly by the nature of backlighting and pixel density.
This will likely be mitigated if not resolved by the advent of OLED
 

daveswantek

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 30, 2007
Messages
1,231
That doesn't mean I'd ever want to watch a movie on it (I have a nice TV for that!) but to say there's no difference between a bluray and a DVD is ridiculous.

This will likely be mitigated if not resolved by the advent of OLED

OK; I will agree with that.
 

daveswantek

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 30, 2007
Messages
1,231
How on earth is a 40" 1920x1080 HDTV @ 55.07ppi higher quality than a 27" 2560x1440 monitor @ 108ppi? A 27" or 30" LaCie or EIZO display will completely destroy any 40" HDTV on the market in terms of clarity. I bought a 27" IPS display and Blu-Ray Discs looks GORGEOUS. The comparison from a DVD is like night and day, and @ 108ppi, let's just say I'll never downgrade to a 40" HDTV.

That is for you to learn.
 

Archaea

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
11,551
This isn't the path you look to be taking, but from what I can read the LG 32LE5300 on sale at amazon right now for $490 (retails $900) is about the best of the TV world at that size.

120 hz
Advertised IPS panel (but in reality only assuming you win the panel lottery)
backlit LED
1920x1080

If you get an IPS panel like you are supposed to it is supposed to be an absolutely fantastic computer monitor. If you don't - you end up with a "va" panel that looks like any other 32" TN based TV. Then with amazon's return policy in effect for free returns- you just keep swapping out until you get a IPS panel.

The resolution is not as high and the quality is probably not as absolutely perfect if you are going to be looking at it extremely closely - but at the price it might be a worthy trade off - especially if you are budge concious. I just ordered three of them today to help ensure I'd get an IPS panel out of the bunch. I'll send the rest back. (sounds rather pathetic I know) but that was amazon supports recommendation when I called to try to ensure I get an IPS panel. The agent said order three and send back the ones that aren't IPS through the free return policy because they have no way to check before you receive. (EVEN THOUGH THE PANEL TYPE IS MARKED VIA SERIAL NUMBER ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE BOX -- w = IPS, d = VA)

At my current desk configuration I can sit back about 3 fee from my monitor and I feel like I'm leaning into my 24" all the time to read --- I'd rather lean back.
 

applebook

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
259
Ignore the troll.

Anyone who thinks that only 40-inch plus TVs have high quality displays is clearly an ignoramus. Independent measurements have proven that most bigger HDTVs tend to have lower contrast and of course, worse viewing angles.

Again, ignore the thread-crapping troll. There's nothing to see here.
 

applebook

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
259
That being said, contrast ratios can be much better on large-format displays mostly by the nature of backlighting and pixel density.
This will likely be mitigated if not resolved by the advent of OLED

And even this isn't the case. Check out the independent contrast measurements conducted by http://thetvreview.com/topics/flat-panel-lcd/

Most of the higher end 32-inch and 37-inch HDTVs have very competitive contrast compared to the many big and pricey plasmas and LED TVs. What the TROLL is basing his ignorant thread-crapping on are probably bad misinformation it has read on various forums and manufacturer hype.

It is true that nearly all HDTVs under 32-inches tend to have crappy specs.

However, both the Samsung F2380 and the BenQ VW2420 have static contrast that would humble numerous big HDTVs, and like you said, a top-notch Eizo, NEC, etc. will surpass just about ANY HDTV - no matter how large or small - in color fidelity.

This troll is the first to make my ignore list on Hard.
 

Cyane

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
143
Nice little debate going on here, I'm liking all the info and suggestions. Question though, is there any major differences between the U2711 and the U3011 aside from the screen size (ie: colour accuracy, input lag, screen coating)? Would suck missing out on the 16:10 aspect ratio that the U3011 has though over the U2711. I've been looking over prices and I'm finding it difficult to justify the huge increase in price from the U2711 to the U3011 with my current budget, unless of course there's any upcoming Dell coupons that would discount the price a lot.

Cheers!
 
Last edited:

Ashok0

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
507
is there any major differences between the U2711 and the U3011 aside from the screen size

It's cheaper? :D I haven't seen the U2711 but my U3011 had zero issues with color accuracy or input lag.
 

Howie

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
230
Blueray is worthless on a computer monitor. They are just not big enough. You need at least 46 inches to even notice the increased resolution. My laptop can play BD to its 17 inch screen, but it does not look anybetter than a DVD.
I am of a different opinion. While I agree that you need a bigger screen (many say at least 37 inch) to appreciate all the improvements that Bluray has to offer, I have found Bluray to be worthwhile even on a 17 inch laptop screen. While there might not be a huge difference between BDs and DVDs on small screens, I've enjoyed the improved quality of Blurays over DVDs pretty much every single time. The reality is that bad DVD transfers abound while one would be hard pressed to find a BD that is worse than the best DVD version. Combined with the fact that the difference between the quality of DVD playback between different players is greater than the difference between the quality of BD playback and it's really not worthwhile to watch a DVD over a BD except for price.

Anyone who thinks that only 40-inch plus TVs have high quality displays is clearly an ignoramus. Independent measurements have proven that most bigger HDTVs tend to have lower contrast and of course, worse viewing angles.
Yep. All else being equal, smaller screens should produce a higher quality picture. For practical purposes though, manufacturers prefer to produce their top end models only in a a few big sizes.
 

applebook

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
259
I am of a different opinion. While I agree that you need a bigger screen (many say at least 37 inch) to appreciate all the improvements that Bluray has to offer, I have found Bluray to be worthwhile even on a 17 inch laptop screen. While there might not be a huge difference between BDs and DVDs on small screens, I've enjoyed the improved quality of Blurays over DVDs pretty much every single time. The reality is that bad DVD transfers abound while one would be hard pressed to find a BD that is worse than the best DVD version. Combined with the fact that the difference between the quality of DVD playback between different players is greater than the difference between the quality of BD playback and it's really not worthwhile to watch a DVD over a BD except for price.


