TFTs - Response time or contrast ratio?

steviemcg_2

I'm looking at getting a 17" TFT from ebuyer. I've narrowed it down to 2 models, both almost identical in spec. The Digimate one has a 500:1 contrast ratio and 12ms response time. The Videoseven model has a 400:1 contrast ratio, but 8ms reponse time. Both are about £110+VAT. Which one would you recommend? Is better response time or better contrast ratio more important? Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

simes

Manufacturers specs are often wide of the mark. The spec on these is too close to call anyway.
If doing a lot of photographic work , then a better contrast ratio would be ideal. Response rate is only a factor on very fast moving games, but you won't have problems on sub 16ms panels.

Choose the one with the best looking case. The difference between specs on those two is too close to notice.

wolfman

Hmmm, I'd be careful with either model. I've used the Digimate before and found it's contrast to be too high, colour levels quite a bit off and it's not as sharp as slightly more expensive tft's. Also, the monitor (my friends) failed after a few months. The Video7 brand doesn't have a great reputation and has come bottom in tests such as by PC Pro.

For a budget (almost extreme) tft the Digimate is ok (preferable choice), but at that price range I'd personally still stick with a CRT. One of the better budget tft's that gets very good reviews, look up the Relisys TL795, it's about £150-160 though.

ManAtHome

Compaq and HP branded TFTs are pretty stunning (similar prices to Relisys)

jezza1O1

Go and view some screens at your local PC World etc. Quoted specs are unreliable as there is much more to these things than you might think. There is no standard way of measuring 'response time' so manufacturers will just quote the best the screen can do - this may be the response from black to white, or from green to blue or perhaps an average of all transitions. Again the contrast can vary depending how it is measured.

Ive seen rubbish screens with good specs, and Ive seen badly marketed screens that look great. Go and look for yourself to avoid dissapointment or maybe pick a bargin...

blinky

There's articles at Tom's Hardware Guide and XbitLabs which both show that the stats quoted by the manufacturers are meaningless as there's no set standard for the measuring contrast ratios and response times.

sam1970

i bought the medion tft screen from Aldi last month and it is fantastic...it costs £139 so it is very close to those two price wise and i think many aldi stores still have them in stock.

Kommunist

AFAIR, those milliseconds are almost irrelevant as it is down to manufacture how to measure response time. It could be black-to-white, other way round and one grayshade to another. But what is important - total time, say from black to white and back... I've seen reports that some monitors had 40+ ms when claimed 12!

Here is the typical measured response (for TN+ matrix):



And if you think that this is bad, look at AG Neovo graph:



Again, 12ms claimed!

So, if I were OP, I would try to understand what do I want from TFT monitor - colours, viewing angle or speed - and for which applications I need it.
Saying that, nothing can beat old good CRT, especially considering its weight!