Monitors: Aperture, .24 compared to .25-.27

[fumbduck]

I am looking to purchase one of the following monitors:

1) Viewsonic P95F

2) Samsung 900NF
Click on specifications to see the specs on both.

Edit: 3) Hitachi P910+
This is a 19inch DynaFlat screen that does 1600x1200 at 85Hz, only weighs 40pounds, the others weigh 55, has a dot pitch of .20 and is only 173$$ ANYONE PLEASE LET ME KNOW ABOUT THIS MONITOR, they are from MonitorsDirect Jim!

Edit: 4)Hitachi Q910 This monitor claims to be PerfectFlat, has a .20 dot pitch, higher horizontal scan than the previous, weighs considerably less (44 LBS). and does 16x12 at 85Hz!!! SOMEONE lET ME KNOW ABOUT THESE 2 NEW MONITORS FAST!!!!!!!1

EDIT: BIG UPDATE!!! See Above

Here is my dilemma:
Number 1 has a better 1600x1200 Refresh rate, 92Hz, but has an aperture of .25 at the center and goes to .27 at the edges.
Number 2 has a worse 1600x1200 Refresh rate, 85Hz, but has an aperture of .24 all the way across.

Some of you may say that 85Hz is enough anyman to see, but i have 20/10 Vision(best recordable, i see at 20 feet what 20/20 people see at 10 feet),
and i can notice it. However at 100Hz mine cuts off, so the closer to 100 the better, but i do not know how aperture factors in here.

EDIT: So it comes down to this :: 1) 92Hz and .26Aperture(Average), or 2) 85Hz and .25Aperture.

Anyone that is good on monitors please let me know soon, i wanted to order tonight.

 

[fyleow]

Then get an LCD that doesn't flicker. I would go for the 0.24 simply because it is true flat. I find curved monitors annoying.

BTW, How does your vision relate to spotting refresh rate? In the "good old days" before my vision got bad I had better than 20/20 and 85 hz was good enough for me. No eye strain at all. Now, with contacts my vision is around 20/10 and I still don't notice it.....

 

[fumbduck]

Well, the Viewsonic monitor claims to be flat, or that the curve is so small it isnt noticable.
But i think aperture is the distance between pixels, not the actual curve or whatever.

If you read, i need a monitor that does 1600x1200 at a good refresh rate, an LCD like that would be crazy priced, Both of those monitors are less than 300$.

 

[glugglug]

18" viewable * 4/5 (assuming normal 4:3 aspect ratio) = 14.4" horizontal = 365.76mm horizontal

so to truly view 1600 across without any pixels being combined with those adjacent you need 365.76/1600 = 0.2286mm or better aperture grill or better, which neither monitor has.

The Samsung is closer to this, however, and will result in a sharper picture.

 

[dpopiz]

*gloat* I have .20 baybeeeee!

 

[JellyBaby]

I'd opt for the .24mm dp tube. Your eyes won't notice the difference between 85 and 92 Hz anyway.

 

[Kingofcomputer]

*gloat* I have .20 baybeeeee!

that's horizontal dot pitch.

 

[Dug]

18" viewable * 4/5 (assuming normal 4:3 aspect ratio) = 14.4" horizontal = 365.76mm horizontal

so to truly view 1600 across without any pixels being combined with those adjacent you need 365.76/1600 = 0.2286mm or better aperture grill or better, which neither monitor has.

The Samsung is closer to this, however, and will result in a sharper picture.

Say what? I understand that the Samsung will result in a sharper picture part. But what's with the numbers and where did you get 18" viewable?

*gloat* I have .20 baybeeeee!

I thought the best aperature grill out there had .22

 

[fumbduck]

the samsung is actually a .25, it says .24 and .25, but im pretty sure its .25.

Any help is appreciated, im leaning toward the viewsonic, becaus ei own an A75F now and it has served me well, also the viewsonic is slightly lighter and less deep.

But im still open. I can find both of these monitors for 300$ or less, the samsun is only less than 300 through a dell deal which ends tomorrow ^^, gotto decide soon.

 

[Dug]

Why aren't you considering the
Sony CPD-G410R or CPD-G420S
or
NEC FE991SB-BK
They are both sold at Dell and are great monitors.

My experience with variable grill pitch is that its not good. It's fine for lower resolutions.

