Redfox From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 172 posts, RR: 2 Posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 1223 times:
I am in need of a new PC monitor and at a crossroads between TFT and CRT.
I usually upload photos at 1200x800 size and using 1024x768 display cannot view the whole photo without moving around the window in photoshop.
I use a DELL TFT at work and my photos look much sharper than uploaded - no surprise as my existing CRT is three years old and has seen much use!. I want to view image as a whole using 1280x1024 display or greater but my CCTV expertise Sony Trinitron is by far the best CRT but better or equal to TFT.
I am risking spending a lot of money to further my enjoyment of aviation photography and want to get it right, so guys any advice?
Joge From Finland, joined Feb 2000, 1440 posts, RR: 52 Reply 1, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 1196 times:
One thing: Don't get a TFT unless you really have a lack of space.
CRT displays can give much better quality and are cheaper than the TFTs. Also I've heard it's normal for the TFTs to have "missing" or pink pixels on the screen.
Ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 275 posts, RR: 19 Reply 2, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 1189 times:
We have some Dell TFTs at work and our graphics people won't touch them - color fidelity is very poor. Yes, they are sharp, but the sharpness is enhanced by the monitor - a good thing when working with text etc. but not a good way to judge a photo.
There ARE good TFTs - LaCie make some for example, but at about 3x the cost of say a Sony Trinitron.
TS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 1179 times:
I use two 1024x768 TFTs, one made by NEC (one of the earlier models, from 1999), the other by Siemens Fujitsu (2000). There are significant differences in quality. The NEC is great for sharpness while the colours look a bit pale. The Siemens Fujitsu is hard to adjust—it took weeks to get the settings right. Still, the midtones & highlights are not well displayed.
I also tried some of the newer 17" TFTs at my university (I forgot which brand) & they were even worse. My experience is that photos almost always look better on traditional screens. Also, it's not easy to adjust the brightness of a photo with a TFT. Once you think it looks right, you just have to change the angle & suddenly the it looks too dark or too light. Rather tricky sometimes.
I cannot comment on today's high-end TFTs—maybe they are better. My TFTs are nice for office applications, but in terms of imaging I have to agree with Joge: Don't get a TFT unless you really have a lack of space.
JeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 56 Reply 4, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 1152 times:
I agree with the above. Unless space is the critical factor, save your money for now and buy a good CRT. It will cost less, be bigger, and have better resolution.
Airbus Lover From Malaysia, joined Apr 2000, 3248 posts, RR: 12 Reply 5, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1130 times:
I currently have a NEC 18" DVI monitor ( I bought less than 2 months ago for my new system ). Although not as good as my previous DELL CRT, I think amongst other LCDs I have used it has the best color. As for sharpness, you can adjust it... so its oversharpened at factory settings so I reduce it to reflect the "actual" sharpness... However, at max brightness it is fine but you dont have room to increase it as at max it is only giving acceptable brightness. If you reduce it, it is a little too dark.
I think it has to be one of the best sub-900 dollars monitor.. and Canadian dollars that is. I got it for C$599.95 including mail in rebate and instant rebate excluding tax of 17.5%. I have yet to get the mail in rebate though. Without that it would come up to C$730 which is still a bargain for a 18" DVI LCD monitor. Only other complain I have is the refresh rate, although being 16ms, I can still notice little "effect" when scrolling down a page.
Aviatortj From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1837 posts, RR: 9 Reply 6, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1118 times:
I really don't have a choice seeing my LCD is attached to my iMac. But they are also generally more expensive. The best I have seen are Sony and Apple Cinema ones. As far as the missing pixels go, you should be able to exchange those monitors. It is a defect. You also get what you pay for.
As Jeff said save your money. You can get a great CRT for half the price of a good LCD. Plus you will get a larger screen and higher res (in most cases). If you have the money, by all means get one. But make sure you shop everything out. I definitely enjoy mine, but you should get whatever is going to give you the most bang for your buck and make you the most happy in the long run.
~TJ
This has also been discussed somewhat in another thread:
FL350 From Belgium, joined Feb 2003, 517 posts, RR: 3 Reply 9, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 1095 times:
Thanx Wietse I've been using my IIyama Vision Master Pro 450 for three years now and yes it's great(but i'm moving so my bro is going to keep it).
I thought there were others brands on the market, but I think I'll stick with them.
Cfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1091 times:
TFTs are mainly optimized for Excel, Word, and such programs. Unless you spend a whole lot of money on a professional graphics-capable TFT, (I think Silicon Graphics makes a good one), stick with a CRT. You'll have better detail and performance. You can get a terrific flat-faced 19" trinitron for not very much money.
Skymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 1058 times:
I use a DELL TFT at work and my photos look much sharper than uploaded
Fundamental problem with some TFT displays is that they can make a picture look sharper than it really is. I think it causes some of the problems here - some folk use a TFT, think a pic is sharp, upload it, then get upset when a screener using a large CRT thinks its not sharp and rejects it badsoft.
KAL_LM From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 497 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 996 times:
"some folk use a TFT, think a pic is sharp, upload it, then get upset when a screener using a large CRT thinks its not sharp and rejects it badsoft."
I can attest to that. After my desktop went on the fritz I was using my laptop for editing and had a couple of problems. But I learned to compensate, so to speak, for the idiosyncracies of the screen on the lappie, usually to good results.
I agree though, a CRT is the way to go, unless you're really cramped for space.
regards,
Tom
is that a light at the end of the tunnel or just a train?
Sponsor Message: 
From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 172 posts, 
From Finland, joined Feb 2000, 1440 posts, 
From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 275 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, 
From Malaysia, joined Apr 2000, 3248 posts, 
From Belgium, joined Feb 2003, 517 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Oct 2001, 3808 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
