Dell 2707WFP: Looking for the Middle Ground of Large LCDs
by Jarred Walton on April 4, 2007 10:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Displays
Closing Thoughts
A 27" LCD is definitely an interesting option for people who want something larger than a 24" model but prefer to stick with single-link DVI connections. If that sounds like the type of LCD you're after, the Dell 2707WFP is definitely a viable option. Of course, there really aren't many other alternatives right now. Anyone looking for more modern styling from the LCD is also likely to be pleased with Dell's new offering and it certainly makes a case for being the coolest looking LCD on the market right now.
Unfortunately, the overall good quality and attractive appearance don't come cheap, as the Dell 2707WFP is currently selling for $1169 on Dell's web site (with the "normal" price being $1299). At the current price, it falls almost exactly halfway between the price of most 24" LCDs and the Dell/HP 30" LCDs. It's also halfway between those two in terms of size, so perhaps the price is fitting. Considering that Dell has frequent display sales, potential buyers might want to keep an eye on things and wait for a larger sale to come around, although when/if that will occur on the 2707WFP is anyone's guess.
Perhaps we're just being a bit spoiled, as it was only 18 months back that we were paying nearly as much for a 24" LCD. However, while we might consider the 2707WFP at its currently reduced price, the regular $1300 would definitely be more than we are willing to pay. At that price, we would be more inclined to spend a bit more for the 30" 3007WFPHC or some other LCD - or else just get a couple 24" LCDs.
The other difficulty is that the current price point also competes against HDTVs that typically include even more input options (multiple component and DVI inputs, for example) as well as speakers, HDMI, and CableCARD support. You can get 1080p 37" LCD HDTVs starting at $1000, or 42" models starting at $1200. We can't say for certain whether the quality and other aspects of such displays are able to match what the 2707WFP offers, but for the same price they are definitely tempting. They may not be better strictly as computer displays, but at the same time we would expect them to surpass the 27" Dell when it comes to other uses like viewing TV, movies, or hooking up multiple peripherals.
The 2707WFP ends up being a very good LCD for most uses, but with a price and features that make it a tough sell. It seems like the most likely buyers at present are going to be businesses or users looking for a display with a cutting edge appearance. Dell delivers on the looks and the features, but for imaging professionals, HTPC types, or those with limited funds we would take a closer look at other options.
A 27" LCD is definitely an interesting option for people who want something larger than a 24" model but prefer to stick with single-link DVI connections. If that sounds like the type of LCD you're after, the Dell 2707WFP is definitely a viable option. Of course, there really aren't many other alternatives right now. Anyone looking for more modern styling from the LCD is also likely to be pleased with Dell's new offering and it certainly makes a case for being the coolest looking LCD on the market right now.
Unfortunately, the overall good quality and attractive appearance don't come cheap, as the Dell 2707WFP is currently selling for $1169 on Dell's web site (with the "normal" price being $1299). At the current price, it falls almost exactly halfway between the price of most 24" LCDs and the Dell/HP 30" LCDs. It's also halfway between those two in terms of size, so perhaps the price is fitting. Considering that Dell has frequent display sales, potential buyers might want to keep an eye on things and wait for a larger sale to come around, although when/if that will occur on the 2707WFP is anyone's guess.
Perhaps we're just being a bit spoiled, as it was only 18 months back that we were paying nearly as much for a 24" LCD. However, while we might consider the 2707WFP at its currently reduced price, the regular $1300 would definitely be more than we are willing to pay. At that price, we would be more inclined to spend a bit more for the 30" 3007WFPHC or some other LCD - or else just get a couple 24" LCDs.
The other difficulty is that the current price point also competes against HDTVs that typically include even more input options (multiple component and DVI inputs, for example) as well as speakers, HDMI, and CableCARD support. You can get 1080p 37" LCD HDTVs starting at $1000, or 42" models starting at $1200. We can't say for certain whether the quality and other aspects of such displays are able to match what the 2707WFP offers, but for the same price they are definitely tempting. They may not be better strictly as computer displays, but at the same time we would expect them to surpass the 27" Dell when it comes to other uses like viewing TV, movies, or hooking up multiple peripherals.
