Dell 2707WFP: Looking for the Middle Ground of Large LCDs
by Jarred Walton on April 4, 2007 10:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Displays
Viewing Angles
Viewing angles are one of those specifications that have become very inflated by the manufacturers. The basic requirement is that a display has to maintain a 10:1 contrast ratio in order to qualify as "viewable". The reality is that most LCDs are unfit for viewing outside of beyond a 45° angle. The good news is we really doubt that most people would want to view a display from anything more than a 45° angle, and typically a lot less. For that reason, we used our camera to take shots from head-on as well as from the left and right sides at ~30° angles, showing how brightness and contrast ratios are affected in off-angle viewing. We also took pictures from above and below at ~30° angles. Links to the viewing angle images of previously reviewed LCDs are available for comparison below:
Acer AL2216W
Dell 2405FPW
Dell 2407WFP
Dell 3007WFP
Gateway FPD2485W
HP LP3065
Within a 60° viewing arc, the colors and image quality of the 2707WFP are very good, but we can say the same about most of the other LCDs. We would rate the 2707WFP as being slightly ahead within a 60° arc, but it's when you move beyond a 30° angle that it begins to pull ahead of the other displays. We would put this display right up there with the HP LP3065 for having the best overall viewing angle. Certainly, it's more than sufficient for use from any reasonable viewing position - after all, we doubt that anyone would really want to look at a display from an oblique 80° angle.
Color Gradients
Taking a look at the ability to reproduce a smooth color gradient on all of the displays, the 2707WFP again does very well, subjectively ranking at the top of our charts. Those interested in comparing the display to previously tested LCDs can open their gradient images via the following links:
Acer AL2216W
Dell 2405FPW
Dell 2407WFP
Dell 3007WFP
Gateway FPD2485W
HP LP3065
It's difficult to say which display is the best, but the 2707WFP appeared to be just slightly better than the 3007WFP and LP3065. Prior to calibration, many of the results were worse, with clear banding visible in various portions of Futuremark's 3DMark benchmarks. Using a camera to photograph each display is not a perfect way to convey color accuracy or many other aspects of a display, so the above images should merely be taken as a rough estimate, and our evaluation is based on what we could actually see with our eyes. If you're concerned about color and image quality, the only real way to see the difference is to view a display in person.
Viewing angles are one of those specifications that have become very inflated by the manufacturers. The basic requirement is that a display has to maintain a 10:1 contrast ratio in order to qualify as "viewable". The reality is that most LCDs are unfit for viewing outside of beyond a 45° angle. The good news is we really doubt that most people would want to view a display from anything more than a 45° angle, and typically a lot less. For that reason, we used our camera to take shots from head-on as well as from the left and right sides at ~30° angles, showing how brightness and contrast ratios are affected in off-angle viewing. We also took pictures from above and below at ~30° angles. Links to the viewing angle images of previously reviewed LCDs are available for comparison below:
Acer AL2216W
Dell 2405FPW
Dell 2407WFP
Dell 3007WFP
Gateway FPD2485W
HP LP3065
 |
| Click to enlarge |
Within a 60° viewing arc, the colors and image quality of the 2707WFP are very good, but we can say the same about most of the other LCDs. We would rate the 2707WFP as being slightly ahead within a 60° arc, but it's when you move beyond a 30° angle that it begins to pull ahead of the other displays. We would put this display right up there with the HP LP3065 for having the best overall viewing angle. Certainly, it's more than sufficient for use from any reasonable viewing position - after all, we doubt that anyone would really want to look at a display from an oblique 80° angle.
