Secondary monitor

[Adcadet]

Hey Guys,
I'm looking to replace my old 19" CRT monitor that I use as a secondary monitor next to my 23" widescreen LCD monitor. I have loved having a second monitor since I first ran this sort of set up back around 2000 or so. I mostly use the secondary monitor when I'm writing. Text on the 19" monitor at 1600x1200 is hard to read, and 1280x1024 gives me too little space. And the old CRT monitor is taking up too much room on my desk.

Colors on the secondary monitor don't matter very much. Response time is not a worry, since I won't be doing any video/gaming on this monitor. A decent viewing angle does matter, since I frequently lean back in my chair to read. Decent text display is a must. I think I would prefer either a 4:3, although a portrait (vs landscape) widescreen might work if it had a swivel. I think 1280x1024 would be a little too small. I suppose I could get a larger primary display, but this seems more economical and is what I'm used to. I'm hoping to find something for <$200, and hopefully in the $150 range.

Does anybody else run this sort of setup? Any suggestions for types of monitors I should be looking at?

 

[Chewy509]

I'm running 2x 20" LCDs at the moment, and I agree - I would be hard pressed to go back to single monitor.

I don't have a recommendation for the second monitor, but have noticed that anything under or around 20" is limited to 1366x768 or 1440x900, to get a higher res (1680x1050) requires a 22" LCD for wide screen (16:9 or 16:10) monitors.

Quickly looking on Newegg, in 4:3 aspect at 1600x1200, there are 2 monitors both over $500... in 4:3 aspect at 19" @ 1280x1024 gives 10 results under $200. Only 1 I could recommend is this one: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824176139 . But be aware it's VGA only, no DVI. Having used this HP model in the past, they are quite good for what they are - a cheap no frills 19" 4:3 LCD monitor.

 

[Buck]

I also use two monitors:
23" @ 1920x1280
19" @ 1280x1024

I like the setup with my 23" being the main monitor or the one where I work on projects. The secondary monitor is for internet browsing, email, and miscellaneous items. I like that my secondary monitor is not widescreen.

 

[ddrueding]

I've found that the best bang for the buck at the moment is 23" wide screen monitors for about $160 at Costco.

 

[Bozo]

You might also look at the Dell website.

 

[time]

I also use two monitors:
23" @ 1920x1080
19" @ 1280x1024

Fixed that for you.

 

[Stereodude]

They could also be 1920x1200.

 

[CougTek]

I don't remember any 1920x1200 23" monitor. The 1920x1200 started at 24" IIRC. The recent 23" are all 1920x1080 in my price lists.

 

[time]

Thanks to m'learned colleague, CougTek, the prosecution rests.

 

[Stereodude]

I don't remember any 1920x1200 23" monitor. The 1920x1200 started at 24" IIRC. The recent 23" are all 1920x1080 in my price lists.

Uh... A quick google search confirms 23" 1920x1200 monitors were definitely sold in the past. They're not sold anymore, but they were previously.

 

[time]

I can find a Philips, an Apple and an HP, all apparently using the same LM230W02 IPS panel. All were available 5 or 6 years ago and none were cheap.

Buck prefers value for money propositions and 23" 16:9 has been the standout for the last couple of years.

Q.E.D., Buck almost certainly has a 23" 1920x1080 monitor, although one can never be 100% certain about anything.

 

[CougTek]

I forgot about those. In fact, now I remember that I ordered a few of the HP flavor some three years ago (they were used). They were mostly for the business market.

They have been out of the market for several years. I doubt Buck has one of them. Money is on a 1080p model.

 

[Buck]

Fixed that for you.

Thanks. That monitor is 1080. In spite of that shortcoming, I still like it.

 

[Buck]

Typically, I distance myself from all things Asus. However, their current line of VW/VH monitors are worth the cost, in my opinion. I have been using their VW 19" and VH 23" monitors with success for budget and mid-range systems. Even at the high-end, the 23" is nice, except when a more accurate and full color gamut is required. That's when I use the NEC Professional 30" LCD3090WQXi. But, that one can be a tad pricey.

