Users of 30" 2560x1600 monitors - some advice please

Our "pub" where you can post about things completely Off Topic or about non-silent PC issues.

Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee

Post Reply
nick705
Posts: 1162
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:26 pm
Location: UK

Users of 30" 2560x1600 monitors - some advice please

Post by nick705 » Sun May 20, 2007 7:17 am

I'm thinking about getting a Dell 3007WFP-HC or HP 3065 but my main concern, ironically, is the high resolution which is the panel's main selling point in the first place.

It seems to me that placing the monitor far enough away so that the entire huge screen can be easily seen might make text uncomfortably small, due to the small pixel pitch. My eyesight (with corrective lenses) isn't terrible, but it's definitely not 20/20 either (and unlikely to get better in future, rather the reverse). I could make use of Vista's improved scaling options if necessary, but it doesn't work properly with some apps, and it sort of defeats the object of having a huge native resolution in the first place. Also, most web pages are still pixel-determined and can turn into a bit of a mess if you start zooming text onscreen.

I know the best option would be to see it in action before I buy, but I can't find anywhere locally that has it in-store. The UK's distance selling regulations allow goods ordered online to be returned for any reason within seven days of delivery, but I'd rather avoid the hassle of having to return it if possible.

Most people reporting on other forums seem very pleased with their purchases, but at least one guy with bad eyesight said he found his Dell 3007WFP-HC "unusable" due to the small text size.

So a few questions for anyone who has a 30" 2560x1600 monitor: How far away do you sit from it? How would you rate your eyesight? How do you find reading text on web pages etc? If it's a problem, is it something you can acclimatise to, and if not are there any decent workarounds?

Any other thoughts or impressions would of course be very welcome. :)

floffe
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 4:36 am
Location: Linköping, Sweden

Post by floffe » Sun May 20, 2007 8:14 am

If you have an Apple store nearby, their 30" Cinema display isn't the exact same monitor but it is a 30" 2560x1600 screen.

mai9
Posts: 102
Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 2:56 pm
Location: Barcelona

Re: Users of 30" 2560x1600 monitors - some advice pleas

Post by mai9 » Sun May 20, 2007 8:40 am

nick705 wrote:Most people reporting on other forums seem very pleased with their purchases, but at least one guy with bad eyesight said he found his Dell 3007WFP-HC "unusable" due to the small text size.

So a few questions for anyone who has a 30" 2560x1600 monitor: How far away do you sit from it? How would you rate your eyesight? How do you find reading text on web pages etc? If it's a problem, is it something you can acclimatise to, and if not are there any decent workarounds?

Any other thoughts or impressions would of course be very welcome. :)
hi, I have a 30" and a 24". I bought the 30" because the 24 was too small (hehe). I am very pleased with it. I have enough myopia to require lenses for driving but I don't use them in front of the screen.

I increased the size in windows and firefox. In winxp I used the "accwiz.exe" accessibility wizard, and on firefox the extension "nosquint". Without those two things I using this monitor would be a pita because like that user said, the text is too small. My eyes are between 50-60cm from the screen.

here's a photo of my layout:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mai9/393298933/

nick705
Posts: 1162
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:26 pm
Location: UK

Post by nick705 » Sun May 20, 2007 8:58 am

floffe wrote:If you have an Apple store nearby, their 30" Cinema display isn't the exact same monitor but it is a 30" 2560x1600 screen.
No Apple store handy, unfortunately. :(
mai9 wrote:I increased the size in windows and firefox. In winxp I used the "accwiz.exe" accessibility wizard, and on firefox the extension "nosquint". Without those two things I using this monitor would be a pita because like that user said, the text is too small. My eyes are between 50-60cm from the screen.
hmmm... 50-60cm seems a bit closer than I'd ideally like, especially with a screen that size.

Is the monitor's position determined by the space available, or is that the distance you prefer? If it was a bit further away, would wearing your lenses help, and would you be able to see clearly without scaling aids?

