Last minute Gift Cards @ Best Buy.
-
Average user rating:
- My rating: 0 stars
Full user review
-
2.5 stars
"Hype Collides with Reality"
Pros: Crisp. Deep blacks and rich color saturation. 5ms response time.
Cons: Headaches -- too BRIGHT; Nixes calibration profile to reduce brightness & still does not eliminate eyestrain
Summary: I recently migrated from an ancient Mitubishi "Diamond Plus 91" flat-screen CRT to my first LCD flat panel display.
Let me start by saying I was perfectly content to go on using my dinosaur long after it was fashionable to buy LCDs. I never noticed any flicker or geometric issues with my Mitsubishi display, which was a top-of-the-line performer in the reviews of its day. I used my old display every day for over seven years, much of it for photographic and graphic art. And since it has long been regarded that CRTs trump LCD displays for color accuracy in preproduction, print and photographic environments, I was perfectly content to go on using it --- until it finally died.
In the course of bringing myself up to speed on today's display options, I learned that LCD displays, because they contain florescent tubes to backlight the display, apparently have a shelf life of only 4-5 years (or 50,000 hours according to the specifications for the N2230w). That may be something to consider if you plan on sinking a lot of money into a jumbo size LCD HDTV in time for next year's mandatory switchover from analog to digital broadcasting. But at a price of less than $400 for a 22" Viewsonic HDTV/monitor at Costco, what's there to complain about? So I made the plunge, trusting that the Viewsonic reputation would rise to the challenge.
For most people, LCDs are old news. But this particular model is sold not only as a computer display but also as an HDTV with built-in tuner that is nicely paired to its widescreen format.
First Impression
Upon hooking up this display, the feeling was one of awe not unlike what I recall feeling after getting a look at the first Apple Cinema displays with their crisp rendering, saturated colors and high contrast. This Viewsonic display is no exception.
But then I started to look more closely.
I can't claim to know much about its HD performance relative to other LCD HDTVs because I don't have enough experience to draw comparisons. What I did note during the initial testing phase, is that reception from a roof antenna that draws in acceptable analog signals had considerable difficulty picking up HD broadcasts. When an HDTV signal is strong, the picture is better than a comparative analog picture. But when a signal is weak, analog is the better performer both in picture and sound. Analog stations that did not come in well nevertheless had picture and sound, whereas digital signals that were similarly marginal in reception did not permit any audio or picture whatsoever (unless you count giant, frozen pixilized blocks that made the contents impossible to view). Of course, all this is irrelevant since it is likely that most viewers will receive their HDTV signals through cabel or satellite sources and not "off air" so to speak.
In the "playing around" phase, I found one channel off air that came in well in HD. Which brings me to my next less than stellar observation. I noticed that the picture was far more crisp than a comparatively strong analog picture, Colors were much more saturated, and the screen generally brighter in appearance when compared to analog TV sets. But despite the higher fidelity, I felt that there was a certain "cardboard cutout" quality to the HD images. In other words, the picture seemed to be lacking depth. I am uncertain if this was a result of the source material -- a newscast --- but the end result is that I felt that the HD picture, while better in some respects, it is lacking in realism in other respects.
In my case, my decision to purchase the Viewsonic N2230w was not primarily to evaluate its HD performance. Mainly, I intend to use it as a computer monitor with the HD tuner a secondary use. So HD performance, while not quite what the hype had led me to expect, would not be a reason, in and of itself, to put me off this make and model.
As a computer monitor, the first thing I noted about the ViewSonic N2230w was that I could not get images to stop distorting when connected to my Mac. At this point, I am attributing the problem to my graphics card but to be sure I hooked it up via DVI to a PC in another room, at which point there was no sign of images being stretched or squashed when in native resolution.
Hooking the Viewsonic back up to my Mac, I found that I was able to run the monitor in its native 1680x1050 resolution, which had worked nicely on the PC. While the results are an improvement over those that the ViewSonic owner's manual recommends for for Mac users , I noted that the distortion, while less obvious, is still present.
