LCD or CRT?

[imported_TimJ]

I have a 22" Mitsubishi and it rocks. Definitely worth the money.

 

[BenSkywalker]

I'm torn between the 2001FP or the NEC FP2141SB-BK 22" CRT...but I'm leaning toward the NEC.

The NEC can't be beat for gaming- best display you can buy. Money is close to even between the two, after checking them both out I opted for the NEC and haven't regretted it for an instant. Shipping cost will kill you on it though, and unfortunately I couldn't find anyplace anywhere in our neck of the woods that stocked them as regular items.

 

[bigpow]

I'm selling my 22" NEC
For local pickup only (NorCal) - PM me

I want to get an LCD. The CRT is great (perfect for photo editing, graphics design, gaming).
But I had an accident and damage my spine. So I can't lift anything heavy. LCD for me from now on.

 

[Insane3D]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

I'm torn between the 2001FP or the NEC FP2141SB-BK 22" CRT...but I'm leaning toward the NEC.

The NEC can't be beat for gaming- best display you can buy. Money is close to even between the two, after checking them both out I opted for the NEC and haven't regretted it for an instant. Shipping cost will kill you on it though, and unfortunately I couldn't find anyplace anywhere in our neck of the woods that stocked them as regular items.

Thanks Ben. I was also checking out Viewsonics 22" CRT since I've started hearing about problems with geometry on the NEC. Also, I like the fact that the Viewsonic has BNC hookups and I already have a BNC cable from my old KDS. I was wondering why NEC didn't make one of their inputs BNC.

I don't know how long it will last, but Amazon has it for $599 with FREE SHIPPING.

 

[RealityTime]

Originally posted by: JustAnAverageGuy

Originally posted by: Insomniak

Originally posted by: JustAnAverageGuy
Space.

There are gaming LCDs out there. I like my 2001FP better than any of the CRTs that I have.

At 16ms, you'll probably notice some ghosting.

I don't notice any ghosting @ 16ms.

can it top this?

I don't have that monitor, so I couldnt' tell you.

diamond pro owns all monitors. lcd or otherwise. for gaming at least. no matter what lcd you get color production is not as true as it is on crt.

 

[w00t]

I would like a 22in nec crt but they cost alot and i would like it to be new unless i came to your house and tested it out. i am just scared of getting ripped off. i think i was talking to you earlier about it? if i could find a nec 22in like after christmas i would get it if cheap and good as new.

 

[konakona]

i got my gateway 22'' from another AT seller. the tube is the predecessor of the NEC model mentioed above. for $230 i paid, it has served me very well.

 

[w00t]

Originally posted by: VanillaH
i got my gateway 22'' from another AT seller. the tube is the predecessor of the NEC model mentioed above. for $230 i paid, it has served me very well.

nice i want the nec for superbright mode also!!
i think i am just gonna go with the 19in crt.

 

[Zebo]

Most CRT's suck but the better ones offer a better picture than LCD plus you can view many diff and extended res without distortion or interpolation. Check out the high end diamondtrons as a starting point otherwise get an LCD.

CRT's are a dying tough. They are expensive to make and ship and are heavy and big. Basically I think they will totally die off within 5 years due to lack of demand since only very small segment of population considers thier advantages superior. And in general even the cheapest LCD looks better than 90% of CRTs.

 

[NightCrawler]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Most CRT's suck but the better ones offer a better picture than LCD plus you can view many diff and extended res without distortion or interpolation. Check out the high end diamondtrons as a starting point otherwise get an LCD.

CRT's are a dying tough. They are expensive to make and ship and are heavy and big. Basically I think they will totally die off within 5 years due to lack of demand since only very small segment of population considers thier advantages superior. And in general even the cheapest LCD looks better than 90% of CRTs.

I was looking at a 19" CRT onsale for $99 and it was pretty decent at 1280 x 1024 @ 85 Hz.


There is no LCD that can be bought for $99 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


PS: In 5 years the Fat-trons will be history but the thin-trons will have replaced them.

 

[konakona]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Most CRT's suck but the better ones offer a better picture than LCD plus you can view many diff and extended res without distortion or interpolation. Check out the high end diamondtrons as a starting point otherwise get an LCD.

CRT's are a dying tough. They are expensive to make and ship and are heavy and big. Basically I think they will totally die off within 5 years due to lack of demand since only very small segment of population considers thier advantages superior. And in general even the cheapest LCD looks better than 90% of CRTs.

hard to swallow, but truth it is. lets hope LCDs improve up to the CRTs level soon or OLEDs are significantly better than the current crop of LCDs. to those who say colors are 'good enough', it may be so for your standards. as for me, i dont want a LCD just yet unless its free (or almost )

 

[MasterMorpheus]

LCD's are better screens and they don't tier your eyes I'd go for the LCD plus the take up less space than CRT monitors

 

[Zebo]

Hard to swallow? I know it sucks. Just look at SONY, probably the all time leader in CRT tech with it's consumer FD trinitrons and it's professional ARTISAN series. All gone now. They don't even make a CRT monitor now and have about 20 LCD's you can choose from.

 

[w00t]

i thinks its better for me to get a crt since i will be gaming i was thinking of the dell 20 in widescreen 16ms 1600x1200 but crt would be better and save money.