Thanks for the pics. :)

/edit: I see the 2405FPW is about the same distance from your viewing position - in practice, is there a dramatic difference between apparent text size on each monitor? The pixel pitch doesn't seem *that* different on paper...

alleycat8675309
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 6:39 am
Location: Vancouver, BC

Post by alleycat8675309 » Sun May 20, 2007 9:22 am

I don't have the 30" screen, but we do have a lot of 20" dual screens at 1600x1200 resolution at work. We sit the normal depth that one would with a single monitor (approx. 70 cm for me). I imagine that's how I would with one of these 30" screens.

bexx
Posts: 75
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 12:17 am

Post by bexx » Sun May 20, 2007 9:25 am

If you don't like the idea of a super high dpi look at some westinghouse TVs...
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1088497
Theres about a billion pages about it. The 37" stands out for desktop use, 1900x1200 8ms. Their 42" is not as outstanding, plus too big to use as a monitor, they also make a 32" but I don't know how it compares in quality.

http://www.tacoclub.net/images/lvm-42w2 ... 006001.jpg
PIC of 37" with windows desktop.

THe reason to buy the dell is for the high dpi, if you don't want it don't pay for it, get a westinghouse ;).

mai9
Posts: 102
Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 2:56 pm
Location: Barcelona

Post by mai9 » Sun May 20, 2007 9:29 am

nick705 wrote:hmmm... 50-60cm seems a bit closer than I'd ideally like, especially with a screen that size.

Is the monitor's position determined by the space available, or is that the distance you prefer? If it was a bit further away, would wearing your lenses help, and would you be able to see clearly without scaling aids?
It's the distance I prefer. I changed the text back to normal size and I can still read it without lenses, but I wouldn't use it that way. I strongly need to increase the size.

nick705 wrote:/edit: I see the 2405FPW is about the same distance from your viewing position - in practice, is there a dramatic difference between apparent text size on each monitor? The pixel pitch doesn't seem *that* different on paper...
It's the same aparent size.

feel free to ask more questions :)

ayjay
Posts: 48
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 11:01 am

Re: Users of 30" 2560x1600 monitors - some advice pleas

Post by ayjay » Sun May 20, 2007 9:30 am

mai9 wrote:I increased the size in windows and firefox. In winxp I used the "accwiz.exe" accessibility wizard, and on firefox the extension "nosquint". Without those two things I using this monitor would be a pita because like that user said, the text is too small. My eyes are between 50-60cm from the screen.
Loving that! Just ran the wizard and sorted out firefox. The sigh of relief! I have a 24"er and sometimes I've been sitting way too close recently but mostly when on the net.

Tzupy
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 1561
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 10:47 am
Location: Bucharest, Romania

Post by Tzupy » Sun May 20, 2007 9:55 am

I used the Apple 30" last time I was in the UK (March 2007).
Placed at about the same distance (~80 cm) as my own 19" Iiyama CRT, I found it way too large.
I believe a 24" would have been more comfortable to work with.
BTW the 32"-37" Full HD LCD TVs are not 1920x1200, but 1920x1080 (16:9 not 16:10).

nick705
Posts: 1162
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:26 pm
Location: UK

Post by nick705 » Sun May 20, 2007 10:02 am

bexx wrote: THe reason to buy the dell is for the high dpi, if you don't want it don't pay for it, get a westinghouse ;).
Well, that's just the point really - I *do* want the high res, but I'm a bit unsure how I'd cope with it in practice. An HDTV would be way too big for me to use as a monitor, and I'd also prefer an S-IPS panel for Photoshop use.
mai9 wrote:It's the same aparent size.
That's good news - I use a 2407WFP sometimes, and that seems OK. I guess there's some difference though - the 1080i window on your 30" monitor looks noticeably smaller than the 2405FPW, even allowing for the difference in vertical resolution (unless it's a trick of the camera).

