Документ взят из кэша поисковой машины. Адрес оригинального документа : http://crydee.sai.msu.ru/ftproot/pub/misc/doc/monitors2 Дата изменения: Sat Apr 27 14:53:26 1996 Дата индексирования: Sun Apr 10 04:31:02 2016 Кодировка: Поисковые слова: http www.astronomy.ru forum index.php topic 4644.0.html

From news.sai.msu.su!Radio-MSU.net!news.dfn.de!news.uni-jena.de!news.HRZ.HAB-Weimar.DE!News.HTWM.De!news.tu-chemnitz.de!uni-erlangen.de!kue!lrz-muenchen.de!informatik.tu-muenchen.de!Germany.EU.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!nnrp.info.ucla.edu!eggneb.astro.ucla.edu!stephen Sat Mar 09 20:48:31 1996
Path: news.sai.msu.su!Radio-MSU.net!news.dfn.de!news.uni-jena.de!news.HRZ.HAB-Weimar.DE!News.HTWM.De!news.tu-chemnitz.de!uni-erlangen.de!kue!lrz-muenchen.de!informatik.tu-muenchen.de!Germany.EU.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!nnrp.info.ucla.edu!eggneb.astro.ucla.edu!stephen
From: stephen@eggneb.astro.ucla.edu (Stephen Schimpf)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video
Subject: Re: 21" monitor comparison
Date: 7 Mar 1996 23:55:00 GMT
Organization: UCLA Dept of Astronomy
Lines: 87
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4hnt0k$hlg@saba.info.ucla.edu>
References: <313E4C9A.2F76@maestronet.com>
Reply-To: stephen@eggneb.astro.ucla.edu (Stephen Schimpf)
NNTP-Posting-Host: eggneb.astro.ucla.edu
X-Newsreader: mxrn 6.18-6


In article <313E4C9A.2F76@maestronet.com>, John Wells writes:
|>Comments please.
|>
|>I'm looking to purchase a 21" monitor in the next two weeks and have narrowed the choice to
|>the following:
|>
|>Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 21 TX @~2,900 CDN
|>Nanao Flexscan F2-21 @~2,650 CDN
|>Nokia Multigraph 445x @~2,800 CDN
|>ViewSonic 21PS @~2,450 CDN

Really? You have no preference between Trinitron and shadow mask
tubes? If you like Trinitron tubes, then where's the Nanao T2-20?
And why did the NEC XP21 not make your list? I'm really curious.

|>Few stores stock these models, and none I've found have any two of these side by side, hence
|>this post.
|>
|>From past discussions here, and in printed reviews the Mitsubishi seems to come out on top.
|>I am concerned however with the .30 dot pitch. While the .30 pitch may be great for video
|>work, it seems too large for sharp DTP work which is my primary focus. From my past
|>experience using .30, .28 and .26 dot pitch 17" monitors from various manufacturers, I like
|>the .26 best.

First, how can you possibly compare the slot pitch--not dot
pitch--of the 21TX's DiamondTron tube to the dot pitch of the
other tubes? You can't do that. Trinitron or DiamondTron tubes
tend to look sharper and clearer in general, and the higher
contrast will help. Specifically, the whiter whites and blacker
blacks can make text look really great.

|>I know that a good monitor is more than just its dot pitch, but these 4 monitors are close
|>in most other performance specs, and are all rated quite well. If the decision is based on
|>dot pitch alone the .25 ViewSonic gets the nod (and I save some money).

Forget about the specs. I've looked at monitors with great specs...and
many of them just plain sucked. Specs are fine to give you an idea where
to look, but don't buy a monitor based on specs alone.

|>For DTP work am I over rating the dot pitch in my search for a 21" monitor?

I believe you are, but I don't do DTP so I really don't know. I'm a
programmer so I care about the look of text. I especially want
consistancy across the screen. It's no good if text is sharp in the
center of the screen but fuzzy around the edges.

I've been looking to buy a large monitor and for various reasons
Nanao is high on my list. I was almost sure I'd want an F2-21 because
I felt text should be sharper on a shadow-mask tube and because I
didn't think there would be much of a difference between a Trinitron
tube and a modern Invar shadow-mask tube.

I live in Torrance, CA, just a few minutes away from Nanao's HQ.
Yesterday I visited their showroom and got to play with all their
monitors. The F2-21 is very nice, but the T2-20 was much nicer.
Looking at the specs the F2-21 looks slightly better, although it
lacks the bonded panel and TCO-compliance of the T2-20. The T2-20's
case is a little smaller as is it's tube (0.7 inches), but looking
at both monitors side-by-side you'd need a tape measure to be able
to tell the difference.