 

[Insane3D]

Originally posted by: w00t
i thinks its better for me to get a crt since i will be gaming i was thinking of the dell 20 in widescreen 16ms 1600x1200 but crt would be better and save money.

The native res on the Dell Widescreen is not 1600 x 1200....only on the 2001FP.

 

[w00t]

Originally posted by: Insane3D

Originally posted by: w00t
i thinks its better for me to get a crt since i will be gaming i was thinking of the dell 20 in widescreen 16ms 1600x1200 but crt would be better and save money.

The native res on the Dell Widescreen is not 1600 x 1200....only on the 2001FP.

my bad all i know is its 1600x1200 on the 2001fp

 

[MikeyKaneJohnMatt]

: )

 

[Luthorcrow]

Woot, you state some contradictory stuff, my man. One one hand you mention the Dell 2001 FP several times but then state that the NEC/MIT. 22 is too expensive at $600? You do realize that the Dell is about $700-900 depending on offers, rebates, etc?

That aside, I have a Dell 2001 FP and a Viewsonic P90F. I got the Dell for the wife so recently I have been getting the itch for a bigger screen and of course LCDs look for appealing. Particularly the 23" models. Her monitor had always looked good so I hooked up in about a month ago to give it a test ride. The first thing that struck me seeing it up close was the screen door effect. Granted it is subtle but once you notice it, it was all I could see during normal desktop operations. So, I booted up Far Cry and UT2004 and both looked very good and I didn't noticed the blur effect but it could be I just wasn't looking in the right areas. When I loaded Doom 3, I was in for a shock. The game was simply unplayable. The blacks and colors were washed out to the point of being plain ugly and difficult to make out details (Boss fight in Hell).

After that experience, I think I will get the NEC/MIT FP2141SB and maybe in 2 or 3 years there will be a LCD or something else worth using. Tell then, I think the LCD fans are either fooling themselves or need glasses.

 

[halfadder]

A good CRT will beat a good LCD in everything except size and heat (and sometimes, brightness). This holds true even for projectors, where a high end Barco or Runco CRT projector will beat even the best DLP projects for color quality and sharpness.

The catch is CRTs are analog. You'll need to spend some time adjusting the settings and you'll need a good graphics card with a nice thick cable. Some people even need to use a good power regulator to keep the CRT image constant, though this is more common on projectors.

Then there's the size and heat issues again. With LCDs getting better and better, they may fit the bill for your needs. They will take some getting used to, though, especially if you get one with a large dot pitch (the "screendoor effect"). I personally use CRTs as I spend about $25 - $100 for used Sun and Silicon Graphics monitors. These were the best of their era (1998 - 2002) and are of great quality... but they're big hot monsters.

 

[w00t]

decided on getting the 22' nec cant wait to play some games on that.

 

[w00t]

Originally posted by: Luthorcrow
Woot, you state some contradictory stuff, my man. One one hand you mention the Dell 2001 FP several times but then state that the NEC/MIT. 22 is too expensive at $600? You do realize that the Dell is about $700-900 depending on offers, rebates, etc?

That aside, I have a Dell 2001 FP and a Viewsonic P90F. I got the Dell for the wife so recently I have been getting the itch for a bigger screen and of course LCDs look for appealing. Particularly the 23" models. Her monitor had always looked good so I hooked up in about a month ago to give it a test ride. The first thing that struck me seeing it up close was the screen door effect. Granted it is subtle but once you notice it, it was all I could see during normal desktop operations. So, I booted up Far Cry and UT2004 and both looked very good and I didn't noticed the blur effect but it could be I just wasn't looking in the right areas. When I loaded Doom 3, I was in for a shock. The game was simply unplayable. The blacks and colors were washed out to the point of being plain ugly and difficult to make out details (Boss fight in Hell).

After that experience, I think I will get the NEC/MIT FP2141SB and maybe in 2 or 3 years there will be a LCD or something else worth using. Tell then, I think the LCD fans are either fooling themselves or need glasses.

what i was saying was that is was exensive for a crt till i found out why.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Luthorcrow
Woot, you state some contradictory stuff, my man. One one hand you mention the Dell 2001 FP several times but then state that the NEC/MIT. 22 is too expensive at $600? You do realize that the Dell is about $700-900 depending on offers, rebates, etc?

That aside, I have a Dell 2001 FP and a Viewsonic P90F. I got the Dell for the wife so recently I have been getting the itch for a bigger screen and of course LCDs look for appealing. Particularly the 23" models. Her monitor had always looked good so I hooked up in about a month ago to give it a test ride. The first thing that struck me seeing it up close was the screen door effect. Granted it is subtle but once you notice it, it was all I could see during normal desktop operations. So, I booted up Far Cry and UT2004 and both looked very good and I didn't noticed the blur effect but it could be I just wasn't looking in the right areas. When I loaded Doom 3, I was in for a shock. The game was simply unplayable. The blacks and colors were washed out to the point of being plain ugly and difficult to make out details (Boss fight in Hell).

After that experience, I think I will get the NEC/MIT FP2141SB and maybe in 2 or 3 years there will be a LCD or something else worth using. Tell then, I think the LCD fans are either fooling themselves or need glasses.