| PumpAction wrote: |
| Why not go for an 1920 with same specs? |
Couldn't find one with good specs and an affordable price. 
| MinderMast wrote: |
Well, you say that every bit helps, but then you choose a 1680x1050 model 
I understand a preference for 1200 over 1080p with all else being equal, but choosing an otherwise inferior model over a 1080p one is what seems strange to me. And that is what I am trying to understand |
I chose 1680x1050 because, for me, resolution is not the most important characteristic. Picture quality is (color reproduction, contrast, input lag, response time, etc.). Also, price is a factor as well. I could easily buy 24" top of the line LCD, but I really don't have a need for it so for me that would be money wasted.
As for 22" with 1920x1200(x1080) resolution, I find it uncomfortable to work at that combination of screen size and resolution. And 22" with 1920x1200(x1080) native resolution and 1680x1050 screen resolution is not good either.
+
| Veki wrote: |
| Second reason is I don't like when products are made worse with introduction of new models. In this case resolution change from 1920x1200 to 1920x1080 in most new 24" monitors. |
Anyway, I bought LG W2220P-BF. It was my first choice since I think IPS should be better that LED+TN and I read that on a couple of forums. The guy at the store told me the same thing. Price was not a factor since it was a 5 euro difference between them.
Mini review + comparison with T220 :
Pros :
color reproduction very good
low input lag
good stand - height, tilt and pivot adjustable
good viewing angles
Cons :
power LED too bright - can be turned off in menu
touch sensitive buttons - hard to use
LG W2220P
Samsung T220
Input lag (T220 left, W2220P right)
Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.
Commisssioner Pravin Lal
"U.N. Declaration of Rights"
