Originally posted by: UTFan81
look at this. New Samsung 2253BW. It must be the true replacement of the 226BW.
http://www.samsung.com/us/cons...2AQWJFV/XAA&fullspec=F
Maybe...we'll just have to see.
Originally posted by: dragon57
I just called around and an OfficeMax says they have an HP W2207 w/a Samsung panel (one of my choices if I go with a 22" panel), which I have read is the best panel to have in the 2207 (versus an LG or Innolux). The price is $360. Since I have read the 2207 is discontinued, is the 2207 now worth $360+tax?
I wonder how they knew it was a Samsung panel?
Gee...the salesmen you must have the fortune of meeting are a lot better than the ones around here.
😛
For a Samsung panel, I'd jump on it. True Samsung 22"s are rare, even coming from Samsung Electronics.
Originally posted by: esjrobles
Guys, any idea about the difference of the samsung 2232bw and 2232gw models? 2232gw is the only availlable 2232 model here in the phillipines.
Samsung BW models are coated with a matte, anti-glare coating. GW ones have a shiny, glossy panel coating (Samsung MagicClear) which improves brightness but also has increased reflection.
Originally posted by: dragon57
Originally posted by: xtknight
Originally posted by: dragon57
xtknight (or anyone else), do you have any opinions on the Samsung 2693HM? I just got back from Fry's Electronics and they had one. I had never seen one before and unfortunately trying to get any info out of the employees was an exercise in futility.
I know it is a TN panel, but it is the same size as the NEC 2690.
Edit: Never mind about the 2693HM. I just tracked down and chatted with a guy that bought a 2693HM at Fry's yesterday. He said it was a huge disappointment and will be returning it.
I guess my search continues. 🙁
I don't know much about this LCD besides that it's a TN. A pretty big size for a TN too IMO. Viewing angles might be a problem, not much different than the 245BW.
The fellow said the viewing angles were very poor on the new Samsung 2693. He said sitting straight on to the monitor he could see color changes up/down/left/right when looking at the center of a mono-colored background. He said $699 was way too much for this panel with the faults he found.
You won't see it being recommended by me then, unless it somehow garners great reviews. The TN 245BW made it, but it was a close call.
Originally posted by: starcycle
Originally posted by: xtknight
That's actually pretty surprising. I'm not used to hearing reports about the 215TW being oversaturated or missing detail.
Digging around, it seems that others have reported it also, like from this review on amazon:
Out of the box, everything about the monitor seemed nice, conservative case, basic access controls and the height/tilt adjustments were key points. The first images needless to say were way over driven...too bright, overly saturated and typical of how the manufacturers set these up to "wow" potential buyers in stores. After calibrating using Monaco Optix Pro, things settled well but I felt the reds were a bit more than "real" and highlights a bit bright still.
http://www.amazon.com/review/p...ZP1QE?showViewpoints=1
That reflects my experience exactly. Switching to the radeon seems to have helped a little (and it's faster than the matrox, too, which is nice - and the rotation with xrandr is cool to impress people with
😀). A lot also depends on the source. I think the samsung is more revealing of a poorly rendered photo or video, especially like those that populate the web, and that probably had a lot to do with it.
Strangely enough, the LG looks even better on my old windows 2000 computer with the matrox than it did on linux. I suspect the linux drivers just aren't up to snuff. I'd still like to see the lenovo 22", but for now I think I'm keeping the samsung after all.
Weird. It's not as if the 215TW has a wide gamut backlight or anything. (Even then, the overvibrance there would be in the green range.)
If it still happens after calibration, then you've puzzled me. The 215TW does have a great contrast. Are you sure it's just red that's overvibrant, even after calibration?
Or perhaps the correct color space transformation isn't taking place in your media player (NTSC->sRGB). I find that with Media Player Classic, using the VMR output correctly converts colors (NTSC range is 16->235 I think).
With Linux, I think mplayer does the color space transformation automatically (before even being sent to video-out driver?) And in Linux, after applying an ICC, calibration actually does take place on video-out (assuming xv or x11 outputs I believe, not sure about gl/overlay).
In what way did it look better under Windows?
Yes a VA panel is generally very preferable to a TN. I do find the red punch hard to believe after calibration. Is there any way you could photograph that (in comparison to LG?)
You could try handing Firefox Gran Paradiso the ICC profile for your 215TW on the CD, which contains gamut information, and enable color profiling in that Firefox beta. But, I doubt this will do anything differently. Like I said, the 215TW's backlight should be normal. And I don't think that color profiling effects plugins like Flash or WMPlayer/totem.