In 1024x768 and 1280x1024 respectively, the picture seems to stretch horizontally. Circles became somewhat oblong, as do icons on my desktop. This is unacceptable because I do graphic art on the side and if images are distorted I can't work. When switching to the recommended "sweet spot" for PC-connected viewers, which is 1680x1050, I have the opposite problem. Instead of a horizontal stretch, I get a vertical stretch. It's not severe, but still unacceptable for any sort of visual work. I'm willing to speculate that the issue may lie with my graphic card, which does not include a DVI hookup, but this is nevertheless a source of disappointment given that it is advertised to be Mac/VGA compatible at lower recommended resolutions than what I found necessary to use.
For use as a desktop display, there is also another problem with this model. The display does not include an articulating arm. Since you cannot tilt it, raising the display height can only be accomplished by setting it on a platform. The necessity of using a platform to raise the display defeats the streamlined look of an LCD.
When I ran the Mac OS calibration routine, I found it necessary to hunch down to make sure my eyes were level with the center of the screen. And when at last the monitor was properly calibrated, I was again presented with a mixed bag. On the one hand, text was crisp and easy to read, whereas uncalibrated portions of the letters in a text document seemed to be darker than others (as if some of the letters were bold and others were not). Once properly color calibrated, photos were gloriously vibrant. Blacks became astonishingly black. And whites became blindingly bright. That's when I noticed how tired I felt. Or rather my eyes.
The obvious solution to my growing headache in response to the blinding whites and the bottomless blacks was to minimize the brightness and contrast. Altering these settings, however, eclipses the work of color calibrating the display. So it would appear one cannot have it both ways. Toning down the contrast and brightness will help the eyes -- if you don't mind the fact that the changes seem to start at the outward reaches of the screen and work their way toward the center -- but it will screw up the graphic potential of this display big time.
Bottom Line:
I would recommend this LCD mainly for its HDTV capacity, not for close up desktop work. If you have a better graphics card and/or a DVI connection, the geometric distortion may not be an issue. And if you already are accustomed to working close up and personal with LCDs, the brightness will probably not induce "LCD syndrome" as it is described elsewhere on the 'net by those who develop severe eyestrain and headaches in response to LCD displays.
For myself? I'm longing for my old CRT. I never noticed a flicker running it at 75+mHz, and it did not induce the eyestrain, fatigue and headache that has been my experience working with this LCD. From 10 feet across the room, an LCD may make a fantastic TV. But using an LCD --- or at least this model --- as a desktop display reminds me all those years ago when mother would warn us kids not to sit too close to the TV.
From a casual perspective, this ViewSonic is stunning. But from a graphic and photographic background, I cannot say this display imparts much realism. Nuances of shadow and highlight drop out regardless of contrast and brightness settings, and that is, perhaps, why HD broadcasts seem to lack depth despite the fact that the dynamic range of LCDs has supposedly improved over the past few years. The last reason why this display is poor suited for visual applications has to do with the way the controls function. Changes to brightness and contrast seem to work their way from the outer edges inward. The result is that looking at this display feels somewhat like looking at a concave piece of glass despite its flat appearance. I find this particularly ironic because CRTs are not true flat screens, but nevertheless I felt that I was viewing a flat surface when using my old flat screen Mitsubishi. In this case, I really am looking at a flat surface but feel that there is an illusion of looking into a concave screen. I have too little experience with LCDs to know whether this is characteristic, or a characteristic of my specific unit. But I can't help but wonder if this subtle concave effect was an attempt on the part of engineers to compensate for the lack of depth that I noted in the HD images?
Make no mistake: None of this review is a slam on Viewsonic. Viewsonic is one of the best display manufacturers out there. What I can say, however, is that first impressions haven't sold me on the LCD/HDTV hype. I'm sure eventually my eye will acclimate to the unique properties of LCD images. But for right now, flaws stand out like a sore thumb. Just the same, I cannot rule out the possibility that I would be much more favorable to this display if I didn't have to type this review from nearly four feet away as I feel my retinas bake and my headache build.
ViewSonic N2230w:
