Does Sony make a 14 or 15 inch with a Z-quality display?

I loved my old SZ680 screen and I'm looking for something similar in a 14 or 15 inch laptop. I'd love to get a new 13" Sony Z, but I don't think I want to spend that much. Does Sony make a 14 or 15 inch laptop with a screen as display as the Z series?

 

Z series has 13.1" screen. How do you expect it's gonna fit on 14" or 15" notebook? By definition, they have 14" and 15" screen respectively

 

I think he means with the same quality, full HD in 14 or 15 inch.

 

I don't know if they are good quality, but as far as resolution goes some european 14" EA models have 1600x900 screens. The 15" EB has 1080 full HD available, and the 16.4" F has a nice matte finish on it similar to the Z, I think it is either 900 or 1080 too, so that would make it the nicest of them.

 

Quality won't be the same, that's for sure. The 1080p screen of the Z is like unbeatable for ''cheap'' notebooks.

I think if you want about the same quality screens you'll gonna have to check macbook pro's. Or the more expensive version of the F series by Sony (1080p matte display).

 

Thanks for the advice. I guess I may have to look at macbook pros. The F series is a little too large and bulky for my taste. I really wish they'd make a "budget" $1k Z series laptop without the ssd drive, no graphics card and a i3. I don't need the graphics or extra speed, but I really want the form factor and the nice screen. I recently purchased a Toshiba R705 and there is a lot to like about it except for the horrible screen (poor vertical viewing angles, low contrast, low resolution, etc.)

 

F series screen still use CCFL which i think is ridiculous, and eb,EC are not as good TN screen type as Z series. Meaning the color fidelity 96% Adobe RGB, contrast level ratio wont be as good.

the new macbook pro's use IPS Screen which is somewhat inferior than Z series screen, so check the macbook pro's if you like. but I think you pick Z because of style meet functionality :] Which is why i didn't pick Apple.

Dell inspiron also has a special LCD called RGBLED (Triluminos). means they actually have a 1red/1blue/2green led configuration for superior color reproduction.

It dramatically expands the lcd color range by aligning individual clusters of red, green and blue LEDs, significantly elevating color purity compared to traditional single white LED backlights.

http://www.dell.com/us/p/studio-xps-1647/pd

Personal note: I do have a sony XBR Lcd with this type of technology and it beats out all the competitors at the moment in terms of excellent colors (and among other tech. combined with local led dimming for superior blacks and whites). its worth every penny if you like to watch movies, edit photots, or gaming.

 

For most purposes, IPS screens are superior to TN screens, and the Z has a TN screen.
Not only do IPS displays avoid shifting the colour tint when the angle of viewing changes, but they are native 8-bit-per-color, unlike TN which is 6-bit with dithering.

The only benefit of TN screens, apart from the lower price, is that they have faster refresh rates.

 

Are you sure about that? From what I've read & heard, the MBPs are still using TN screens & not IPS screens.

 

From what I know MacBooks have TN Panels, like all notebooks these times.
They have good (better than most) TN-Panels, but still TN.

Since the Z got one of the best screens overall, you won't find something as good as it with 13".

The mentioned Dell above has a screen comparable wit the Z's.

 

sorry, yea I meant superior lol

 

You might want to check out any clearance C2D VGN-Z (or a referb. one from Sony outlet) before you head toward 13" MBP. VGN-Z specs are still better than 13" MBP and I think the screen is comparable or better as well.

If you are into 15" then MBP is a decent choice.

 

refresh rate doesn't apply to LCDs, they don't work the same as CRT does.

 

I'm pretty sure he's referring to response time which nowadays is used interchangeably with refresh rate...and, yes, it's applicable to lcd's.

In fact, refresh rate in it's old-fashioned CRT terms is also applicable to LCD's. IE 60hz/120hz/240hz.

 

I guess the point I'm trying to make - you can't differentiate between LCD displays based on refresh rates, they are all pretty much locked to 60hz (with a very few exceptions). Response time, on other hand, varies widely and that's why it's more appropriate.

