[redsniper]

Ok so, my old monitor FUBARed and now I'm looking for a new one. What's a good, 19" CRT monitor that has Trueflat or whatever it's called and a decent dot pitch in the $100-$200 range?

[Ashrak]

samsung 959NF

[Scuddie]

My top choice, as regards to power is the ViewSonic P95f - Pricy, but for damned good reason.  One of the best CRTs you can buy.  Best high end performance for the buck you can find almost anywhere.  Either that, or you could get a KDS XF-9I.  Much cheaper, also for a reason.  Consider it the generic flat 19" CRT.  It has plenty of features, but it doesnt reign supreme in any one area.


If you want the mid-range between these two, I couldnt recommend anything better than Ashrak's idea.  However, I believe the dot pitch is too low, and you will get a dark picture.

[kode]

since eizo has stopped manufacturing CRTs, go with samsung or viewsonic. they're both good.

[Taristin]

I have a KDS. I think it's awesome. But it's old, now. A Visual Sensaions model.

[mitac]

Originally posted by Ashrak
samsung 959NF

[Swamp_Thing]

Sony Trinitron Multiscan. I have a Samsung aswell, and you wouldn´t believe the diference in image quality between them both.
So, i take it the blowdrying didn´t work?

[pyro-manic]

I've got an Iiyama. It's only 17", but it's an excellent quality monitor. (It's a VisionMaster Pro 413. It's a few years old, but I know there was a 19" version of it - the Pro 415 or something - and it was supposed to be very good as well. You'd probably find it quite cheap now) That's my recommendation. Or go for a Sony - they're very good as well.

[redsniper]

the blowdrying wasn't supposed to fix it, just help identify the problem, and it did that admirably; made the picture stay a lot longer and flicker less.
I'm thinin about getting this.

[Nix]

I'm in the same boat actually, looking for a new CRT.  I purchased a Sony Trinitron back in '98 and it's still kickin but it's a 17" and its not capable of the higher refresh rates modern monitors can display at.  I bought a Samsung SyncMaster 793MB and it's pretty good, it's a hell of a lot brighter than my old Sony, but I have seen differences between the two.  Problem is, it's not a Dynaflat tube, but a Magic Bright tube.

1  = Max resolution is the exact same with my Sony, at the same refresh rates. This has been verified by running it on two seperate boxes, one Windows and one Fedora Core 2.  

2 = High resolutions = not so clear text.  On my Sony, text looks a little crisper, but if you turn the brightness down (the Magic Bright settings) you can get away from the fuzziness.  

3 = Screen is set deep in the monitor, so deep in fact that the edges sometimes look dark for some reason.  I'm actually picking up the shadow from the edge of the monitor casing being projected on the screen.  No big deal, just a little wierd sometimes.  I just have to move my lamp behind me or behind the monitor on the desk.  

This 17 incher is actually going to my parents, but I'm contemplating buying a Samsung 19" in the Dynaflat variety because it CAN do the higher refresh rates at higher resolutions, but I am also wondering about the NEC/Mitsubishi monitor that's almost like this.  Problem is, it costs about 100 bucks more than the samsung.  I live up here in a high altitude area (7000+) and have experienced high failure rates with viewsonic monitors like crazy, which could be due to either a bad batch of monitors or elevation or something.   This samsung looks like a safe bet but has anyone heard of the NEC/Mitsubishi?
BTW, if you froogle the part number for the 997DF,  I got Dell as the lowest price + free shipping.  Interesting.....

[Fury]

You probably have your reasons but I don't understand why anyone would buy 19" CRT when they can buy 17" TFT. Viewarea is about same in the both, TFT also produces less heat and takes less space in your desk, not to mention it uses less power. All good TFT's are good for gaming, the old not for gaming argument really is just that, old.

I've got this Samsung display nearly a year ago and I haven't regretted that decision even the slightest.

[Turnsky]

Originally posted by Ashrak
samsung 959NF

sounds alright.. but, since my samsung monitor  is starting to act iffy (SyncMaster 955df) after just a couple of years of use..  i've learnt to be a little leery of samsung monitors.

LCD are good and all, but if you do intense graphical work(i.e Photoshop), you'd be better off with a CRT

[Janos]

Originally posted by Mr. Fury
You probably have your reasons but I don't understand why anyone would buy 19" CRT when they can buy 17" TFT. Viewarea is about same in the both, TFT also produces less heat and takes less space in your desk, not to mention it uses less power. All good TFT's are good for gaming, the old not for gaming argument really is just that, old.

I've got this Samsung display nearly a year ago and I haven't regretted that decision even the slightest.

Exactly. I have a Fujitsu-Siemens and it's very good for gaming (though ironically I've been less into gaming lately, even though my screen is better for it than my old CRT).

[Taristin]

Poo. My montor's colour is starting to go pale every now and then...

[redsniper]

with dot pitch lower numbers are better right?

[Scuddie]

No.  Middle numbers are better.  If it's too high, you lose sharpness.  If it's too low, the light output will be low.  For a 19" monitor, .23-.27 is acceptable range.  .24 or .25 is best.