Computer Monitor advice

[Stewie]

I was thinking of getting this monitor LG W2753V I found it locally for $499 (in Canada)
It gets generally good reviews. Has good response time, decent(ish) contrast ratio.
My only real issue is that it has a .311 dot pitch. Is this really going to be that big of a deal.
My main reason for wanting this is a larger screen for PS cs4. I am concerned that the .311 dot pitch will not be very sharp.
any advice?

Monitor specs:
WebID: 10119038
Mfr. Part Number: W2753V-PF
Monitor Type  LCD
Analog vs Digital  Analog, DVI-D (HDCP), and HDMI
Brightness  300cd/m2
Built in TV Tuner  No
Contrast Ratio  50,000:1 DFC
Maximum Resolution  1920 x 1080
Other  DVI Cable included
Product Dimensions  65.27 (W) x 48.61(H) x 21.2 (D) cm
Product Weight  7.98 kg
Response Time  2ms
Screen Size  27"
Speakers Included  No
Warranty  3 Year Limited

[Salamok]

It's 1080p you may as well just buy a TV.  If you are doing this for photoshop and not gaming or movies you would be better served by a 1920x1200 resolution.  I think i'd rather have a Dell 24" than this thing, in addition to the higher res it will probably be brighter and have far more vibrant color.

As far as dot pitch goes you will probably be noticing some screen door if your viewing distance is less than 2 feet. Not sure about you but I tend to move in close when photochopping (within a foot of the screen).

[Murgos]

I think you're confused on dot pitch.

You have 3x number of pixels (1ea R, G, B) and y area of screen.  For a 27 inch 16:9 screen you get .311 spacing for a triad of pixels.

It would be odd if it weren't that size for that size and shape monitor.

16:10 (1920:1200) is going to be more natural when computing though, it simply will be better supported, ask Sky, he'll tell you all about it.

[Trippy]

16:9 is the trend now for computer LCDs as well. It's hard to find a new model that isn't 16:9.

Sharpness isn't really the issue at 27", 1920 x 1080, it's more that the LCD "screen door" effect is more visible like Salamok said. Color shifting is also an issue since it's a TN panel so even just shifting your eyes around the screen may cause a shift in color depending on how close/far you sit from the screen.

If your primary application is going to be Photoshop you do not want a fucking TN panel LCD, which that one is. Almost all TN panels are only 6-bits per R, G, B layers and they have to essentially "dither" to get the remaining colors. This is on top of the color shifting issue.

The contrast ratio thing is misleading. That uses some funky electronics which you want to turn off for regular usage.

[Engels]

Unfortunately, the alternative to TN is IPS or PVA, which is a) more expensive and b) burried in the spec sheets.

http://www.pchardwarehelp.com/guides/s-ips-lcd-list.php

I couldn't find a handy PVA list.

[rattran]

Unfortunately, the alternative to TN is IPS or PVA, which is a) more expensive and b) burried in the spec sheets.

http://www.pchardwarehelp.com/guides/s-ips-lcd-list.php

I couldn't find a handy PVA list.

28" tn panel is fine for gaming, but for photoshop and video stuff, the s-pva panels are a whole world better. Especially if you have someone else working with you, they see the same color if they're sitting next to you which isn't the case on tn.
<edit> Oh, and the IPS monitors are as much better than pva as pva are better than tn. I couldn't convince myself it was worth that much extra money though when I was shopping for monitors.

[Stewie]

Alrighty.

Thanks alot. I will just hang tight and save up till I can afford something that I will be happy with in the long run.
Thanks for the info! 

[Salamok]

Unfortunately, the alternative to TN is IPS or PVA, which is a) more expensive and b) burried in the spec sheets.

http://www.pchardwarehelp.com/guides/s-ips-lcd-list.php

I couldn't find a handy PVA list.

28" tn panel is fine for gaming, but for photoshop and video stuff, the s-pva panels are a whole world better. Especially if you have someone else working with you, they see the same color if they're sitting next to you which isn't the case on tn.
<edit> Oh, and the IPS monitors are as much better than pva as pva are better than tn. I couldn't convince myself it was worth that much extra money though when I was shopping for monitors.

Not sure about now but when dell introduced it's 24" s-pva there wasn't a manufacturer that produced an ips that large.  Such a thing as a 27" ips may not even exist.   I have an IPS 20" dell sitting next to an s-pva 24" dell and I think the 24" looks better, blacks are blacker and color is more vibrant.  The color being more vibrant may have more to do with the fact that the backlight on the 24" is brighter than the friggen sun though.

[Trippy]

Not sure about now but when dell introduced it's 24" s-pva there wasn't a manufacturer that produced an ips that large.

There were (S-)IPS panels around that size (23" and 25.5") back then, just not exactly 24".

Such a thing as a 27" ips may not even exist.

25.5" (which monitor makers are calling 26" *sigh*) is the closest. There are 30" IPS's as well but those are at 2560 x 1600.

[Sky]

16:9 is the trend now for computer LCDs as well. It's hard to find a new model that isn't 16:9.

16:10 does seem to be the tech dead-end. People want to watch native format movies on their pcs and laptops.

Iirc, the 16:10 thing only bit for Medieval 2, almost everything supports 16:9 these days.

[Engels]

I watch Blueray on my 16:10 just fine. Its probably more about the industry consolidating standards to facilitate manufacturing rather than a great public clammor.

[Trippy]

There's very little overlap ATM in 1080p panel sizes shared between LCD HDTVs and LCDs designed for computers. Below 32" the only size where you can semi-easily find a 1080p LCD HDTV is 26" while with computer LCDs you have them at 23", 24", 26", 27" and 28".

At 16:9 today's console games and made for TV HDTV programming will show up without black bars, usually, while you will get them at 16:10. Movies typically use wider aspect ratios so you'll get blacks bars in either case but they'll be smaller on 16:9s.

[Arthur_Parker]

Just upgraded from a 20" tft to a 24 widescreen 16:9.  This is going to take some getting used to, it's bloody massive.

[Polysorbate80]

There's very little overlap ATM in 1080p panel sizes shared between LCD HDTVs and LCDs designed for computers. Below 32" the only size where you can semi-easily find a 1080p LCD HDTV is 26" while with computer LCDs you have them at 23", 24", 26", 27" and 28".

21.5 is available as well.  I have a small computer desk (and no room to get a bigger one until they finish building my house) so I purchased two of these for my current PC upgrade.  They're not perfect, but for $180 each I won't complain too much.

[Nerf]

I picked up a HP 27" 1080p 16:9 a few weeks ago after RMAing my 2nd gateway 2400FHD and getting told "oh sorry, we don't have anymore, sucks2beu"
Link: http://www.jr.com/hp/pe/HP_2709M/

It's pretty nice, its got the same shiny anti-glare coating the fhd2400 does and it really makes colors pop, although the 16:10 does seem to look better.  The only benefit I can really see of having the 16:9 27" is that its roughly the same height as the 24" 16:10, so they don't look too funky next to eachother, one is just much wider.  I'm sure if I hooked up a console to it or watched movies I'd appreciate the lack of black bars, but for strictly computing uses I think I'd rather have gotten another 16:10 monitor.

[Ingmar]

Just upgraded from a 20" tft to a 24 widescreen 16:9.  This is going to take some getting used to, it's bloody massive.

In about 2 weeks you'll look at older smaller monitors and think "How did I ever function with those?"