Sony 21" CRT monitors

[knight0]

hi
could someone tell me the difference between these two 21" models sony makes:

CPD-G520
CPD-E540

the only difference i could find is the max resolution. but what if i will never run at that high a resolution? is one monitor still better than the other? any help is appreciated. thanks.

 

[knight0]

hmmm, there also seems to be another model, the e500. this time the max resolution is the same as the g520. other specs seem to be the same as well, and yet it is cheaper. hope someone can help me out here. thanks.

 

[mbetea]

the g-series monitors are sony's "top of the line" crt models. you'll get the highest rez@highest refresh rates. probably better convergence and the dot pitch might be better on the whole monitor (most manufacturers give a center and corner/edge dot pitch on larger monitors). what i've found from reading and the help of others (sharks) is look at the "recommended" operating rez and refresh rates.

[insert philosophical statement here]

 

[knight0]

mbetea, thanks for replying. the three monitors all have the same aperture grille pitch. the only difference i can find is the max resolutions, except with the g520 and e500 models, which both have the same max resolutions. but the question is what if i don't intend to run my monitor at anywhere near the recommended resolutions? i'll probably run it at 1024x768, which is low compared to the recommended resolutions. is there a diffence between the monitors then? does the g series use different technology? i ask because there is a huge price disparity between these models, and it won't be worth it if i shell out an addition $300 for a resolution i don't intend to use. please reply, i need to make a decision soon on which i should buy. thanks.

 

[mbetea]

sorry, i was a little incorrect in that statement above, the f-series is their top of the line, while the g-series is second. the main difference (and factor of price) is the g520 is a high rez monitor. meaning it'll operate at higher acceptable refresh rates at higher rez than the average 21". like my new monitors, i got 2 17" viewsonic pf775, because they run great at 1280x1024@85hz, where most 17" are 1024x768, that's a high rez monitor. the e540 would serve you just fine and it's got a good range that you could go to a higher rez if you like.

[insert philosophical statement here]

 

[OldBear]

I have had an E500E for 3 months. I looked at the E520 and could not see spending the 400$ difference at the time. I run my display at 1600x1200 at 85Hz. It is a great monitor and very easy on the eyes.

<font color=blue>Remember.... You get what you pay for. All advice here is free.</font color=blue>

 

[knight0]

thanks for the replies! you cleared a lot up. i still can't believe people run their monitors at such high resolutions. i can't stand anything higher than 800x600 on my 17". my eyes start to hurt. that's why i was a little surprised the g520 is more popular than the e540, which is cheaper by $300. anyway, it looks like the e540 will be my new monitor. thanks again.

 

[upec]

I am running my 19" at 1280x1024.

 

[compuhan]

I returned a E540 due to major ghosting. Every dark vertical line had a white/gray shadow to the right. I have cpd e200 and it displays this too, but so sligtly as to be hardly noticeable. Other than that my e200 has better than the g540 in picture quality. The E540 also had horrible vertical convergence. The top and bottom is always off. Too bad sony couldn't include independent top and bottom vertical convergence, though they did for the horizontal covergence. Purity could not be corrected with landing and text was slighlty blurry at 1600X1200 though this was the recommended resolution. 1280 rez was sharp, though it still displayed the other problems. In general, the e540 had very good color and contrast/brightness but annoying text (sharp except for annoying shadows). I was disappointed and considered "upgrading" to a G520, instead I ordered mitsubishi dp2060u (still waiting for arrival) after reading great reviews. Perhaps my sony was defective. I hope mitsubishi will live up to my needs otherwise I'll always be wondering my I didn't give sony another chance, if indeed my particular was defective. Everyone seems to like sony better.

I've had a hard time searching for e540 reviews and can't comment more than by my own experience. The G520 has more reviews, but according to zdnet, cnet, or pcmag (i forget) it was just "good" while the dp2060u was excellent in both text and graphics. Displaymate rates the gdm f520 as the best aperture grill ($1500!) while the dp2060u falls in at #2 ($725). The G520 was not listed. This is why I chose mitsubishi.

I hope I don't scare you away from the e540.

Let me know your experience, specifically about the ghosting as this is most important to me.

 

[compuhan]

older model, not current, may have lower specs as well.

Quality is better than name brand, even regarding beloved AMD.

 

[compuhan]

UPDATE:

I had the dp2060u for some time now, and it is great. No shadows, no purity issues, no geometry issues, no convergence issues. In a word, perfect. The text is razor sharp on all four corners stretched. The contrast and brightness is a little dimmer subjectively. The screen is a slightly curvier that the deadpan flatness of sony.

I highly recommend this monitor over the horrible e540 i had. it could be luck, but i suspect the e540 may have quality issues as it is not nearly as popular as the g520 though it is $100 cheaper. The local store had stacks of these monitors too (not selling). Reviews are also lacking on this product.

Quality is better than name brand, even regarding beloved AMD.