There's a new 22" in town

[n7]

We just got this in at work, & i am impressed.

It's a pretty standard 22" in terms of specs.
TN (of some kind)
1680x1050
1000:1 contrast ratio
5 ms response time

But then it pulls ahead IMO

Height adjustable
Portrait mode (pivot)
Very nice looking chassis & bezel
Brightview (glossy finish like Opticlear)

HP's info:
http://www.shopping.hp.com/product/stor...RcBzSEd3uoS2bDYGwjC74DGLq5njk5ujDgdvw3!625554263


I am already liking it over anything else out there for the 1680x1050 crowd (aside from the NEC 20WMGX2 of course).

Basically, for those of you who like the glossy finish panels for their vibrancy & sharpness, this is the 22" for you (if you can't afford the NEC)

Only drawback is the reflective surface all glossy panels have.

Meaning if you have a lamp or lights shining onto your LCD, rearrange your desk/lighting to work for this monitor

 

[GEOrifle]

I like GLOSSY panels, SONY did it and picture q-ty was AMAZING, the only monitor i liked. I have SONY, DELL and VIEWSONIC, saw Samsung, Gateway and WH but they are ALL GARBAGE compared to SONY.
Maybe HP does a good job but you better compare it with latest SONY or DELL LCD's.
Than tell us what do you think.

 

[n7]

Dell & Viewsonic have done glossy on what panels & since when?

 

[CP5670]

It's great to see more manufacturers adopting the glossy panels. What are the street prices prices of this thing though? The Acer AL2051W has the glossy coating and an 8-bit VA panel for only $250 and would seem like a better buy, although it is a bit smaller.

 

[n7]

Best Buy has it for $450 CND it appears.

Seems to be just under $400 USD, so it's on the higher end.

But it has the height adjust/pivot capability few others have.

 

[darkswordsman17]

Originally posted by: n7
Dell & Viewsonic have done glossy on what panels & since when?

Dell's done it on their laptops, don't know about Viewsonic.

I have no clue why Dell has not done it on their normal LCD monitors (or rather their Ultrasharp versions and leave the normal ones without it). At the very least I would think there would be a market for upscale monitors that are guaranteed to have good panels and other features (such as actual usable 1080p capability, etc).

The problem here is that although it does a lot right, it's still a 22" and so suffers from their intrinsic problems. I would guess HP did it mostly so they would have something unique in a very competitive segment (22" has lots of competition these days).

If they could just come up with some way of making a cheap front bezel type thing where if you want the anti-glare you put that one on, and if you want glossy you put that one on.

 

[dblue]

what's the intrinsic problem with 22"?

i have tried both HP 22" and 20". the image on 20" is definitely better. is that the intrinsic problem you mean? well i know the dot is bigger 22" since they are the same resoultion.

 

[Keysplayr]

Don't glossy panels reflect more light? Are they not harder to see in brightly lit rooms? Or have the manufacturers conquered this problem?

 

[n7]

Just as an update, my initial impression still stands.

I used the HP W2207 in portrait mode today for a bit, & wow, i must say i was impressed.
Normally, TNs are basically unbearable in portrait, but somehow the Brightview glossy finish helps for viewing angles, as it was at least tolerable side to side in portrait, something i cannot say for other TNs, including my own Samsung 204B.

I would encourage anyone worried about the gloss to go into a store & see this LCD for themselves.
It will sell itself, believe me

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Don't glossy panels reflect more light? Are they not harder to see in brightly lit rooms? Or have the manufacturers conquered this problem?

The problem still exists, but many people would accept the trade-off. You have to see it to believe it. Keeping an open mind is always a good thing.

 

[randym431]

The 22" was just too big, for a pc monitor, for me. Theres a point of overkill and 22" is it. 20" is the max I'd go with a pc monitor.

 

[allies]

Originally posted by: randym431
The 22" was just too big, for a pc monitor, for me. Theres a point of overkill and 22" is it. 20" is the max I'd go with a pc monitor.