 

[Buck]

However, as I have mentioned in the past, I still prefer 4:3 ratio monitors under 23" for business-type work. Typical documentation (e.g. report, spreadsheet, letter) is still more portrait in size (not that some spreadsheets aren't stupidly wide, but they seem to not be the norm). Even photography work is better on a ~4:3 screen. I prefer doing photo manipulation on my 20" 1920 x 1600 monitor than on my 23" 1920 x 1080 monitor. I think the 1920 x 1600 is WUXGA, whereas the 1920 x 1080 is HD 1080. That latter describes the situation best: wide-screen is best for HD movies, not much else. Anyway, that's how HLM Company sees things. Yet, in practice, 19" wide-screen monitors are less expensive than 19" 4:3 varieties. :-/

 

[Mercutio]

I usually buy 22" Dell or Hanns-G (depending on budget) screens for pretty much everything. I think a 19" widescreen is too small for useful work on a desktop and frankly most office dwellers love all the screen real estate even if the lion's share of them do change the resolution of their screens to 1024x768 as soon as they possibly can.

 

[LunarMist]

Typically, I distance myself from all things Asus. However, their current line of VW/VH monitors are worth the cost, in my opinion. I have been using their VW 19" and VH 23" monitors with success for budget and mid-range systems. Even at the high-end, the 23" is nice, except when a more accurate and full color gamut is required. That's when I use the NEC Professional 30" LCD3090WQXi. But, that one can be a tad pricey.

I was 0.5 for 2 on the LCD3090WQXi. Do yours have delta E issues? I gave up and went back to Eizo, which is rather more expensive per inch.

 

[time]

I figured that a mention of the now infamous NEC would bring Lunar out of the woodwork.

 

[LunarMist]

Have I been in the woodwork? :cheese:

 

[BingBangBop]

Have I been in the woodwork? :cheese:

Bed bugs :razz:

 

[CougTek]

my 20" 1920 x 1600 monitor

Shouldn't that be 1600x1200? Back then, "square" 20" were 1600x1200. Now, they have dissapeared.

 

[LunarMist]

I thought most of the 1600x1200 monitors were 21.3" about 5 years ago.

 

[time]

Yep. I'd guess there were at most two panels available, all PVA/MVA.

 

[LunarMist]

My 21.3" display is IPS and it was not quite new in 2005.

 

[time]

Sorry, I was thinking further back than that.

Does that mean there was probably only one panel (Samsung?) ever available in that size in MVA? I thought there might have been an NEC PVA as well, but it was always a tiny market.

 

[CougTek]

I thought most of the 1600x1200 monitors were 21.3" about 5 years ago.

Nope, I'm talking about 20" monitor, like the Dell 2001FP. 1600x1200 and 20". A quick search revealed that they still sell the 2007FP with the same definition.

 

[LunarMist]

Of yeah, now I remember all those 2001, 2003, etc. and sometimes getting IPS and sometimes not. What was the point again?

 

[Stereodude]

I still have a working Dell 2000FP. It has an IPS panel. It's also put to shame by newer inferior technology panels.

 

[Santilli]

I'm currently using a 37" Vizio, and a 27" SamsungP2770 from Costco, 300 dollars.
I'm going to move the 27" into the living room computer. It's actually too big for my desk, and to see it I have to turn it sideways so I can use then entire 37".

I would have a look at this:

http://www.costco.com/Home.aspx?cm_re=1_en-_-Top_Left_Nav-_-Top_logo&lang=en-US

From Costco:
$149.99 after $30 OFF
AOC 24"W LCD Monitor
1920x1080 Resolution
Touch Sensitive Controls

They have similar monitors at the store, and, they look very good. Seems like the sweet spot for cost vs. real estate, and quality. I find the second monitor is better to be a little lower quality, otherwise I have to turn the settings to text, since it's often too bright while doing, or viewing other things on the 37".

I'm also considering a 21.5" Samsung, for about the same price, but, I remember that being a bit too small for my setup. It was too small, and being set at 1900 X 1080 it was too small, for text in particular.

