LG IPS277L-BN monitor

[LadyCrimson]

imo wait for 120Hz IPS ... whenever that happens

I only paid about $330 for this one, so I'm fine with getting a more expensive one later.

 

Still liking this cheapie IPS a lot better than the regular LCD. So much brighter (without being irritating) and cleaner looking, and like the bigger screen. Don't feel like YouTube has to be in the 2nd size window all the time anymore etc.

 

Side note: while in the store, there was this gorgeous, 80" TV in the special section. I'm not sure what type of screen it was (some kind of LED/IPS perhaps), but it was the awesome. Sadly, I don't have $25,000 to spare.

 

Other ones weren't to my liking, however. They were so weirdly sharp or something that it gave everything a cheap video-camera feel (like that one infamous Twilight Zone episode)...too flat, where you lose all of the illusionary sense of dimension. They were playing a well known action movie on it, and it was truly disconcertingly odd.

[Humanoid]

Might be slightly out of date here, but I believe most TVs use PVA/MVA panels instead of IPS. Not necessarily a quality compromise even though it's probably a somewhat cheaper tech - as far as I know the main difference is that though *VA panels have slightly inferior colour reproduction than IPS (still bounds ahead of TN of course), they do have better, deeper blacks, which tend to be important for movies and such.

 

If you are looking for a TV though, I'd still suggest a plasma over any LCD tech. An important thing to note when buying TVs is that, unlike common advice for many other consumer goods, trying it for yourself instore isn't actually the best suggestion. They're set up "wrong", in a super-bright shop mode, usually under very cold fluorescent lighting, with the frame interpolation* turned up to maximum (hence the "soap opera effect", or video camera feel as you say, on the picture). Therefore, outside of specialist stores which set them up properly, reviews tend to be the most reliable gauge for quality.

 

*Frame interpolation is sold under such fancy trademarks as "Motionflow" or "Intelligent Frame Creation", but whatever they call it, it sucks. It basically fakes out extra intermediate frames, typically double or quadruple the original source material, to create a "smoother" image. But a typical movie is shot at 24fps (actually, 23.976fps) and broadcast TV at 30 or 60fps, and we're so used to that that is simply looks wrong any other way. Fortunately it's easily switched off, and should be at the first available opportunity.

[LadyCrimson]

Hm. I suppose that frame interpolation thing could be the issue with those TV's I saw. When staring at them it made me think of the 48fps debate on The Hobbit, wondering if that's what I would have thought of it (didn't see The Hobbit in the theater). As usual I haven't kept up with TV tech, since we haven't been in the market to buy one. Not that I haven't tried to convince hubby we could use a new one....he's not quite ready.

 

And agree about plasma. The one 80" TV was the awesome tho...contrast/blacks and I was surprised at how sharp it was for being that large. Even hubby, who pretty much can't stand LCD-anything for video, didn't seem to be bothered by it much. Nothing near that price range is listed on their website tho, so I can't re-check what brand/tech it was using. Maybe it was a 4k resolution one?

[Gorth]

My old 42" plasma TV even has a mode called "Store" or something as a colour profile, exactly like said, super bright and over the top contrast

 

Unlike their monitors, this old Samsung thing just lasts and lasts. Since they are going all digital now, I may have to buy an external box/tuner for it soon.

[LadyCrimson]

Musing: I do really like the size of the 27", and I do like the larger size of stuff on screen because it's 1080 instead of 1440. Assuming a sharp photo to begin with, photography editing doesn't seem to be very affected by 27" @ 1080, just the low quality photos on some websites, which I don't care about. Movies I don't watch while 2 feet away, so don't care there either. At the same time I'm still curious about whether I'd like or even prefer the higher resolution. Argh.

 

But hubby still rolls his eyes whenever he mentions my 590 (he'd never spend more than $150 on a GPU, lol), so I hesitate to run out to spend $700-$900 on a monitor just to check it out. They really don't tend to carry many of the 1440's on the shelf in stores around here, either. I am definitely not mail-ordering to "check out" the bigger resolution if I might just send it back.

[Bokishi]

Higher res > Lower res

[LadyCrimson]

I think we all know where you'd stand on that, Bok.

 

...I'm sure I'd like higher res, at least in some ways, I'm just not sure it's worth twice or more as much. I could practically build a whole new (excellent) gaming rig for $900 (if you don't go nuts on the GPU). Not sure why monitors are priced so high relative to what they'll be attached to.