Color Gradients
Taking a look at the ability to reproduce a smooth color gradient on all of the displays, the 2707WFP again does very well, subjectively ranking at the top of our charts. Those interested in comparing the display to previously tested LCDs can open their gradient images via the following links:
Acer AL2216W
Dell 2405FPW
Dell 2407WFP
Dell 3007WFP
Gateway FPD2485W
HP LP3065
 |
| Click to enlarge |
It's difficult to say which display is the best, but the 2707WFP appeared to be just slightly better than the 3007WFP and LP3065. Prior to calibration, many of the results were worse, with clear banding visible in various portions of Futuremark's 3DMark benchmarks. Using a camera to photograph each display is not a perfect way to convey color accuracy or many other aspects of a display, so the above images should merely be taken as a rough estimate, and our evaluation is based on what we could actually see with our eyes. If you're concerned about color and image quality, the only real way to see the difference is to view a display in person.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
39 Comments
View All Comments
AnnonymousCoward - Friday, April 6, 2007 - link
Slightly off topic, but what's the easiest way to get color profiles to apply in games, and not just Windows?JarredWalton - Friday, April 6, 2007 - link
If you set a color profile, it applies to everything but overlay. So games automatically use it, AFAIK. It's only video content that has problems.AnnonymousCoward - Friday, April 6, 2007 - link
You're probably right, since I tried changing the color profile to make everything hot pink, and the game also looked that way.Whenever Windows is booting up, the desktop first looks slightly lighter, and after a second it seems like the color profile kicks in. When I run the game Dark Messiah, right before the screen switches to the game, the desktop switches back to that lighter appearance, so it doesn't look like it's using the profile. I've also seen a few sites indicate that profiles don't apply for games: http://www.hex2bit.com/products/product_mcw.asp">http://www.hex2bit.com/products/product_mcw.asp says "...to prevent other programs from changing the color profile Windows uses. This is especially important to gamers as most games will change the color profile Windows uses." and http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1064124&...">http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1064124&... someone said "Also, that color profile won't effect videos, games, or your mouse cursor. I calibrated through my spyder2..."
sm8000 - Wednesday, April 4, 2007 - link
"single-link with a very limiting 1280x800 resolution"Isn't single link's max res 1920x1200? I'm pretty sure it is. Is the article saying dual link panels by design won't display more than 1280x800 on single link?
JarredWalton - Wednesday, April 4, 2007 - link
Right. There are no scaler ICs for 2560x1600 right now, but apparently they can manage a simple doubling of resolution. If you use a 30" LCD with a single-link DVI connection, they will only support up to 1280x800. In the case of the HP LP3065, any other resolution ends up being garbled (i.e. the BIOS, POST, and boot sequence is illegible). Within Windows, you can change the resolution and apparently the GPU will handle the scaling, but outside of Windows you're basically out of luck unless you're running 1280x800.jc44 - Wednesday, April 4, 2007 - link
I feel the need to take issue with the assumption in the article that a denser pixel pitches must lead to smaller text. OK - that certianly happens by default, but it is possible to increase the number of dpi that windows associates with amonitor and that should increase the size of the displayed text. I'll admit that support is somewhat patchy with web pages being amongst the greatest offenders - but in general it works.Personally I'm a dpi junkie and normally use a 204dpi monitor which can lead to somewhat interesting results on applications & web pages that are convinced that all monitors in the world run at 96dpi!
These days you don't need to spend a lot on a graphics card to a a dual-link dvi connector - I'm not sure where the bottom of the range is but an nvidia 7600 costs less than £100 and can be found with one dual + one single link DVI connectors.
JC
JarredWalton - Wednesday, April 4, 2007 - link
Adjusting DPI is certainly possible, and I believe this is one of the areas that Vista is supposed to be a lot better than XP. (Anyone able to confirm that?) However, my personal experience with modifying the DPI has been less than stellar. I usually end up just increasing the font size in Firefox, using the magnification in Word, etc. There are plenty of other applications that have no respect for the Windows DPI setting.nullpointerus - Wednesday, April 4, 2007 - link
Vista is definitely better than XP in this regard, but there are still many areas that could use some polish. For example, Vista still appears to use tiny bitmapped icons, which do not scale very well on the high-dpi title bar and task bar. Moreover, many third-party applications and even many Microsoft applications still have icons and images that scale horribly without the standard 96-dpi setting.Nonetheless, font-handling and layout for non-Aero-native applications has improved dramatically since the early Vista RC1 release; instead of merely upscaling the fonts and controls into a blurry mess, the layout engine does proper spacing and the font engine draws crisp, high resolution fonts. Visual Studio 2005 shows *major* progress in this regard.
For anyone interested in getting a higher density display and using the Vista DPI setting, I definitely trying it first. You could enable 120 dpi on your old monitor and stand back an extra foot or so to mimic the effect of a lower pixel pitch. Or get a friend to do this if you do not have Vista on your own computer.
strikeback03 - Wednesday, April 4, 2007 - link
I always reduce the size of my windows icons anyway. they are huge in the stock setting.on a related note, anyone know how to change desktop icon size and spacing in Gnome/Ubuntu? do you need a whole new theme? icons for mounted drives are way large.
nullpointerus - Wednesday, April 4, 2007 - link
typo: I definitely recommend trying it first.