Screen competition: Sony Z wins hands down amoung 14 competitors

just found this pic from a japanese website. these are newly released Centrino 2 laptops from 14 companies. Clearly Sony's Z series has the best screen of all.

 

I'm not sure you can make that judgement based on this picture. For example, are all the screens on the same brightness settings, and are we saying that 'brightest = best' or what?

Sometimes, e.g. in a dimly lit meeting room, you want to be able to dial the brightness right down (below the minimum setting for many recent laptops), so you don't disturb others nearby. Brightness isn't always best.

Also, from the picture there looks to be light leakage from the top and bottom of the screen on the Sony, or is that just me?

 

If judged by brightness, the Sony definitely seems to win, however,a few problems with that. The picture's taken off centered, plus the light from the back doesn't help matters.

 

"We saw various videos and demos playing on the Z Series and compared to the TZ Series before it, the TZ looked washed out, faded and unrealistic. "

http://crave.cnet.co.uk/laptops/0,39029450,49298185-1,00.htm

I have seen the screen of the TZ and is really incredible, the best screen I've ever seen. If the Z is better than this I have no words...

 

In my ownership/usage of 6+ laptops, I was pleased with Toshiba, HP, IBM, and Sony screens. In fact, most of the laptops I've encountered have had good screens. So I guess my question is, who ships poor quality screens?

 

I think every manufacturer sometimes does. Even Sony.

For example: I'm not impressed by the screens on NR or CR.

 

no no no, sony's screen is the best. It's the fact! No apple, no HP or any other guys out there is better than Sony. You gotta compare a new one to a new one not a new one with an old Sony.

 

this is kind of subjective... first of all not all screens are the same for the same brand...

Personally, I think HiColor FZ Sony & Fujitsu CrystalView are the brightest and the best looking screens I've ever encountered. I've also had Dell 1530 with LG WXGA+ screen and it was not bad. My wife has IBM x61 with a horrible screen and ALL HP DV models (including new ones that are non LED) are so-so. Acer 5920G that I owned had an awful screen.

With that said I will take either Sony or Fujitsu screens any day over the competition

 

Clevo/Sager has screen quality comparable to Sony.
According to reviews, screen quality and brightness is excellent...

 

obviously you haven't seen Fujitsu outdoor screens

 

Which one do you mean?

 

I do see it a bit as well, however I think that may well be the result of the jpg-format of the image

 

Fujitsu CrystalView 450 nits. They are even better then Sony... too bad specs are not as good, but if you want great screen for work and outdoor use, there is no match to CrystalView in Fujitsu, even Sony is lacking.

http://store.shopfujitsu.com/fpc/Ecommerce/productoverview.do?type=NB&pgid=Notebooks#Thin and Light

 

Thanks for the link. I'm totally new to Fujitsu. I am looking but I can't find it. What laptop comes with this screen?

 

Mostly all of them have it as an option. Crystal View screen is limited to WXGA resolution. Here is E8410 you can configure either with WXGA Crystal View (450nits) or regular WSXGA (200 nits)

http://configtool.fujitsupc.com/ser...eId=first&CPN=A9A1D1E507851031&lino=&GPID=101

I had Fujitsu 13" XGA Crystal View 2-3 years ago and it was an awesome screen

 

I'm still looking for the 450nits but can't find it. I mean where does it say 450nits?

 

This is a bit weird. The way the 2 LCDs screens are shot, it would always look like the one on the side has washed out colors due to the angle.

The motherboard photo is also incorrect. Either they don't know what they are talking about or they were lied that the mobo on the left (smaller one) is the Z and the one 'huge' on the right is the TZ.

I've opened my TZ several times and the mobo looks like this (the smaller mobo):


Either way, it is silly to compare those two, since they are for completely different markets.

 

http://configtool.fujitsupc.com/ser...eId=first&CPN=A6L1F1E80AG71012&lino=&GPID=101

 

Ah there it is. Too bad i can't find any reviews of the screen where they measure the birghtness. I'd like to know how they rate compared to TZ, not by specifications but in real life.

 

any link to the article?

 

Clearly Sony's Z series has the smallest screen of all.


hee-hee...

 

klas, how much better was Sony's HiColor screen vs. the m1530's WXGA+ screen?

 

I can give some insight to this from having the FZ right next to my Dell D630. The Hi-color screens utilizing CCFL as backlight are very nice, and make just about any other notebook screen look washed-out color wise (the screens were about equally as sharp). If you look at Notebookcheck.com or Notebookjournal.de, you'll see the Hi-color screens also exceed 300 nits brightness and have a contrast ratio of 500:1 or greater.

Just about every CCFL laptop screen out there has a 45-50% NTSC gamut. The gamut on the FZ Hi-color screen is 90%. While colors on the FZ are rich and vibrant, this comes at a cost: color accuracy. Awkwardly speaking, the FZ screen can 'choose' from a very wide range of colors, but it is very poor at choosing the right color. This is due to the fact that the 6-bit LVDS interface, which every notebook uses (including IBM's FlexView), must dither down the wide color gamut to fit within the 6-bit pipeline. This is why you see 'Deep Color' advertised on wide-color displays capable of HDMI 1.3. HDMI 1.3 allows for a 12-bit wide pipeline for color - in essence allowing a wide color gamut while still keeping color accuracy.

 

Keep in mind though that Dell has several brands of LCD screens they use in 1530. Even if you order WXGA+ it can be different brands, as far as I know. I did read good things about the LG one.

