Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Looking for the best 17" CRT out there

Last response: in Computer Peripherals
Share
December 10, 2002 12:46:00 PM

Hello, my old CTX 17" monitor died and now I'm out there looking for a new 17" monitor, I would get a 19" but I have no money, so whay monitor do you guys recomend? I was thing the LG one, because it has no trintron lines, but read some bad reviews about the geometry..
Please answer if you tried more than one 17" monitor..
___________________________________________________________

<font color=red> text </font color=red>THIS VOILENCE IN THE NAME OF LOVE

More about : crt

December 10, 2002 3:07:11 PM

if you want a very nice Trinitron Screen, go for the viewsonic G71F+Sb

.24 FD Trinitron, SuperBright 5X, awersome display

if you don't want Trinitron / Hight Quality, take any Flat display.

Recommand: Viewsonic, NEC
December 10, 2002 7:56:43 PM

What about 17" Viewsonic P75F Flat Diamondtron Monitor?
Will that be high quality?

<font color=red> THIS VOILENCE IN THE NAME OF LOVE </font color=red>
Related resources
December 10, 2002 9:07:46 PM

do not buy any LG or you will suffer bad geometry and convergence..i have once tried samsung 753 df dyna flat monitor. its geometry and convergence was very good but has grainy pixels on the left and right side ~7cm each..i couldn't solve that problem and returned it back and buy an Lg now that i understand that was the biggest mistake i have ever made. i returned Lg's 6 times. now i am using lg flatron 795 ft+ and it also very suck... these real flat stupid Lg's always have focus and geometry problems...i didn't see any Lg without any problem..maybe 1/100..i have seen Sony and Sony is great but the trinitron lines maybe suck those who can't stand these lines...but they are not so noticeable...i also used a Philips 107p and was great too but the trinitron lines are very noticeable than Sony.
i have also heard very good things about Nec monitors. My friend has a Nec Fe700 and he says it is great..trinitron lines are not very noticeable and geometry+convergence is
perfect..some clicking noises when changing resolution but i don't know if other nec models has it too..i recommend not to buy a monitor other than japanese manufacturers...i don't blame viewsonic but i think Lg really sucks so on Philips because they are producing Flatron tubes together..i have asked it to philips support center!!
December 10, 2002 9:28:43 PM

I've got a 17" Shamrock CRT, no longer manufactured. Not bad though. My roommate has a 17" flat screen Samsung. It works very nicely. I'm not sure on the specs but it's good.
January 3, 2003 9:38:46 PM

I have the same situation, about to buy a brandnew 17" CRT...
the best choices i have spotted are Samsung 757NF, the Viewsonic P75f+ and NEC Multisync FE791SB...
all are 0,25 aperture grill and 1280@85Hz, all have proved quite good in reviews, but whitch one to buy (NEC is bit more expesive but seems a tad better)????
January 4, 2003 12:19:04 AM

What's thw price of the Fe791sb ur looking at? I have one, it's good- gives me a LOT LESS eyestrain than the previous 15" CRT, and @ 116Hz refresh rate, it's beautiful. The Viesonic 75F is the same tube btw.

"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough."
- Mario Andretti
January 4, 2003 3:35:28 AM

Here's a thought.

I know 19" monitors seem much more expensive than 17" monitors but that's when you compare the best of each class.

Try this. Look at the specs of 17" monitors that you are considering. Good ones might have 1280x1024 with 85 hz refresh, maybe a little higher. These same monitors might even reach 1600x1200 but at 60 Hz or 66 Hz refresh or not much better.

Now go back and look at 19" monitors with similar specs, 1280x1024 at 85 Hz and 1600x1200 at perhaps 75 Hz. Match all the features you like but as closely as possible. Flat screen yes or no, aperture grill or shadow mask, dot pitch (remember a bigger monitor can have slightly higher dot pitch and look just as good as the 17-inchers).

Don't look at the 19" monitors that have much better specs than the 17" monitors that you are considering.

Now if you compare 17" monitors to 19" monitors in this way I think you will find the prices are a lot closer.

If I had to choose between two monitors with almost identical specs and close price but one is 19" and the other is 17" then I'd take the 19" monitor.

Anyway, that's my two cents.

