LG L245WP : 1920x1200 and HDMI for the mass.

[CougTek]

One of my good customers bought me that monitor. I plugged it to be sure there were no dead pixel and to verify that everything was working ok. Talk about creating a need. Now my Dell 2005FPW looks so pathetic. 1920x1200 is great, even compared to a still respectable 1680x1050. And the picture quality on the 24" LG is quite a step above the crowd of cheap 22" screens that are currently flowding the market. No comparison possible. HDMI (DVI-to-HDMI cable included) tops it all.

All this for about the same price that I paid my 20" Dell one and a half year ago. The Acer 2416W 24" is cheaper, but it only has an analog input. I expect a significant decrease in picture sharpness and color accuracy because of this.

You haven't seen a monitor until you've seen this one or something above. Sure, it doesn't match a NEC 2690Xi, but nothing else does anyway and the LG 24" is reasonably close, especially considering the price.

Now get out and buy one.

 

[Buck]

One of my good customers bought me that monitor. I plugged it to be sure there were no dead pixel and to verify that everything was working ok. Talk about creating a need. Now my Dell 2005FPW looks so pathetic. 1920x1200 is great, even compared to a still respectable 1680x1050. And the picture quality on the 24" LG is quite a step above the crowd of cheap 22" screens that are currently flowding the market. No comparison possible. HDMI (DVI-to-HDMI cable included) tops it all.

All this for about the same price that I paid my 20" Dell one and a half year ago. The Acer 2416W 24" is cheaper, but it only has an analog input. I expect a significant decrease in picture sharpness and color accuracy because of this.

You haven't seen a monitor until you've seen this one or something above. Sure, it doesn't match a NEC 2690Xi, but nothing else does anyway and the LG 24" is reasonably close, especially considering the price.

Now get out and buy one.

I just installed a Samsung 244T for a customer and their jaw dropped out of amazement at the quality. You're right Coug, there are so many 19/20" cheap monitors being flogged at the public, it's a real shame. Their quality sucks, and then trying to sell someone a good quality version is difficult. But I manage. : ) I think at the 19" range the Samsung 940BX is a nice compromise between quality and price; plus it keeps the more practical 4:3 image ratio.

 

[CougTek]

think at the 19" range the Samsung 940BX is a nice compromise between quality and price; plus it keeps the more practical 4:3 image ratio.

I don't have the 940BX on my lists. I can have the 932B, the 931C, the 931BW and 940BW, but not the 940BX. I usually sell LG L1953T to customers looking for a 19" display. It's better than the Acer models of comparable size and better too than the Samsung I mentioned. But it's nothing compared to the 24" L245WP.

I remember Time wrote that some Philips 190E7??? 19" looks awesome, but it is more expensive than some 20" LCDs with UXGA native definition, so I'm gonna pass.

 

[Sol]

Is it just me or is HDMI actually not all that useful? My TV has HDMI but because the native resolution is 1320x768 or something instead of 720P if I try to use the HDMI connection instead of the analog VGA plug the quality is terrible.

I imagine 1080P would look just as bad on this monitor for the same reason. (Although obviously DVI here makes the point somewhat less relevant)

 

[Mercutio]

A lot of screens seem to use a 16:10 resolution and use an internal chip to scale it. Looks crappy. I understand there are also rules about how an image can be scaled over HDMI and I'm not sure those same rules apply to the analog connection.

 

[timwhit]

I thought HDMI was just a DVI cable with added digital audio? Maybe I better read up.

 

[time]

1. I notice Coug referred to the widescreen 940BW rather than the 940B (or the BX variant Buck referred to). These are completely different panels with different specs.

2. My skin crawls whenever I contemplate recommending LG. I notice that the 1953T doesn't even have tilt adjustment - is that correct?

Nonetheless, it is cheap for a 700:1 monitor (of course, they say 2000:1 - that's "dynamic", misleading claims are the norm for this company). I'll go for it if you truly believe it's a good thing, Coug.

3. What about the Samsung 206BW? Unlike the 205BW, 8 rather than 6 bits per color channel and 800:1 contrast ratio. Probably not much more than US$250?

 

[time]

Coug, I was sort of hoping for comments. Does anyone else have any?

 

[Mercutio]

The site was inaccessible during what most of us here call "the day", yesterday. I'm kind of curious for Coug to respond as well.

 

[Stereodude]

I thought HDMI was just a DVI cable with added digital audio? Maybe I better read up.

It basically is except the audio data is stuffed into the horizontal and vertical blanking interval of the video signal. It does not have discrete wires for audio data.

 

[Stereodude]

I like the idea of a Sharp 32" LC-32D62 for a PC monitor myself. 1920x1080 and a real 2000:1 CR. None of these namby pamby sub 1000:1 CR's.