 

Ahh, true. Some of the screens had a "grainy" issue.

 

yes and as I mentioned it somewhere, I had LG WXGA+ which was excellent, Sony HiColor was more vibrant in comparison though.

 

It's true that with Dell it's a bit of a crap shoot -- maybe you'll get a great screen, maybe you won't -- depending on which manufacturer made your particular screen.

Does Sony have any inconsistencies like that within the same laptop model? Or do the same laptop model screens all come from the same manufacturer?

 

I've never heard or read any reports of Sony having inconsistencies like that.

 

Excellent. Good to know.

At least that way if we spend $100 extra for XBRITE-HiColor (aka: FW) we can be fairly certain that it will be a great looking screen.

Can't say that about the Dell m1530 -- unfortunately.

 

Fascinating. Apparently, the FW High Color screen corrects some of these issues with FZ screen so it should look fabulous. As an avid photographer with high end Canon gear and a Blu-Ray fan, I can't wait to see how this screen performs (I have an FW on order).

 

I was thinking along the same lines since I want my 40D shots to look good!

 

The highlight of this all-new design is the unique-to-Sony 16.4-inch LCD. If a 15.4-inch desktop replacement has you wishing for more screen real estate but a 17-inch (or larger) luggable sacrifices too much in the way of portability, the VAIO FW Series is the answer to your prayers. The 16.4-inch screen, which has an aspect ratio of 16:9 instead of 16:10 (as seen on most widescreens) makes it seem squatter compared to other notebooks of its ilk, but in daily use, you’ll hardly notice the difference. It gives you an uncramped view while still allowing the system to weigh a reasonably portable 6.7 pounds.

Image quality from the 1600 x 900 panel is stunning. It employs Sony’s Xbrite-HiColor technology, which claims a higher brightness and wider color gamut than run-of-the-mill LCDs, and it shows. Watching the Blu-ray edition of Live Free or Die Hard (via the preloaded InterVideo WinDVD BD player) was a pleasure on this screen, which exhibited natural colors, good details in shadow areas, and very good motion reproduction.

In Windows apps, colors pop, and we found ourselves turning down the screen brightness to work comfortably. So if your viewing environment has a lot of windows or overhead fluorescents, this panel has the candle power to overcome it. The screen also boasts wide viewing angles, which makes the VAIO FW a good machine for multiple viewers to gather around.

-- from the review of the FW
http://www.laptopmag.com/review/laptops/sony-vaio-vgn-fw198u-h.aspx?page=1

 

Nice camera. I've got a 5D. Love that Canon PQ!!

 

Bahhh!

 

Do you know where you heard this? As far as screen improvements, keep these details in mind:

1. Most notebook panels are tn type (twisted nematic). TN panels suffer from poor viewing angles and color shift. Because most panels are TN you have #2.

2. All tn notebook panels are 6-bit, and thus limited to 262,000 colors, excluding dithering. Some use more advanced Frame Rate Control (FRC) to improve the color range close to a true 8-bit panel, but it's not perfect.

If the FW screen is improved over the FZ, it may be in the color dithering method. The FZ had poor dithering; not surpised though as 6-bit+basic dithering+wide gamut = accuracy issues. Now Sony did acquire IDTech in 2005 (one of the many companies who made the 6-bit IPS notebook panels), so it's possible their new series (think FW Hi-color and Z DuraBright) utilizes a non-tn screen technology (MVA/PVA/IPS). Although I believe Sony sources most of their panels from Panasonic - I'll have to track that down.

 

If the FW has an IPS panel, I'm sold. My Dell 20" has an S-IPS panel... and it's just amazing.

 

I have no first hand technical knowledge of the improvments. However, my nephew who sells notebooks at Best Buy was told by Sony rep a few weeks ago that the new FW screen is gonna be something special and Sony was making a big deal out of it. And then 2 days ago a Sony store employee told me his regional guy went into a long techical diatribe about the new screen...he said it was like a hybrid CCFL-LED display or something. Who knows but those are 2 independent accounts that the display is something significant and different. Wish I could be more detailed but that's what you get from sales guys I guess.

 

CCFL+LED sounds highly unlikely, given the nature of the two technologies. All the press I've seen has put focus on the Z's DuraBrite screen. The FW, like the Z, does claim 100% NTSC, it just does so with CCFL. FZ's Hi-color was 90%. I'll peruse the Sony Japan site some more and see if I don't encounter anything else.

 

Please keep us posted. Inquiring minds want to know.

 

No other special mention about the FW screen, beyond 100% NTSC. You can check it out yourself:

http://www.jp.sonystyle.com/Style-a/Product/Fw/index.html

But regardless, if you go to a Sony Style store and simply tilt the screen up and down, checking for grayscale color shift, that will give you a quick indication of whether or not it is a tn panel.

 

I just bought a 70-200 IS USM F/2.8 for my 40D! Killer Lens !!!

 

http://club.vaio.sony.co.uk/clubvaio/gb/en/vaio10/

Check out this video. In the 2nd half you can see a FW and a Z next to some older series. The image quality difference seems huge. Colors look dull on the older VAIOs.

 

Yes it is... although I stuck to the smaller/lighter f/4 myself.

 

Yikes!! That was as much as the FW I'm getting. But agree, it's a fantastic lens. I had one but it was too heavy and never got any use!!