As for 60hz/120hz/240hz example - that's HDTV specs, isn't it? And as you know, the same HDTV's claim to have 100,000 or even 1,000,000 'dynamic' contrast ratio which is impossible for LCD tech. Similarly, they like to marketspeak about 240hz TV but how much it is real and how much just some tricks, is hard to say. There are a few TRUE 120hz desktop displays but AFAIK none 120hz laptop displays.

Lastly, using two terms with different meaning interchangeably is ignorant. Refresh rate is not the same thing as response time even though they are related. Granted, it was a probably a mistake in the first place and response time was implied but arguing that they are one and the same is wrong.

 

Using it interchangeably is incorrect, but it's how it used. And FWIW there are 120hz REFRESH RATE pc monitors that DO accept 120hz signals from pc's (3d monitors). In fact, I suspect you knew what the op meant (response time) and instead of agreeing that, yes, tn panels typically have a faster response time than an IPS or PVA panel, you'd rather refer to how his terminology is incorrect.

Good job. Anyhow, back on topic.....

 

Fair enough...and sadly, now that you edited your post I look like a jerk

 

And 120hz laptop displays are coming - 3d To your point, it is probably time to correctly distinguish between refresh rate and response time, since refresh rate in it's correct for will become relevant (albeit just a little).

 

DELL does not sell the 16" with RGBLED anymore, sell now only WLED, because they had some issues with it. WLED is cheap

Nothing special about that for a good flatpanel TV/Monitor. But Plasma is still better.

Indeed. I recently replaced my "cheap" 3.5 years old Samsung LCD with a Dell U2410. man what a difference. The U2410 has a H-IPS panel with 10bit per color.

Anyway, back to topic.
A good quality display depends on how you define it. For some only resolution and maybe brightness is important. For me everything is important: resolution, brightness, contrast, matte/glossy (prefer matte), color space.
The Sony Z display has it all except it could be less mirroring/reflecting.

To find a display like the Z somewhere else is difficult. I know that the Lenovo W510 with FullHD has also RG-ph/RGB LED display and good brightness and contrast. I think DELL has the RGB/RG-ph display only in the Studio 17.

 

if your budget is rather high the Elitebook 8540W and the 8740W have the Dream Color 2 option ( 10 bit IPS screen 150% sRGB gamut and 178 degree viewing angles available ) expensive lil bugger but makes the Z and the MBP look like childs toys

 

Thanks for all of the suggestions. The Elitebooks are definitely out of my price range. Ideally, I'd just get a Sony Z, but I just don't want to spend that much. I've spent far more than that in the past, but I've gotten burned too many times on premature deaths.

Enny02 has a good point ... a good display depends on one's definition. For me, my old SZ is my own personal gold standard. I realize it was by no means perfect, but it met my top priorities.

Here are my own personal priorities
1) Vertical viewing angles
2) Contrast
3) Resolution
4) Color Accuracy
5) Brightness Uniformity
6) Horizontal viewing angles
7) Brightness

I'm now considering a Refurb'd Sony Z890 at the outlet store. Am I crazy to spend $1200 on a 2 year old refurb'd laptop?

 

$1200 seems a bit high for a refurb VGNZ. To answer your questions above, #1 is the only area that's a big issue for the VPC/VGN-Z and thus if you are close to the unit it can cause perceived issues with #5. Beyond that, IMO it's the best panel on the market short of going to an IPS unit.

 

That's not good news. So with my old Sony SZ, the screen only washed out at extreme angles when opening and shutting the laptop. Are you saying that the Z has a more limited 'sweet spot' with vertical viewing?

 

The sweet spot (vertically) for perfect brightness is very narrow. You can see the image still at angles but it's not the same. Hard to describe.

 

Its definitely a hard thing to describe in writing or even pics. However, my current Toshiba R705 completely washes out and has that inverse-contrast effect with the slightest movement up or down. My Sony SZ gets dimmer, but doesn't blow out the contrast or give that inverse effect.

 

You lose brightness rapidly but you don't run into inverse colors, etc. till you get to extreme off angle (and again the issue is mostly vertical only).