<<
I was just reading this weeks PC Magazine and they did a feature on lcd monitors. They only gave the Planar 2 out of 5 and said that image quality fell short of average. It rated near the bottom out of 16 different models. It doesn't really seem like a hot deal now, luckily I read the mag and decided against ordering it. >>
Did you notice what criteria the reviewer used to judge the display? Here is a quote:
"Unfortunately, sound from the speakers was tinny and thin. Since the front panel lacks a volume control, you'll have to navigate deep into the on-screen menu to adjust the level. The front panel also lacks buttons for auto-sync and signal-source control, again forcing you to work through the menu system. And the button labels on the unit's black case are difficult to read."
"The PV174 rotates to portrait mode and has both analog and digital connections?features that typically signal a premium product?but missing controls and poor sound negate the gains of the fancy features."
So, he doesn't like the speakers (who would use them anyway?) and he is confused by the OSD. How profound. Can someone explain to me how poor speakers and an imperfect OSD render the pv174's portrait mode useless? Not sure the logic the reviewer was using here, but it is questionable. Next, we have a quote that seems a bit odd:
"Viewing angles were clearly more limited than on most of the other monitors"
WHAT? The pv174 utilizes a fujitsu mva panel and has viewing angles of 160 degrees horizontally AND vertically. Not sure which monitor he was looking at when he was typing that little tidbit, but I don't see how it could be the pv174. The most credible parts of this review are the brightness tests done with professional testing equipment. Click on the link I have pasted below and then click the box which reads "Click here to view the results of our performance tests."
Test Results Page
You will notice that while the pv174 scores only average on brightness, it wins first place in brightness variance (consistency of brightness over the entire screen). Now everyone is welcome to their own opinion but I would put more weight on a top ranking brightness variance score than the performance of the monitor's superflous speakers. Here are some more positive comments from the reviewer:
"Once you get to the auto-sync feature, it does a good job synchronizing on analog signals and getting the size, position, and timing correct in one shot. Our display did well with light-gray shades and color tracking..."
One might suggest that I am simply trying to defend the product I own. However, I have not even received the LCD yet. The Planar may indeed be a terrible monitor and if so, I will ship it right back. Personally, I do not put much stock in professional reviews of monitors. While some have the benifit of professional testing equipment, they don't often seem to put it to good use. In my experience, these reviews rarely reflect the actually performance of display (If the display quality is even the focus of the review). My experience consists of a never ending quest to find a monitor that I can live with. I have purchased and returned/exchanged over 10 CRT monitors, some of the same make/model (I was hoping the problems were shipping damage or a manufacturing defect) so far and one LCD (because of limited viewing angle). The professional reviews of many of the monitors I purchased were stellar but when it showed up at my door I was less than impressed. It seems that all 19" CRT monitors will have at least some loss of convergence and focus at the corners/sides/top/bottom and many have less than perfect geometry. I have decided that because I want perfect convergence, focus, and geometry, I must look towards LCDs. Hopefully the Planar will satisfy my seemingly insatiable lust for the "perfect" monitor.
Anyway, my main point is to take professional reviews with a grain of salt. In this case I put more confidence in the many Anandtechers that have posted opinions of the pv174 (both good and bad) than one reviewer who's biggest gripe with this monitor is the speakers and OSD. Not to mention that he neglected to include the fact that it scored the best of all the monitors on brightness variance. Another thing he left out is Planar's 3 year (free 2 day air shipping) warranty. Even if we take the reviewers opinions/observations at face value I don't see how it recieved the lowest rating. Oh well, perhaps I will hate the Planar LCD when it gets here. We shall see.
One last thing, I don't want everyone to think that I am completely jaded and biased against all professional reviews. A few do seem to be very well done. For instance I was impressed by:
Tom's Hardware's review of the p2460
This review was thorough, seemed very honest, and gave a detailed analysis of the display quality. They even evaluated it once with the default settings and then again after calibrating it to it's maximum potential. They also took and posted digital photos of the area of the display that had uncorrectable color variance. I would LOVE to see CRT reviewers take and post digital pics of a few key displaymate test screens such as convergence, focus, and geometry. I wish more reviews were done in this manner instead of the trend of reviewing 10 monitors at a time and only devoting half a page of text to each unit (PcWorld comes to mind).