If your vision is as good as you say, I wouldn't run a 19" monitor at 1600x1200 anyway because it doesn't display perfectly. There isn't enough room and will look a bit blurry. Which I think is what glugglug was trying to say.

If you have to choose what you listed, I would definately get the Samsung.

 

[fumbduck]

doug, i see no difference in those 2 sony monitors between each other, except the price. Also, those get the same or slightly less results as the samsung.

and the NEC has a .27 Aperture grill :-\.

im highly interested in your opinions and responses however, please keep them coming.

 

[glugglug]

19" monitors typically have 18" viewable area, measured diagonally, and the spec sheets on these verify this.

The diagonal, horizontal, and vertical dimensions typically form a 3-4-5 triangle, so the ratio of horizontal to diagonal is 4/5, giving a 14.4" horizontal viewing area dimension.

14.4" ~= 366mm.

Now if you have a 0.27mm aperture grille, 0.27 goes into 366 1355 times so that means there are physically only 1355 vertical slots for the pixels to be showing through in (with a 0.24mm aperture grill there would be 1525 slots). Since 1600 > 1355, each vertical line on the screen obviously won't have it's own slot ("aperture") to appear in. What happens is adjacent pixels are blended together, so if you have an adjacent pixel-thin white vertical line and pixel-thin black vertical line it will appear as a grey vertical line on the screen.

It's nowhere near as bad as it sounds because your brain will automatically magnify the contrast between that grey line and the surrounding pixels and text will stay completely readable until you are actually exceeding the resolution your monitor can really display in each direction by almost double. But it's still best to minimize this effect if you can.

 

[dpopiz]

in reference to my proud claim of .20:
horizontal? I dunno...is it normally measured in vertical or what? all I know is I have a samsung 700IFT and it says .20 horiz dot pitch

 

[glugglug]

For a trinitron, the optimum vertical resolution is theoretically infinite (limited by hsync range & desired refresh) - there is no limit to how close pixels can be displayed perfectly above or below each other, only a horizontal limitation.

For a Shadow mask screen, the sets of 3 (red/green/blue) dots forming each pixel are arranged in rows offset 1/2 pixel horizontally from each other and the dot pitch is normally measured between pixels DIAGONALLY adjacent.

700FT lists "horizontal dot pitch" of 0.20mm and "diagonal dot pitch" of 0.24mm.

 

[fumbduck]

crap i didnt order yesterday, i still cant decide... !!! someone telll me

 

[DJediMaster]

I say to go with the Samsung 900NF. I have never seen the viewsonic p95f but the PF790 has the same variable aperture grill .25-.27 and it doesn't look nearly as nice as the 900NF (which i own). The colours on the viewsonic seemed washed out compared to the samsung when compared side by side. Text also seemed alot sharper on 900nf. My vote goes towards the samsung..great monitor.

 

[Kingofcomputer]

Samsung is one of the leading manufacturers in CRT and LCD.
Viewsonic is just a marketing company that outsources the production to some real manufacturers.

 

[Gosharkss]

Originally posted by: Kingofcomputer
Samsung is one of the leading manufacturers in CRT and LCD.
Viewsonic is just a marketing company that outsources the production to some real manufacturers.

King

And I would rank a few of these third party vendors better from a quality point of view. Just because Samsung makes more than just about everyone else does not mean there quality is any better. In fact the factories that I have been to that push quantity usually sacrifice some quality in order to achieve production goals.

 

[Kingofcomputer]

I don't find Viewsonic monitor is worth to buy,
at its price level, can always find some real manufacturer brands with better spec.

 

[Gosharkss]

Agree, look hard enough and you will always find a better deal somewhere else.

 

[Kingofcomputer]

Gosharkss, do you find that Viewsonic is going down hill?
In the old day, the 17PS with BNC was very nice and reliable, many are still working good today.
Later the P series doesn't have BNC and seems cheaper in material and quality than the predecessor.

 

[Gosharkss]

Honestly I don?t track ViewSonic, these are tough times for everyone and simply staying in business these days is an accomplishment. Our ViewSonic sales are still on average with the other non-factory direct brands we sell.

 

[fumbduck]

well jim, at first i had my eyes on a 21 inch cornerston,e but you are glad to hear that. the p1650 or 1600 i think. but too expensive.

So im down to these 2. the Deal for the samsung for 270$ ends today, so i guess ill order tonight.

 

[fumbduck]

ttt