Another alternative might be to go with a 27" for your main monitor, 300 dollars is reasonable, I think, for that size, and move the 24" to the secondary position?

 

[Buck]

Nope, I'm talking about 20" monitor, like the Dell 2001FP. 1600x1200 and 20". A quick search revealed that they still sell the 2007FP with the same definition.

Yup, and last week it died on me. RIP.

 

[Adcadet]

Well, the 19" monitor in question is now starting to die. It will occasionally act like I cycled the power. Any current suggestions? My uses are still as described above.

 

[time]

The situation hasn't improved - you're going to have to compromise on one or more of your requirements.

This NEC 19" PVA gives you 5:4 aspect ratio and wide viewing angles, but it's only 1280x1024 and blows your budget at $340. But it will give you the largest text.

Everything else that's even vaguely affordable is 'widescreen'. Within budget at $170 is this Samsung 23" cPVA which is a really great entry-level monitor for graphics but limited to just 1080 lines.

Samsung 24" TN gives you 1200 lines for $370, but as you would expect for a TN panel, viewing angles are limited.

Other ideas include Hanns-G 27.5" TN, which for $270 guarantees the text will be big but with poor viewing angles; and the assorted IPS panels that start at $400 for the DoubleSight 24".

Personally, I'd consider buying 3 of the Samsung 2333T and using them in portrait mode with a 3-monitor VESA stand.

 

[Adcadet]

Would be nice if I could find a cheap widescreen that I could rotate to make portrait rather than landscape; all the stands I've seen recently make that impossible.

 

[ddrueding]

Would be nice if I could find a cheap widescreen that I could rotate to make portrait rather than landscape; all the stands I've seen recently make that impossible.

You also don't want to do that with a cheap screen; only something with really good color consistency and viewing angle will still look decent in portrait mode. My cheap 27" ASUS something-or-other looks crap that way, but my Dell U2711 looks awesome.

 

[Santilli]

I'm with David:

Buy either a 27" Samung, or the 23" Samsung from Costco, depending on budget, and live with the size. You might also look at the 21" as well.

While not perfect, they are pretty good.

 

[time]

Would be nice if I could find a cheap widescreen that I could rotate to make portrait rather than landscape; all the stands I've seen recently make that impossible.

$40 from NewEgg (click for manufacturer's page):

 

[LunarMist]

Don't you still need monitor orientation support or is that all in the OS?

 

[time]

You also don't want to do that with a cheap screen; only something with really good color consistency and viewing angle will still look decent in portrait mode.

Exactly, except my market summary post makes it very clear which models have narrow viewing angles. Adcadet specified wide viewing angles as one of his requirements, so I concentrated on non-TN panels.

The Samsung 2333T is a cheap screen but it DOES have really good color consistency and viewing angle. AFAIK, it's comparable to the F2380 cPVA, which while nowhere near as good as a far more expensive IPS monitor like the Ultrasharp U2711, is superior to low-end IPS monitors like the Ultrasharp U2311.

In short, it's an absolute bargain. The only problem is that 16:9 widescreens only give you 1080 pixels across when you pivot them 90°, which is why I suggested thinking about more than one. 16:10 (1920x1200) screens are definitely preferable in this regard, but as I said, you have to pay at least $400 for even a budget IPS brand.

Incidentally, the Ultrasharp 27" is also great value (for what you get); my only (minor) reservation is that the 2560x1600 resolution really belongs on a 30" monitor, but maybe you should consider it as a single monitor option?

 

[time]

Don't you still need monitor orientation support or is that all in the OS?

It's all in the OS / graphics drivers. Unfortunately, there's no sensor to tell Windows to change the orientation automatically, as one might expect in 2011. Anyone who's spent time with a smartphone realizes how moribund the Wintel nexus has made the IT industry.

 

[LunarMist]

Incidentally, the Ultrasharp 27" is also great value (for what you get); my only (minor) reservation is that the 2560x1600 resolution really belongs on a 30" monitor, but maybe you should consider it as a single monitor option?

It is only 16:9 (2560x1440) and the pixels are rather small, so it may not be the best for good text especially as a second monitor.