[Humanoid]

Obviously the solution is to have two 27" screens, one 1080p and one 1440p, side by side. Then you can selectively display content on whichever screen handles it better.

 

 

And this suggestion is only half tongue-in-cheek - it's probably a good genuine option if you're unsure for now and put off the thinking until later.

[LadyCrimson]

If I did that, I'd seriously, really need a much bigger desk arrangement...

[LadyCrimson]

So, any of you on IPS rated at 5-7ms, do you notice a bit of motion blur in games? Like when I'm running, I feel like in some games the terrain/some objects, especially to the sides/"peripheral" vision (eg, not everything) will blur a bit more notably on the IPS (supposedly 5ms)  than on my old monitor, which was (supposedly) 2ms. Not blurry blurry, just a bit less sharp, and then if you stop, it super-fast settles into sharp again. It's not a big deal, but once I notice, it becomes a bit irritating.

 

I don't recall ever noticing that effect before, so I'm wondering if it's the monitor ms response time or something else...like do I just notice it because the screen is physically bigger. I know monitor claims to ms response time can sometimes be a bit bogus, too...anyway to find that out?

[Gorth]

3013 you say? Hmm... I might just hold off a bit then. I've been living with the constant flickering for more than a month now, while it's driving my crazy(more crazy?), I might survive 1 or 2 more. Thanks for the heads up. Not that I have any idea what the 13 implies compared to the 11

A pox upon Samsung and their disastrously bad designs and manufacturing quality

 

After getting rid of the flicker for a while (splitting the monitor, trying the "heat" treatment of the controller, reassembling etc.) it's back for good. Since a new monitor isn't on my budget until February, as part of a regularly schedule PC upgrade, I had to bite the bullet and ordered a smaller monitor to sort of carry me over until after New Year. This truly sucks. Did I mention I wouldn't touch a Samsung anything-with-electronics in it again? >_

 

Ordered a Dell 2713H which should hopefully arrive before the end of the week. Yeah, slumming it with 2560x1440 for the next half year by the looks of it

[Humanoid]

Sometimes I do wish I hadn't been so gung-ho in getting dual 27s and instead held off for at least one 30". Not that my 2711s haven't served me well, (aside from occasional issues with incorrectly scaling when connected via DP - a two-second power cycle fixes that), I couldn't conscionably get rid of them now. Not unless I move into a bigger house and can set up a second desktop....

[Bokishi]

Not bad for $4,000, imagine 3 of them for 4k eyefinity

 

http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/4/4394294/asus-4k-monitor-price-release-date-and-retina-compatibility

Edited June 18, 2013 by Bokishi

[Gorth]

Manged to get all of 2 days of enjoyment out of my new Dell monitor before having to travel interstate.

 

Call me jaded, but I'm glad I didn't fork out the money for the 30" if this is representative of the image quality. Lowering the brightness and contrast considerably helped a bit, but the light "bleed" is awful, looking like somebody has a torchlight behind the screen, moving it around as you look at it from different angles. I wonder if this is typical for LED screens?

 

A thousand poxes upon Samsung and their lack quality when it comes to electronics (as the TFT display itself still seems vastly superior).

[Sensuki]

This is pretty good for $320 shipped. Thinking of getting one (overclocks to 120Hz as well)

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/27-QNIX-QX2710-Evolution-2-ll-2560x1440-WQHD-Samsung-PLS-Monitor-Matt-Screen-/130868312541

[LadyCrimson]

I'm still quite content with my "lowly" 1080 resolution 27" IPS. Maybe it's because I largely watch Netflix and such on the PC, so it's not like that's going to be the uber regardless. I occasionally notice the extra grain a tiny bit under some circumstances, but it's nothing for me to be in a snit over so far.

 

I have a feeling I wouldn't have liked it if it hadn't been the IPS tho. But the IPS is so nice and clean/crisp/colorful that it's fine....for now. A few years and I might splurge on better. I still refuse to mail-order a monitor, tho. I live in a big metro area, I shouldn't have to, darnit.

[Sensuki]

I bought one, I'll post my impressions later. If I don't get any dead pixels and it overclocks well, future proofing for P:E will be complete

 

16 GB DDR3 1600

3GB Asus HD7970 DirectCUII

27" 1440p PLS Monitor

 

bring on those high-res environment assets.

Edited June 28, 2013 by Sensuki