1800fp sucks compared to the apple studio displays

[dpopiz]

I was very close to dropping $500 on an 1800fp. I was kind of reluctant though because I've never used an lcd monitor before. fortunately I happened to find an 1800fp to look at in person at a college bookstore I was visting. I'm glad I did because I wasn't at all happy with the image on the 1800fp. it looked very poor compared to the 20" apple studio display that was right next to it. basically what I noticed is that the 1800fp has a harsher image with badly produced colors and really resembles the look of a laptop lcd. it also seems to have a little bit of the strange polarized backlighting look you see on laptop displays. the apple display on the other hand, looked just like a crt, but sharper and brighter. what's the difference between these two panels and are there some others that would have the look of the apples but are cheaper?

 

[Keysplayr]

Apple sucks the life out of your wallet.

 

[Viper96720]

If you want one that looks like an apple display then you'll have to pay the price similar to one. Sharp LL-T1820 has a good picture. Apples have a wide viewing angle.
That lessens the polarizing effect you notice.

 

[UncleWai]

1) they are not even in the same price range.
2) did you check what display card it is using?

 

[dpopiz]

I just thought that maybe the only reason the apples are so expensive is because everything apple makes is so expensive. and the 1800fp is supposed to be very good. so the apple actually uses a much better panel?

 

[Looney]

Originally posted by: dpopiz
I was very close to dropping $500 on an 1800fp. I was kind of reluctant though because I've never used an lcd monitor before. fortunately I happened to find an 1800fp to look at in person at a college bookstore I was visting. I'm glad I did because I wasn't at all happy with the image on the 1800fp. it looked very poor compared to the 20" apple studio display that was right next to it. basically what I noticed is that the 1800fp has a harsher image with badly produced colors and really resembles the look of a laptop lcd. it also seems to have a little bit of the strange polarized backlighting look you see on laptop displays. the apple display on the other hand, looked just like a crt, but sharper and brighter. what's the difference between these two panels and are there some others that would have the look of the apples but are cheaper?

First off, they're not even within the same price range, so comparing the two isn't fair. Second, the display would be a bit better on a 20" LCD with resolution at 1600x1200 than on an 18" LCD with resolution of 1280x1024... the pixels will be smaller with the 20".

 

[PowerMacG5]

Originally posted by: Moralpanic

Originally posted by: dpopiz I was very close to dropping $500 on an 1800fp. I was kind of reluctant though because I've never used an lcd monitor before. fortunately I happened to find an 1800fp to look at in person at a college bookstore I was visting. I'm glad I did because I wasn't at all happy with the image on the 1800fp. it looked very poor compared to the 20" apple studio display that was right next to it. basically what I noticed is that the 1800fp has a harsher image with badly produced colors and really resembles the look of a laptop lcd. it also seems to have a little bit of the strange polarized backlighting look you see on laptop displays. the apple display on the other hand, looked just like a crt, but sharper and brighter. what's the difference between these two panels and are there some others that would have the look of the apples but are cheaper?

First off, they're not even within the same price range, so comparing the two isn't fair. Second, the display would be a bit better on a 20" LCD with resolution at 1600x1200 than on an 18" LCD with resolution of 1280x1024... the pixels will be smaller with the 20".

I agree. If you want to make a comparison that is a little more fair, put the Dell 2000FP next to the Cinema Display. IMO, thats still not even a fair comparison because the price range is still off.

 

[ElDonAntonio]

Are you sure both LCDs were running at their native resolution? it sounds stupid but everytime I go to a stupid CompUSA or Best Buy, they have gorgeous LCDs looking like crap because they're running at a lower resolution and being fed from an analog Geforce4 MX.

 

[jarsoffart]

Originally posted by: ElDonAntonio
Are you sure both LCDs were running at their native resolution? it sounds stupid but everytime I go to a stupid CompUSA or Best Buy, they have gorgeous LCDs looking like crap because they're running at a lower resolution and being fed from an analog Geforce4 MX.

Also, usually one signal is split up, so the image quality degrades.

 

[dpopiz]

fortunately at this college bookstore, all the lcds on display were running at native resolution using either DVI or ADC. there was a 2000FP set up pretty close to the studio display, but there was a woman in a trance watching Monsters, Inc. on it very intently and I didn't think it was nessecary to ask if I could close it because it looked to me about the same as the 1800FP at least when displaying the dvd.
what I'd be interested to know is if there are some specific specification differences that make the apple and dell displays look so different. that way I can look for one with quality more like the apples for a lower price.

 

[Blastman]

A big factor in image quality can be the graphics card being used. For eg., I find the image quality of a GF2 pale in comparison to my ATI 7500. So unless the 2 displays had roughly equal grahics cards, it might not be an apples to apples comparison.