The 2707WFP ends up being a very good LCD for most uses, but with a price and features that make it a tough sell. It seems like the most likely buyers at present are going to be businesses or users looking for a display with a cutting edge appearance. Dell delivers on the looks and the features, but for imaging professionals, HTPC types, or those with limited funds we would take a closer look at other options.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
39 Comments
View All Comments
JarredWalton - Wednesday, April 4, 2007 - link
A perfect example of stuff that doesn't look right with a higher DPI setting is anything that uses a bitmap. All of the icons at 120dpi tend to look like crud in XP. There are just far too many areas of Windows and the applications that run on it that are built around pixel sizes, so changing DPI settings only sort of affects them.Anyway, the point isn't whether or not higher DPI is good or bad. You like it, others don't. That's the main idea behind that introduction: an explanation of why higher pixel pitch can be a good thing. I really do have poor vision (an irregular astigmatism that can't be corrected without a retina transplant, so I live with slight double vision). I find many of the high DPI screens to be undesirable, although I do like higher resolutions for image work.
kalrith - Wednesday, April 4, 2007 - link
Since we're discussing pixel pitch and poor eyesight, I thought I'd mention that one of my coworkers has such poor vision that he's using a 21" LCD at 800x600 resolution and thinks it's "just right".Also, out of the 10 19" LCDs we have, only one person runs hers at the native res. Everyone else uses 1024x768.
LoneWolf15 - Thursday, April 5, 2007 - link
This is one reason why I "downgraded" (the rest of the specs are similar, other than that I also shaved 2 pounds of weight) from a laptop with a 15" 1600x1200 UXGA display to a 14" 1024x768 XGA display. At 15", picture detail was incredible, but text for web browsing was giving me sore eyes and headaches. I wouldn't mind having 1280x1024 at 14" or 15", but since I'm not paying for it, beggars can't be choosers.It's also why I returned my Dell 2007WFP and exchanged it for a 2407WFP. Higher resolution, but larger pixel pitch as well.
kmmatney - Wednesday, April 4, 2007 - link
I'm another person who likes big pixels. Work tried to give me a 17" LCD, but I would have none of that. I then tried a 21" Samsung at 1600 x 1200, but it was still too small. Now I have a 20" LCD running native at 1400 x 1050 and its really nice. I have a laptop with small pixels that I use when I travel, but I'm much more productive when I can see everything clearly.I would love to have this display, but it really needs to come down in price.
strikeback03 - Wednesday, April 4, 2007 - link
my vision is awful uncorrected - way beyond not being able to see the big "E". But since I'm always wearing glasses or contacts anyway I like high-DPI displays. Love my thinkpad with the SXGA 15" display. The UXGA 15" would probably be hard to read though.My boss has a ~20" CRT that he runs at either 800x600 or 1024x768.
jc44 - Wednesday, April 4, 2007 - link
OK - I admit it - I'm stunned. With the exception of your colleague with the poor eyesight I find it hard to conceive how anyone would prefer (presumably) a slightly fuzzy (due to scaling artifacts) 1024x768 to a sharp 1280x1024 on a 19" LCD. I could simply not put enough information on the screen to be able to do my job at that resolution without resorting to a lot of printouts.Well horses for courses I guess - thanks
JC
xsilver - Friday, April 6, 2007 - link
lol - the amount of people that have their lcd monitors set to non native resolutions is insanely funny.but even more insanely funny is how many people say they cant see anything wrong with the scaling artifacts and fuzziness.
I haven't done much (any) testing on this in gaming though - is the distortion just as bad in gaming when running a non native res? getting a 20" lcd or above these days has pretty much required a high end graphics card to be purchased if any gaming wants to be done if you want to run native res.
still prefer crt atm myself but I realize it will be inevitable that i'll have to make the switch and need to figure out some options.
mitchell123 - Thursday, December 3, 2009 - link
hello FriendsThios is a nice article.......for everyone...........
==============
Mitchell
Tommyguns - Wednesday, April 4, 2007 - link
19" Viewsonic lcd here. you guessed it. 1024x768 and it suits me just fine. not that i have bad eyes at age 22 or anything, i just like being able to clearly see everything. I game hard as well and it works out just fine. i do have it in clone mode going to an aux 17inch crt thats about 20 feet away. higher res. is nice, but i prefer big letters, with out the squints sometimes.it would be nice to know what is around average in terms of gpu's, to be able to use these larger lcd's. average wasnt always a super highend 8xxx series card.