I suppose I *could* sit a bit closer, if I had to - do you sometimes feel like you're watching a tennis match, with a big widescreen panel so close? Any problems with colour differences caused by viewing the sides of the screen at a sharp angle?

mai9
Posts: 102
Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 2:56 pm
Location: Barcelona

Post by mai9 » Sun May 20, 2007 7:09 pm

ayjay wrote:
mai9 wrote:I increased the size in windows and firefox. In winxp I used the "accwiz.exe" accessibility wizard, and on firefox the extension "nosquint". Without those two things I using this monitor would be a pita because like that user said, the text is too small. My eyes are between 50-60cm from the screen.
Loving that! Just ran the wizard and sorted out firefox. The sigh of relief! I have a 24"er and sometimes I've been sitting way too close recently but mostly when on the net.
Glad you like it. I couldn't live without it. I also use the same enlarged settings on my laptop :)
Tzupy wrote:I used the Apple 30" last time I was in the UK (March 2007).
Placed at about the same distance (~80 cm) as my own 19" Iiyama CRT, I found it way too large.
I believe a 24" would have been more comfortable to work with.
BTW the 32"-37" Full HD LCD TVs are not 1920x1200, but 1920x1080 (16:9 not 16:10).
Well, the thing is: it IS too large to be used like your 19" screen. I don't use it in the same way. I do move my neck to see from one side of the screen to the other. And I never have windows covering the whole desktop. But still, it's very convenient. Right now, I have a video-clip, a spreadsheet and this firefox window all in this 30" screen. (I know I could alt+tab but it's not the same)
nick705 wrote:
bexx wrote: THe reason to buy the dell is for the high dpi, if you don't want it don't pay for it, get a westinghouse ;).
Well, that's just the point really - I *do* want the high res, but I'm a bit unsure how I'd cope with it in practice. An HDTV would be way too big for me to use as a monitor, and I'd also prefer an S-IPS panel for Photoshop use.
mai9 wrote:It's the same aparent size.
That's good news - I use a 2407WFP sometimes, and that seems OK. I guess there's some difference though - the 1080i window on your 30" monitor looks noticeably smaller than the 2405FPW, even allowing for the difference in vertical resolution (unless it's a trick of the camera).

I suppose I *could* sit a bit closer, if I had to - do you sometimes feel like you're watching a tennis match, with a big widescreen panel so close? Any problems with colour differences caused by viewing the sides of the screen at a sharp angle?
I just took some measures. The 30" is smaller, but at first sight I couldn't see the difference.

The notepad at 640x480 pixels is 16.3cm x 12cm on the 30" and 17.5cm x 13cm on the 24".

I don't have the feeling of watching a tennis match, I have the feeling that the virtual desktop is not virtual anymore since I can leave a window at one side of the screen and keep working on the other side, in the same way I leave a book at the other side of the real desk.

nick705, I also have the feeling that you took your time to decide on this monitor and now you're facing the truth: the decision has been made. I had the same process. I took all kind of measures on the height and width of that very big screen. And I spent months thinking if it was too high, or too wide, or too expensive, or too whatever. I even made a photoshop image of how it would look like on my desk based on the sizes posted on the web. :roll:

You care about the sizes inside the screen and I cared about the external size. hehe

nick705
Posts: 1162
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:26 pm
Location: UK

Post by nick705 » Sun May 20, 2007 10:26 pm

mai9 wrote:nick705, I also have the feeling that you took your time to decide on this monitor and now you're facing the truth: the decision has been made. I had the same process. I took all kind of measures on the height and width of that very big screen. And I spent months thinking if it was too high, or too wide, or too expensive, or too whatever. I even made a photoshop image of how it would look like on my desk based on the sizes posted on the web. :roll:
lol... you're absolutely spot on. I've spent ages obsessing about the details, and deep down I think I've already made the decision. Maybe I just wanted help justifying spending that much cash on a personal indulgence - I don't really "need" such an extravagant screen, but if I bought something smaller I wouldn't get that kid at Christmas feeling... :D

I guess really the only way to know for sure if I'll have any problems is to see for myself, but you've helped reassure me (if not my accountant).

Many thanks for your help, and also to everyone else who responded.

zerok66
Posts: 113
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 2:45 am

Post by zerok66 » Mon May 21, 2007 2:50 am

I have the dell 24" and have been considering the 30" for quite a while now.

What worries me though is the need for a Dual-DVI graphics card capable of the silly resolution.

While that is fine and I have an 8800GTS - surely that resolution is going to cause strain on the system and need better cooling on the graphics card?