After a couple months of using a 22" monitor, I can tell you I can't wait to go to 27"+

Edit: Actually I could settle for a 24" NEC with glossy... whenever it comes out

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: xtknight

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Don't glossy panels reflect more light? Are they not harder to see in brightly lit rooms? Or have the manufacturers conquered this problem?

The problem still exists, but many people would accept the trade-off. You have to see it to believe it. Keeping an open mind is always a good thing.

When I was shopping around for my LCD, I almost picked up a Benq (I think) that had a glossy screen, but all the lighting in the store could be seen on the screens reflection, and that made me not buy the monitor. This was before I encountered the LG I currently have.
Glossy has a nice "look" as it simulates a "glass" type "tube". But for me, not worth the reflections. But that's just me.

 

[IlllI]

n7...werent you the person saying not too long ago, how theres no real practical use for widescreen monitors? or lcds for that matter? and that crts are still better etc etc?

maybe i have the wrong person, but i could have sworn you wrote something along those lines not too long ago. seems kind of odd to see all this praise for a widescreen lcd... unless i have the wrong person

 

[n7]

No.

I do not like CRTs at all lol

I don't particularly like WS gaming, but i don't mind WS LCDs (see sig for why).

 

[biostud]

Originally posted by: dblue
what's the intrinsic problem with 22"?

i have tried both HP 22" and 20". the image on 20" is definitely better. is that the intrinsic problem you mean? well i know the dot is bigger 22" since they are the same resoultion.

the 22" is 1650x1080 while the 20" is 1440x900

And I've had the w2207 for about two weeks and really love it. The color settings seems to be very good out of the box IMHO.

 

[biostud]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: xtknight

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Don't glossy panels reflect more light? Are they not harder to see in brightly lit rooms? Or have the manufacturers conquered this problem?

The problem still exists, but many people would accept the trade-off. You have to see it to believe it. Keeping an open mind is always a good thing.

When I was shopping around for my LCD, I almost picked up a Benq (I think) that had a glossy screen, but all the lighting in the store could be seen on the screens reflection, and that made me not buy the monitor. This was before I encountered the LG I currently have.
Glossy has a nice "look" as it simulates a "glass" type "tube". But for me, not worth the reflections. But that's just me.

It hasn't been a problem in my room which is quite well lit, and the more vivid colors seems to be a nice trade off for the glossy finish.

 

[IlllI]

Originally posted by: n7
No.

I do not like CRTs at all lol

I don't particularly like WS gaming, but i don't mind WS LCDs (see sig for why).

maybe that was it then. i knew it had something to do with ws lcds

 

[dblue]

both the 22" and 20" is 1680x1050. i am pretty sure about this, because right now i am using dual output of same image to w2207 and w2007. The w2007 contrast is higher and looks sharper, but the viewing angle from the top definitely favors 2207. And I downloaded checkmon.exe program, the color gradiant is more distinguishable on the 2207. And both of the monitor i use the default text setting.

 

[biostud]

Originally posted by: dblue
both the 22" and 20" is 1680x1050. i am pretty sure about this, because right now i am using dual output of same image to w2207 and w2007. The w2007 contrast is higher and looks sharper, but the viewing angle from the top definitely favors 2207. And I downloaded checkmon.exe program, the color gradiant is more distinguishable on the 2207. And both of the monitor i use the default text setting.

my bad, I just thought I saw somewhere it was lower on th 20"

 

[dblue]

biostud, do you use custom setting for ur monitor or which default setting do you use?

 

[biostud]

Originally posted by: dblue
biostud, do you use custom setting for ur monitor or which default setting do you use?

atm default, every time i tried to calibrate the monitor it resulted in worse picture quality, than the default

 

[dblue]

i noticed the same thing too

 

[kantonburg]

I know this is a thread bump but I'm pretty settled on this monitor. I particularly like the glossy screen. How does everyone like this who own it after a few months?