IPS on the 15" SE??

Is this true?

15.5" LED backlit Full HD display (1920 x 1080) with IPS technology

 

It has always been IPS for the SE.


Sent from my iPhone with Tapatalk

 

AnandTech - Sony VAIO SE: An IPS Laptop for Under a Grand

A review I just read on it earlier today.

 

I do not think an IPS was always in the SE. I was shopping for one last year and it was just a TN panel, and an average one at best.

Cool... IPS Screen is new for 2012. Sweet!

 

It actually has been, I have some PDF documents for the Vaio SE1 from Korea which states that it has an IPS panel.

Sony was just ignorant enough not to advertise it, it would have drawn far more attention.

 

which HP did well for their Envy.

 

Wow...I would of got the Sony instead of the Lenovo. I guess I was thinking of the 13" TN panels

 

I'm considering buying the SE. I've never owned a Vaio, so how is the build quality and the fan noise?

 

which if you are looking at the Z, its the best 13'' panel that there is.

 

^ I love the screen on my 2009 Z, but their newest screens actually rated lower than the Vaio SE on measures of brightness, contrast and viewing angles. The Z of course mops up on color reproduction but SE has a very credible panel.

 

I probably would of bought a Z but the keyboard felt mushy to me. Not much key travel, but that's the trade off for being thin.

 

Actually the current 900p Z screen hasn't changed since the 2009 VGN model. the Z'a 1080p screen hasn't changed since introduction I'm 2010. Both Z screens are brighter and have better contrast than th SE IPS screen, which has terrible color accuracy. the only aspect of the SE screen that is better than the z screens is in vertical viewing angles. Thr TN screens on the Zs have horizontal viewing angles of nearly 180 degrees.

the SE is a steal at as low as $800 but it is in a different league than the Z. I'm not sure I can justify the 2-4X price difference though.

 

Here are the numbers from notebookcheck.net that I was referring to. SE really bests the Z on measures of brightness and contrast:

VPC-Z23N9E (2012)
Average brightness: 240.7 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 87 %
contrast ratio of 694:1

VPC-SE1Z9E (2011)
Average brightness: 253.3 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 92 %
contrast of 697:1

 

Point taken on the brightness and contrast of the Z 1080p, but the SE and these would be considered statistically identical - they are nearly the same numbers! Note: there have been 3 measurements of the Z's 1080p screens on 3 different models and the brightness and contrast have varied considerably; your reported numbers are on the low end. But again, compared to the SE, these numbers are the same. The 900p in the Z is far brighter and off the charts better contrast (see below). But once you bring colors into it, the SE falls off the proverbial table.

The Z's 900p screen, while lower res and slightly narrower color gamut than the 1080p Z's (96%), has high-end IPS-like numbers for contrast and black values, and significantly more brightness, from the same source:

Information
Gossen Mavo-Monitor
Maximum: 307 cd/m²
Average: 284.8 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 82 %
Center on Battery: 298 cd/m²
Black: 0.26 cd/m²
Contrast: 1146:1ICC File (Datacolor Spyder3Elite)

Because of these characteristics, I have chosen the Z's 900p over the 1080p for each of the three units I have owned - after doing A/B "blind" tests (no, I didn't have my eyes closed! I just didn't know which screen was which when I chose the one I preferred.) I am in the minority among Z owners, but methinks bragging rights are involved more than image appearance. I did a thread on this, but too lazy to find it; should be just a few pages back.

Then again, at $800 for the SE (Microsoft Store - assuming you can do something useful with the $200 MS Store credit), I think I'd buy it first and if it suited me (I'm unfortunately spoiled by the Z!), I would take the $400-$1,200 saved (the Z2s are getting deeply discounted at the Sony Outlet) and, well, do something else with it! When the Z2 went to non-uprgradable RAM and no DVD drive bay to add a second SSD or HDD, Sony made it a tough choice for all but those who "demand" a 2.5 lb, 0.7" thick SV cpu + SATA III drive controller bus. Faster than s--t, but so is a Ferrari, but both have some cost and practicality issues. Think of the SE as the 'Vette in the comparo: more speed and better handling than most could need, but a little rough around the edges.

 

Is this IPS display better than any of the displays on the Z Series? Man I can't believe this.

 

If Z does not have IPS then YES!

 

nah- as lovelaptops points out it's just some panels are marginally less bright (new 1080p ones) but even in that case the SE screen's big color flaw outweighs its benefits imo. I was just making the point that its screen doesn't suck and could be great.

 

I don't doubt that the IPS has good contrast and viewing angles,

but the Z is the best TN panel I have EVER used, and I've used lots of laptops.

This is even better than the highly touted AUO B156HW01 B+RGLED series.

 

No, not really. IPS is a superior display technology than TN, but low cost IPS displays (Sony SE, Envy 15, Thinkpad X220) can be inferior to excellent TN displays in every way - except vertical viewing angles which TNs apparently can't do at any cost.

true, true.

Also true - though both of those TNs are superb.

I find it odd the way the industry/media/consumers have caught on to the fact that IPS technology can be used on LCD/laptop displays and have made the (incorrect) leap to assume that IPS display = great display > (always) TN display. On the other hand, it's equally curious as to why these low cost laptop IPS panels can't be made, for not a great deal more cost, to have reasonably wide and accurate colors.

 

IPS panels probably aren't cheaper because the average consumer doesn't know the difference. I mean look at these monitors from Korea:

(Reviewed) $400 2560x1440 IPS no-AG 90hz+ Achieva Shimian QH270 and Catleap Q270

Those are $350 27" 2650x1440 IPS panels (LG is the OEM... probably same as the ones used in the 27" Cinema display) which actually go for $200 in Korea... which is the MRSP of most TN panels. Imagine the trade agreements that go into preventing those panels from ever reaching our shores.

 

that we don't get them for these prices here
that they can be made/sold that cheaply; one can hope...

 

The main problem with the IPS panels used in the SE and the Envy is that they have trouble displaying the color red properly. It appears orange. Some people don't mind it, though. I didn't care at all; I just liked the semi-gloss screen and the excellent viewing angles.

 

I second Ichinenjuu - after a month of using the SE I can honestly say that the red hasn't bothered me at all. It's just not something I notice. What I do notice and appreciate very much on a daily basis is the resolution and how good the screen looks...

 

I totally understand your pov on this. I happen to love the color red but otherwise I'm sure if the issue wasn't blaring in the media and forums almost everyone would just be lovin what an awesomely powerful computer and gorgeous screen I got for such a stupid low bargain price.


Still, since it doesn't cost more.to make reds.and.the IB.refresh is sure to have that thing fixed, I say Sony and HP owe SE and Envy buyers a free trade or.refund. Just because you're fine.with it as is doesn't mean you aren't entitled to compensation.

Oh, and, riddle me.this: why can't SE and Envy 15 owners.recognize Macintosh Apples on their screens???!!! Answer: because they didn't waste around $800 more on an MBP 15!! Tee-hee