Best sub $400 20inch+ LCD

[MrBojangels]

I want to know what are some of the best non TN 20.1-22inch LCDs are, I am completely lost as LCD seems to be a more diverse technology then any other type of display. I have a budget that can go no higher than $400, less is preferred.

Oh and I want a widescreen LCD.

 

[nanaki333]

you looking for an LCD TV or a gaming monitor?

 

[MrBojangels]

PC monitor, more for multimedia but I still don't want any visible ghosting. I was thinking about a Dell 2007WFP, but the dell lottery doesn't sound fun.

 

[nanaki333]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824009102

i love my acer! i have the 24" one though. image quality is excellent. also, i found scepter to be a good cheaper brand as well. i got a 1080p scepter TV and my got my gf a 19" wide sceptor LCD. works great.

 

[MrBojangels]

That is 22", so isn't it pretty much guaranteed to be a TN LCD?

 

[potato28]

Originally posted by: MrBojangels
That is 22", so isn't it pretty much guaranteed to be a TN LCD?

Most of the LCD's in this price range are TN unfortunatly...

 

[MrBojangels]

Originally posted by: potato28

Originally posted by: MrBojangels
That is 22", so isn't it pretty much guaranteed to be a TN LCD?

Most of the LCD's in this price range are TN unfortunatly...

What about 20.1" LCDs? The dell 2007wfp is S-IPS and S-PVA, I am just afraid of ending up with the S-PVA.

 

[xboxist]

You have very few options on 20", non-TN LCDs. At least from what I understand.

You can just spend more and get the ultra-badass NEC. Or you can try to find the now-discontinued 20" Viewsonic. Or play the Hell lottery.

Basically every manufacturer decided that the majority of people that buy LCDs are soccer moms and grandmas. People that don't know or care about image quality. Just what's cheap.

 

[MrBojangels]

Then I guess I am sticking with my trusty CRT, oh well.

 

[Modular]

What's the story with the Hanns_G 19" WS?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824254005

Is that a good LCD?

 

[MrBojangels]

Its a TN display.

 

[postmortemIA]

Only samsung 215TW is not TN in that price range.

 

[Zebo]

HP 2065 for $400 nothing comes close. Incredibly cheap for an IPS...The next S-IPS is the $600 LG 2000C (same panel) Maybe you should play the Dell lottey if you want WS or get a 22" in this review..

http://www.behardware.com/articles/647-...ith-reaction-times-from-2-to-5-ms.html

 

[MrBojangels]

Originally posted by: postmortemIA
Only samsung 215TW is not TN in that price range.

That is out of my price range.

Originally posted by: Zebo
HP 2065 for $400 nothing comes close. Incredibly cheap for an IPS...The next S-IPS is the $600 LG 2000C (same panel) Maybe you should play the Dell lottey if you want WS or get a 22" in this review..

http://www.behardware.com/articles/647-...ith-reaction-times-from-2-to-5-ms.html

The HP is 5:4.

 

[Zebo]

No it's 4:3 and has 10% more area than a 20" WS. WS is overrated. Sorry $400 is not much to work with I'm just trying to get you quality within that range. Maybe you should just bie the bullet and get the NEC?

 

[sodcha0s]

WS is overrated

That is completely subjective and is a matter of personal opinion. I have the 215tw and after using it, I could never go back to 4:3 or 5:4. With 16:10 I can have 2 windows open side by side, and not have to scroll sideways on either of them making them both very easy to work with. You lose a little screen area, but can see and work with so much more, at least IMHO.

 

[MrBojangels]

A widescreen 20" monitor is going to have %20 more viewing area than a 20" 4:3 monitor in letterbox

Edit: I will be watching HD-DVDs on the monitor, thanks to Microsoft's $200 drive

 

[postmortemIA]

Hehe 16:10 and 4:3 meet at 14:9. So you could expand your 4:3 monitor and lose some borders on sides, but not have as much letterbox. Also widescreen might help you with side scrolling, but you pay price in vertical scrolling. WS annoys me when I read PDF files. so much space is wasted, and it is still to small to have two pages at once because often I read at zoom ~125%.

Perhaps 1920x1200 is ultimate resolution.

 

[TheRyuu]

Originally posted by: sodcha0s

WS is overrated

That is completely subjective and is a matter of personal opinion. I have the 215tw and after using it, I could never go back to 4:3 or 5:4. With 16:10 I can have 2 windows open side by side, and not have to scroll sideways on either of them making them both very easy to work with. You lose a little screen area, but can see and work with so much more, at least IMHO.

Agreed.
You have to try it.
If you don't like it then, well, your just weird.

The majority of the cheap 20+in. monitors are TN panels (what do you expect, you get what you paid for).

The Viewsonic VX2025wm is a P-MVA (the one I have) but they don't make those anymore and I think they replaced it with a TN panel based VX2035wm (IIRC) probably to cut down on costs.

Your best shot right now is the Dell 2007wfp. It's the best monitor in that price range plus whichever one you get, it's not gonna be a TN panel. Cross your fingers and you might even get a S-IPS panel.
Thats if you really don't want a TN panel.

If you don't mind it then the 22in Viewsonic is a nice monitor along with the others from the 22in Chi Mei monitor thread will do just fine.

 

[MrBojangels]

Well how much better are Chi Mei panels than other generic ones? I guess I could go for the Benq or spectre.

How are they with dead pixels, and backlight bleeding?

Asus vs Spectre? I know the Spectre is going to give me HDMI so I could hook my cable box up to it if I ever wanted. Asus is way to sexy, I don't think I could resist it, but the one review said it had horrible color rendering.