Regardless of the specs, the T2-20 simply had a much better image
than the F2-21. Text in general was surprisingly good, and black
on white text was easier to read on the T2-20.

When it came time to try out Windows wallpaper to check graphics
the difference was also obvious and the T2-20 again had the best
image. Someone here once described it this way: colors on the
F series monitors look like dry paint and colors on the T series
monitors look like wet paint. I took an impartial observer along
with me, someone who has no bias with regard to brand names,
who doesn't know the prices of the monitors, and who doesn't even
know the difference between a shadow mask tube and a Trinitron
tube. She was also wowed by the T2-20 and said it was clearly
superior to the F2-21.

Anyway, I hope my comments help. BTW, yes, I did check out
the FX2-21, and it is nice, but no way is it worth an extra
$1000.

Stephen
--
Stephen Michael Schimpf
Programmer/Analyst, UCLA Department of Physics and Astronomy
Author, CyberSky planetarium program for Microsoft Windows
CyberSky Home Page http://www.astro.ucla.edu/staff/stephen/cybersky.html

From news.sai.msu.su!Radio-MSU.net!news.phys.msu.su!mx.nsu.ru!nic!fagot!satisfy.kiae.su!news.spb.su!demos!news1.best.com!news.texas.net!news.frontiernet.net!gollum.kingston.net!news4.ottawa.istar.net!news3.ottawa.istar.net!istar.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!nntp.news.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!not-for-mail Sat Apr 27 14:53:26 1996
Path: news.sai.msu.su!Radio-MSU.net!news.phys.msu.su!mx.nsu.ru!nic!fagot!satisfy.kiae.su!news.spb.su!demos!news1.best.com!news.texas.net!news.frontiernet.net!gollum.kingston.net!news4.ottawa.istar.net!news3.ottawa.istar.net!istar.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!nntp.news.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!not-for-mail
From: rizwan@primenet.com (Rizwan Abdullah)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video
Subject: Quest for "THE PERFECT MONITOR"; Finally over (for me at least).
Date: 24 Apr 1996 17:33:01 -0700
Organization: Primenet Services for the Internet
Lines: 48
Sender: root@primenet.com
Message-ID: <4lmh7t$gij@nnrp1.news.primenet.com>
X-Posted-By: ip133.phx.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

Hi,
My quest for a "perfect" monitor is finally over. I started of by defining MY definition of a perfect monitor.

1: It must do 1600x1200 @ 70Hz+.
2: Geometry has to be NEAR perfect.
3: Absolutely minimum misconvergence.
4: Should have a way to control ALMOST every aspect of the picture.
5: Colors should look like some one just splashed them on.
6: It MUST display VERY readable 6-point text at 1600x1200.
7: Price between US$1000 to US$2000.

I was willing to compromise on 5,6 and 7 if the unit met the specified requirements in
1,2,3 and 4.

The machine configuration is:
P166; Intel
TitanIII; 512K PB Cache
64MB EDO RAM
Matrox Mill 8MB

First monitor I got was a NANAO T217-TS. US$1099.
Serious geometric disorders. Returned.

Second monitor was a NANAO T217. US$1130.
Geometric disorders in certain parts of the screen. These disorders
varied from resolution to resolution. Returned.

Third monitor was a NOKIA 445X. US$1999.
I have no idea what got into me to make me get this one. It
looked like some one dug it out of a grave yard. IT WAS DULL. The
darkest black I could muster out of this beast was dark gray. 6-point
text at 1600x1200 was barely readable. Returned.

Fourth monitor was a ViwSonic PT810. US$1999.
This unit has very good reviews (Windows Magazine, Byte). Dot pitch is
0.3 mm. It uses a Sonictron tube; a copy of Trinitron. Well, it has colors to
die for. Geometry is ALMOST perfect. Alas, the top right 3x3 inch part of the
screen was out of focus. There is no control provided for that. So far this was
the best monitor I had seen. 6-point text at 1600x1200 was as sharp as it can
get; as long as it was in the middle part of the screen. I really hated to retun this
one.

Finally I have an NEC XP21. WOW. Where had I been. Folks, this is it. IMHO, for
US$2050; it can not get any better than this. I tried hard to find some geometric disorders;
it does'nt have any. There is no control for misconvergence, but I did'nt need it. Colors are
not as good as PT810 but they are good enough. This one I am keeping.

Rizwan Abdullah