Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Samsung LTM295W 29" LCD Review

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the good-enough-to-lick dept.

An anonymous reader noted a review of the Samsung LTM295W. Quick excerpt "The contrast ratio of 600:1 is amazing, and takes the cake for being the highest Iâ(TM)ve seen to date here with the site. I was pleased to see a more than acceptable brightness level of 450cd/m2. The response time isnâ(TM)t anything to snuff at, standing at 22ms. For viewing angles everyone should be pleased with 170/170 (W&H). The last mention is the pixel pitch which sits at .4935(h) X .4935(w). The optimal resolution while in PC use is 1024 x 768 @ 75Hz although the maximum is 1280 x 768 @ 75Hz." Not the highest resolution, but still, quite impressive.

6 of 320 comments (clear)

  1. Nice but not for everyone. by grub · · Score: 3, Interesting


    I have a 19" Sony at home on my game PC. Unfortunately the relatively slow refresh rates and latency of LCDs don't cut it for my 3D LCD shutter glasses from Elsa. So until LCDs get to ~110Hz+ I'm stuck with a CRT for my 3D gaming. :(

    Oh as an aside, the latest Revelator drivers from nVidia support many brands of 3D glasses and even the lame red-blue ones.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  2. A Better Use of $$$ by nherc · · Score: 4, Interesting
    $3k for a lot of real estate. But I think getting say 2 or 3 17" or 19" LCDs and running them with an extended desktop would allow you to actually be more productive and probably save some money.

    Although I suppose this would be the monitor to play Doom III with, IF you have to play it in your office.

    I paid $2400 for a Sharp m20x DLP projector and have a PC running it for HDTV and DVD's in my family room. That's a 133" flat screen for even cheaper. ;)

    --
    'He was a dreamer, a thinker, a speculative philosopher... or, as his wife would have it, an idiot.' - Douglas Adams
  3. Re:Yeah, but . . . by ryanwright · · Score: 3, Interesting

    No joke. I've got a pair of 19" Dell flatpanels that only run @ 1280x1024. Everything is still too big. I'd like to run them @ 1600x1200. A 29" monitor should run something even higher than that...

    If you're only running it @ 1024, or even 1280, it's a waste.

    --
    -Ryan, with the unoriginal sig
  4. Re:Yikkes.. the spcs suck by _xeno_ · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I was thinking that too, until I noticed something: it's really a TV. It happens to contain a RGB/DVI adaptor, but from the specs (and the fact that it includes speakers), I think it's really meant to be used as a TV. Which makes a lot more sense - that would be an OK HDTV, but I would agree that it sounds like it would make a really crappy monitor.

    The 17" LCD screen I'm currently staring at has a resolution of 1280x1024 - going down to 1024x786 seems a bit of a drop for a 29" monitor. It's probably intended to also allow usage as a kiosk display from a computer, not to be used as a primary monitor.

    --
    You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
  5. Re:Where's UXGA ?! by NMerriam · · Score: 4, Interesting

    we've been trying to figure that one out for years now. Beautiful 15" 1600x1200 LCDs are available from a number of laptop manufacturers, but desktop LCDs that cost as much as the entire laptop are 20" and still only 1280x1024. Baffling.

    --
    Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
  6. Waiting for concave, curving screen. by kobotronic · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I want something like this : (crappy lame untextured quick 3D doodle - a large monitor about the size of the Panasonic, but it should curve slightly inwards.

    This would allow more monitors to be put side by side forming a giant panoramic screen. One benefit of such screens would be uniform eye-to-screen distance which should greatly reduce eye stress (since you won't have to refocus when looking at a different part of the screen.)

    The actual optimal resolution of the screen should be determined by intended viewing distance : Individual pixels would still need to be discernable at a distance of about 3 feet, which makes me think the Panasonic resolution is only slightly under par.

    The curving screen technology will almost certainly be available with the advent of OLED screens - perhaps even with semi-flexible, adjustable curvature.