 

[CougTek]

I'm not in a great mood for posting these days. But since I'm begged for a reply, then I will oblige myself to type a few lines.

As stated above, I don't have access to the 940BX, so I cannot commend it. I don't like the color reproduction on the 940B. Maybe I'm confusing this one for another model, but I think it's a 6-bit panel. The LG L1953T (honestly, I haven't seen the L1953, only the previous L1952 but the specifications are very similar and I think the only difference is in the dynamic contrast), on the other hand, is an 8-bit panel. It performs ok for gaming, unless the user is very demanding. The color temperature is a little cold (bluehish) by default. Poor for photo editing, but it looks nices for common "windowing". It can be adjust. Viewing angles, while not great, are very acceptable for a low-cost LCD monitor. I won't claim it's an exceptional value, but except for the lack of tilt adjustment (I never noticed before), it has so serious picture flaw. It's a no-frill, affordable monitor. I started selling it (well, it was the L1952 back then) on a regular basis a year ago (March 2006 IIRC) and so far, I've received no complain about it, only praises.

And of course, it has a DVI input, although since last summer, LG stopped including the DVI cable.

I've been unimpressed with the 206BW, just like every other cheap widescreen 20-22 inches LCDs on the market. They all look the same. They all have poor viewing angles and washed out colors. Most if not all of them use TN panels, so none looks good. For widescreen panels in that size range, I always sell the Acer 2216WBD theses days. It's the cheapest of the bunch and it looks more or less like all the others. It has a DVI input and the cable is included. It doesn't have fancy features like an i-pod dock, extra USB ports or integrated speakers, but I don't give a shit. A monitor's raison d'être (You see, now I sound like a preppy Californian) is to display pictures, not to grill toasts and serve coffee. If you want a better picture than the Acer 2216WBD, then you don't jump to the 206BW(20"), 225BW(22") or any other widescreen LCD (except maybe for the NEC 20MXG2), because they are only scantly better, you opt for an UXGA 20-21 inches or a 24 inches panel.

In résumé, the Samsung 206BW doesn't look good enough for me to pay extra $$ for it over the cheap, yet comparable Acer 2216WBD. Oh yeah, I forgot to mention it before, but as you probably figured it out, the 206BW cost me more than the bigger Acer 22".

 

[CougTek]

Sorry for the spelling mistakes in my previous post. I hit submit reply instead of preview post. I'm coffee-deprived right now and unlike most of you, I'm a lot better when I PUI.

 

[timwhit]

Does PUI include caffeine?

 

[CougTek]

In my case it makes a difference. My organism needs it to work well.

 

[time]

I don't like the color reproduction on the 940B. Maybe I'm confusing this one for another model, but I think it's a 6-bit panel.

I use an identically specced (apart from size) 740B during the week and find the color reproduction awful.

The LG L1953T (honestly, I haven't seen the L1953, only the previous L1952 but the specifications are very similar and I think the only difference is in the dynamic contrast), on the other hand, is an 8-bit panel.

AFAIK, the L1952 was a 6-bit panel. The really interesting thing is that according to LG's web sites, Canada (and presumably Quebec) seems to be the only place in the world that has an 8-bit version of the L1953! Even the US has to make do with a 6-bit panel ... And in Oz we are also afflicted with the fixed stand!

I've been unimpressed with the 206BW, just like every other cheap widescreen 20-22 inches LCDs on the market. They all look the same. They all have poor viewing angles and washed out colors. Most if not all of them use TN panels, so none looks good.

Unfortunately, I ordered one before you posted. Mainly because it's one of the few affordable 8-bit panels available in Oz - unlike its 6-bit predecessor, the 205BW. The 206BW is quite new.

Vertical viewing angle isn't great, but I've seen worse. There's some color shift as the horizontal angle changes, but quite moderate for LCD.

Out of the box, the Contrast was set to 75, above which shades of color started to merge. Subjectively, we found the picture better with Contrast at 50. As usual, Brightness was set way too high at 100. 50 was much better and I've used 25 at night in a dim room.

The claimed 3000:1 dynamic contrast ratio is the most blatant example of bullsh*t specs I've seen for a while. Even adjusting brightness and contrast to extermes wouldn't match a proper 1000:1 static ratio monitor.

For widescreen panels in that size range, I always sell the Acer 2216WBD theses days.

In Oz, it's a 6-bit panel, although I'm starting to think that the differences aren't as obvious as some people make out.

Anyway, for the money (less than US$30 more than the 940B), I give this Samsung 206BW a passing grade. I think it's certainly more competitive than the 205BW. However, I now think the larger 226BW is probably just not worth the extra dollars.

 

[e_dawg]

Dell has a nice 24" 1920x1200 with DVI, the UltraSharp 2407FPW for a decent price. Might be able to give the LG a run for its money.