I recon going for a 1080p LCD TV that supports DVI would be the best option. The resolution is high enough for enjoyment + it can serve multiple purposes :D

nick705
Posts: 1162
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:26 pm
Location: UK

Post by nick705 » Mon May 21, 2007 3:02 am

Well, there's no doubt that pushing all those pixels around takes some effort, and if you've "only" got an 8800GTS it might struggle with demanding games at the native resolution (although I'm sure the stock cooling is more than capable).

If your main interest is gaming and you don't want to upgrade your graphics card, then yes, you'd probably be better off with a 1080p HDTV. :wink:

mai9
Posts: 102
Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 2:56 pm
Location: Barcelona

Post by mai9 » Mon May 21, 2007 5:53 am

zerok66 wrote:While that is fine and I have an 8800GTS - surely that resolution is going to cause strain on the system and need better cooling on the graphics card?
If this information is of any help: My 24" and 30" are ran by an ATI x1600 Pro 256MB, and I can play Pro Evolution Soccer 6 at its highest resolution (2048x1536). It's a bit forced, sometimes the voice delays, but it still runs.

IsaacKuo
Posts: 1705
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2004 7:50 am
Location: Baton Rouge, Louisiana

Post by IsaacKuo » Mon May 21, 2007 7:17 am

I wonder why they don't make LCD displays with 2048x1536 resolution. 2048x1536 is a rather common maximum resolution for graphics cards. I would have thought it would make for a logical size between 1600x1200 and 2560x1600.

Currently, I use an IBM brand Trinitron CRT at 2048x1536 and it's wonderful--but the screen is too small! The screen is around 20" diagonal, and really it would be about perfect if it were 30+" diagonal.

Beyonder
Posts: 757
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 11:56 pm
Location: EARTH.

Post by Beyonder » Mon May 21, 2007 5:18 pm

IsaacKuo wrote:I wonder why they don't make LCD displays with 2048x1536 resolution. 2048x1536 is a rather common maximum resolution for graphics cards. I would have thought it would make for a logical size between 1600x1200 and 2560x1600.
Probably because the trend for monitor resolutions has been moving away from 4:3 aspect ratios (e.g. 2048*1536 and 1600*1200) to 16:9 or 16:10 aspect ratios (e.g. 2560*1600). I personally like the wide-screen ratios better, but some people seem to prefer the 4:3.

ayjay
Posts: 48
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 11:01 am

Post by ayjay » Mon May 21, 2007 11:44 pm

True enough point there. There are plenty of crts about that are capable of that. I used to have 2 of em but eek a 60hz refresh :lol:
Widescreen's nice. I find it odd working on 4:3 now. Then again if I was working on 4:3 all the time, 16:10 might be odd to my eyes.

porky133
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 7:19 pm

Post by porky133 » Tue May 22, 2007 12:11 am

have you considered a 27 inch monitor? I despaired of the 30 inchers and finally went with a Samsung 275T. It's 27 inch widescreen with a resolution of 1920x1200. It is working out very nice for me!

nick705
Posts: 1162
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:26 pm
Location: UK

Post by nick705 » Tue May 22, 2007 3:07 am

porky133 wrote:have you considered a 27 inch monitor? I despaired of the 30 inchers and finally went with a Samsung 275T. It's 27 inch widescreen with a resolution of 1920x1200. It is working out very nice for me!
Welcome to SPCR!

Yes, I've actually seriously considered the Dell 2707WFP-HC - from what I've read elsewhere, it's a top-class monitor, but it's expensive and I can't help thinking I'd always regret it when I could have had a 30" 2560x1600 for not much more.

What was it about the 30-inchers that made you "despair"? Was it the size, the resolution, the price, or a combination? Or something else I haven't thought of?

porky133
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 7:19 pm

Post by porky133 » Tue May 22, 2007 4:45 am

The resolution. I'm over 40 now and my eyes aren't so good. Also, I build my own machines and have resisted going with either SLI or Crossfire because of the heat and noise issues. With this 27 incher, at this res, I sit with my head approx 3 feet from the screen, I can have two windows showing at the same, and I'm comfortable and can see without glasses on.

Since Samsung released this and Viewsonics' should be out soon (if not already) prices should drop somewhat for the 27s.

Post Reply