For all of recent memory, I have been trying to get what I consider to be a 'good' 19" monitor. The models that I have tried include all of what many consider to be the best of the 19" CRTs(don't even tell me to get a LCD, LCD's suck for gaming at the moment). The number of monitors that I had are listed after the model:
Samsung 900NF (2)
Viewsonic P95F+ (1)
Sony CPD-G420S (5?)
NEC FP912SB(2)
When I look at a monitor, I look at a white screen, run explorer and look for geometry/convergence problems, and look at the top and bottom of the screen. I belive that a high quality 19" monitor should have no trouble passing these tests.
It has been awhile since I had both the 900NF and the P95F+, but I can say that the focus of the 900NF was very very poor in the upper right hand corner of the screen. The P95F+ was just a nightmare. It looked as though the whole screen was out of focus.
The NEC FP912SB, for all intensive purposes, was mostly a great monitor. However, in the end, I felt that the SONY cpd-g420s had better overall focus over the screen and better colors. The NEC did have much better geometry though.
The SONY's have been a headache. I bought them from Dell. I must say that, for the most part, Dell has been a great company from which to buy a monitor. Long ago, I decided that the cpd-g420s had the best image (clarity, color, and brightness). However, the top and bottom of the screen bowed horribly on the first one. The next 3 had a combination of image bowing, messed up pixels(some phosphor missing or pixel exceptionally bright...and these are CRTs), or a "blemish" in the face of the glass. Currently, I have a sony cpd-g420s in front of me. This one does have fairly good top and bottom horizontal straightness, but towards the left of the screen it does bow "inward" toward the middle of the screen slightly. On the right hand bottom, the image does slightly bend away from the middle. In addition, there is a blemish in this screen as well, and a 'messed up pixel', although it is not entirely noticeable. The convergence in the upper left (mainly) is difficult to adjust, because when you make that great, it throws off the rest of the screen. Dell's response to the "blemish" and pixel was that the monitors are designed to allow a certain number of defects.
What I can't understand is why it is so difficult to get a good, quality monitor. I look at my friends older 19" sony (trinitron, not FD) and his image is square, crisp, and the convergence isn't funky. Sony's FD trinitron monitors are, for the most part, the most expensive CRT monitors (without going completely overboard!). Why is it that I can't seem to get one without any bowing, good convergence, and no blemishes or bad pixels? Honestly, I can't be the only one to whom this happens. Maybe I am, or maybe I expect too much.
My advice? Talk to other people who have had the monitors you're considering, and you better buy from a reputable dealer with a liberal return policy. It's the only thing you may have on your side, should you decide that you don't like it.
Slashdot Mirror
Samsung 900NF (2)
Viewsonic P95F+ (1)
Sony CPD-G420S (5?)
NEC FP912SB(2)
When I look at a monitor, I look at a white screen, run explorer and look for geometry/convergence problems, and look at the top and bottom of the screen. I belive that a high quality 19" monitor should have no trouble passing these tests.
It has been awhile since I had both the 900NF and the P95F+, but I can say that the focus of the 900NF was very very poor in the upper right hand corner of the screen. The P95F+ was just a nightmare. It looked as though the whole screen was out of focus.
The NEC FP912SB, for all intensive purposes, was mostly a great monitor. However, in the end, I felt that the SONY cpd-g420s had better overall focus over the screen and better colors. The NEC did have much better geometry though.
The SONY's have been a headache. I bought them from Dell. I must say that, for the most part, Dell has been a great company from which to buy a monitor. Long ago, I decided that the cpd-g420s had the best image (clarity, color, and brightness). However, the top and bottom of the screen bowed horribly on the first one. The next 3 had a combination of image bowing, messed up pixels(some phosphor missing or pixel exceptionally bright...and these are CRTs), or a "blemish" in the face of the glass. Currently, I have a sony cpd-g420s in front of me. This one does have fairly good top and bottom horizontal straightness, but towards the left of the screen it does bow "inward" toward the middle of the screen slightly. On the right hand bottom, the image does slightly bend away from the middle. In addition, there is a blemish in this screen as well, and a 'messed up pixel', although it is not entirely noticeable. The convergence in the upper left (mainly) is difficult to adjust, because when you make that great, it throws off the rest of the screen. Dell's response to the "blemish" and pixel was that the monitors are designed to allow a certain number of defects.
What I can't understand is why it is so difficult to get a good, quality monitor. I look at my friends older 19" sony (trinitron, not FD) and his image is square, crisp, and the convergence isn't funky. Sony's FD trinitron monitors are, for the most part, the most expensive CRT monitors (without going completely overboard!). Why is it that I can't seem to get one without any bowing, good convergence, and no blemishes or bad pixels? Honestly, I can't be the only one to whom this happens. Maybe I am, or maybe I expect too much.
My advice? Talk to other people who have had the monitors you're considering, and you better buy from a reputable dealer with a liberal return policy. It's the only thing you may have on your side, should you decide that you don't like it.