My standards are probably lower than yours but I recently purchased a Viewsonic E95 for $203 (shipping included). It is not a flat screen (but it's not bad). Other than that it does everything I would ask of a budget monitor, bright vivid color with no hot or dull spots, sharp focus on all parts of the screen even at the very corners, no discernable mis-convergence problems, good geometry (despite slight screen curvature). Has all the controls that I need and more. I guess it's a shadow mask monitor. I never did find info on this but there are no visible horizontal lines like AG monitors. Dot pitch is .26 (.22 horizontal - I've never seen this spec before). Max Refresh rates - 1024x768=100 hz, 1280x1024=88 hz, 1600x1200=76 hz (max resolution).

I needed a single monitor to replace both my 15" MAG DX-15T and also a 19" television. I'm really happy with the E95. I never really considered a 17" monitor because of the the desire for televsion viewing. (I use the Viewsonic VB50HRTV TV tuner which I bought at the same time. No, I don't work for Viewsonic).

<b>99% is great, unless you are talking about system stability</b>
January 4, 2003 9:38:45 AM

to: flamethrower205
I live in estonia (europe), so i changed the prices to euros for better understanding...
NEC costs about 280EUR and Samsung&Viewsonic about 250EUR
is NEC worth the extra buxx (considering that samsung uses also diamontron CRT and viewsonic a CRT derivated from diamondtron)????

to phsstpok:
close specs can be misleading, for instance you cannot compare trinitron or diamondtron to those shadowmask monitors and 19" naturalflat is damn expensive...
For instance I never considered 19" CRT simply because I cannot affort a good 19" naturalflat CRT, i admit the E95 is damn good value for the money (here I can get one for almost the same price of those 17" diamondtrons), yet I find that better a high-quality 17" than a good 19", also I don't watch that much TV from my computer, mostly games, internet-surfing and occasional DVD's, so picture quality is number one characteristic for me, size ain't that important, well thats a piece of my thoughts anyway...
January 5, 2003 12:00:00 AM

Quote:
close specs can be misleading, for instance you cannot compare trinitron or diamondtron to those shadowmask monitors and 19" naturalflat is damn expensive...

I never implied one could compare AG to shadowmask. Of course, one has compare similar technologies. I just meant once the type and features have been decided then compare relative quality differences between 17" and 19" monitors.

Seeing is much more important than specs. There are definite subjective qualities to monitors. Each model has a different appeal to different people. If the picture doesn't look good to one person it doesn't matter how good the specs are.

As for the E95, it's definitely not one best monitors just very good for the money. In general, I am impressed at how good and how cheap all (or nearly all) 19" monitors are today. I don't know if it is consumer demand or what that has driven the price of these monitors so low but I think they are worth considering. I think some of the moderately capable 19" monitors are fairly comparable to some of the best 17" monitors. The technology continues to improve (amazing considering how mature CRT technology seems to be).

Six years ago I passed on cheap 17" monitors and went with a fairly decent 15" monitor with an AG display because none of the cheap 17 inchers approached the quality of a good AG 15" monitor. That monitor was $400 USD back then and had decent specs but it doesn't compare to the $200 E95 that I have now. This monitor is just better in every way not that it's a fair comparison with a six year old monitor but you know what I mean.

Although I never really considered a 17" monitor, I would find the choice between 17" and 19" today much more difficult than my old choice between 15" and 17". It's just so much easier today to get a decent monitor in the larger size [edit-->] at an affordable price.


<b>99% is great, unless you are talking about system stability</b><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by phsstpok on 01/04/03 09:10 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
February 2, 2003 10:19:33 PM

to anyone and
flamethrower205:

I have a SYLVANIA 14" C42 Monitor !!! this sucks ? i dont know lol... i think this sucks very much...

I bought a 19" envision 980... I return it i didnt like it .. but of course better than the one i currently have -anything is better than what i have right now...

Now i dont have much money to spent and Buy a SAMSUNG 957mb 19"........ So im looking forward to 17" and i think 17" can be more adjustable for gaming than a bigger screen...
Though from a 14" view 13.2inch TO 17" view16 ITS a big difference..

SO i was looking for THAT NEC FE791sb --i saw it on www.pcworld.com TOP 10 17" monitor #1 monitor .

and now that
flamethrower205 Said he have that monitor im more excited about that FE791SB-- Hey should i get This one? i cant decide yet though .. But this is my top so far!? I can Buy it ONLINE for $176 is that a good price?
flamethrower205: Whats better COLOR: in greyWHITE or BLACK?
I think in black color looks better? WHATS your opinion on this please ? i need to know .. I cant wait any more.. THX

WHITE OR BLACK? which one best?
!