Yep. All else being equal, smaller screens should produce a higher quality picture. For practical purposes though, manufacturers prefer to produce their top end models only in a a few big sizes.

Even if the 1080p screen were only 9-inches big, it would still benefit from quality 1080p film. Of course, you'd have to view the screen pretty close to see the details. Before the iPhone 4 came out, I was skeptical that something with a 326ppi could show off sharp small text and images, but the Retina Display is proof that small, high-res can be wicked. My Motorola Droid has higher contrast, deeper blacks, and higher color gamut than the iP4, but IMO, the iPhone has the superior screen due to the high pixel density. Contrast and color aren't everything.
 

Godmachine

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 7, 2003
Messages
10,472
I am of a different opinion. While I agree that you need a bigger screen (many say at least 37 inch) to appreciate all the improvements that Bluray has to offer, I have found Bluray to be worthwhile even on a 17 inch laptop screen. While there might not be a huge difference between BDs and DVDs on small screens, I've enjoyed the improved quality of Blurays over DVDs pretty much every single time. The reality is that bad DVD transfers abound while one would be hard pressed to find a BD that is worse than the best DVD version. Combined with the fact that the difference between the quality of DVD playback between different players is greater than the difference between the quality of BD playback and it's really not worthwhile to watch a DVD over a BD except for price.

I agree with you on most of your point. However Blu Rays were developed with TV / Projection display in mind and even though some of the production is done on a computer ( cleaning up negatives from a high resolution rescan or archiving and also the application of various fine detail adjustments) the final result of a production of creating a Blu Ray for the majority of them at least is to look its best on a TV set.

Computer monitors are fine to watch Blu Rays on , not everyone can afford a more expensive TV or are restricted by size conditions due to the living space. But Blu Rays always look there best on TV or Projectors from my experience.
 

daveswantek

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 30, 2007
Messages
1,231
I am of a different opinion. While I agree that you need a bigger screen (many say at least 37 inch) to appreciate all the improvements that Bluray has to offer, I have found Bluray to be worthwhile even on a 17 inch laptop screen. While there might not be a huge difference between BDs and DVDs on small screens, I've enjoyed the improved quality of Blurays over DVDs pretty much every single time. The reality is that bad DVD transfers abound while one would be hard pressed to find a BD that is worse than the best DVD version. Combined with the fact that the difference between the quality of DVD playback between different players is greater than the difference between the quality of BD playback and it's really not worthwhile to watch a DVD over a BD except for price.

Finally; an intelligent responce that I really can't argue with. The one thing I will say is that I would not buy a BD just to watch it on a laptop, especially if I already had the DVD.

Dave
 

daveswantek

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 30, 2007
Messages
1,231
Computer monitors are fine to watch Blu Rays on , not everyone can afford a more expensive TV or are restricted by size conditions due to the living space. But Blu Rays always look there best on TV or Projectors from my experience.

This comment sums it up pretty good. If the OP has been watching BDs on a Nice 50 Kuro then they are going to be pretty disappointed with any computer screen. It isn't about the specs at all, it is all about the viewing experience.

Current 27/30 LCD have a different native resolution so you have scaling involved right off the bat. Then you have 3:2 pull down, because computer LCDs cannot accept the native 24Hz refresh of a BD, and it keeps going from there.

The best HD display I have ever seen is the Sony 34 HD CRT TVs that were built right before Sony dumped CRT production entirely arround 2003. The only problum there was/is that you have to sit to close.

Can you watch BDs on a computer LCD; yes. It is an awsome viewing experience; no.

It is kind of obvious that some people in here are arguing based on budget or space limitations. I cannot afford what I really want, (a high end projector) but that does not mean I would badmouth the benifits of have one.

Have fun

Dave
 

Ashok0

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
507
Current 27/30 LCD have a different native resolution so you have scaling involved right off the bat.

Well, this is somewhat misleading Dave. If you hook up an external Blu-Ray Disc player to a monitor that isn't native 1080p then yes, scaling may be a potentially fatal issue. However, if you are playing Blu-Ray Discs thru an OS and your display is driven by an nVidia or ATi graphics card, scaling becomes irrelevant. When I watch Blu-Ray Discs on my PC in "Windows Media Player Classic - Home Cinema" the quality on my 27" IPS monitor is astounding. Is it an awesome viewing experience? You betcha. :D
 

Bastich

n00b
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Messages
42
Some of you seem to have some misconceptions in regard to how size is properly measured on a display device. It isn't measured in inches but in field of view from your viewing distance. You can figure this out with the Pythagorean Theorem and some trigonometry.

A 30" monitor viewed from 2 feet is the exact same size as a 50" TV viewed from 3.5 feet. Both cases give about a 55° FOV. If you sit farther than 3.5 feet from that 50" TV (and just about everyone does), it is SMALLER than the 30" monitor at 2 feet and will give a less immersive presentation.

THX actually recommends a 40° FOV for viewing, so a 30" monitor at a two foot viewing distance is actually way too big according to them. You would have to sit about 3 feet from a 30" monitor to get a 40° FOV and about 5 feet from a 50" TV to get the same; and to reiterate, if you sit farther than 5 feet from that TV it is SMALLER than the 30" monitor at 3 feet.

So anyone saying a display device is too small without specifying viewing distance has a rather fundamental misunderstanding of the issue.
 
Top