Subjective Evaluation
As usual, we spent some time using the display both before and after calibration. Many users don't have access to color calibration tools, while for imaging professionals some form of hardware calibration is pretty much required. We will start with our subjective evaluation before getting to the actual quantitative results.
A funny thing happened during our testing of the HP w2207. We hooked it up to a laptop, since that was most convenient - a laptop we hadn't used with previous LCDs. Our initial impressions of the w2207 were, frankly, horrible! Colors were off, text didn't appear as clear as it should, and even after calibration we felt that the display really had nothing good to offer compared to previous LCDs that we've used. Using a VGA connection from the laptop was even worse. However, we noticed some distortion that was being caused by the laptop at that point, so we decided to go back and retest using a different laptop.
We've always felt that DVI connections are all basically the same - they're digital, so there shouldn't be any concern of signal degradation, right? That's the theory anyway. In practice, all we can say for certain is that the display outputs on the ASUS G2P laptop we were initially using apparently have serious problems. The difference between what the display looked like with that laptop and what it looked like when attached to a different laptop was astonishing! So, if you have an LCD and image quality/clarity isn't what you would expect (particularly with a DVI connection), you might want to try hooking it up to a different graphics card or computer before determining that the problem lies with the LCD.
Once things were running properly, we were quite happy with the w2207. Brightness, colors, contrast, and response times were all what we would expect to see in a modern LCD - particularly in a 22" LCD that costs almost 50% more than competing 22" models. Black levels and contrast ratios in particular are better than what we've seen in other LCDs. Was the LCD significantly better overall? Not to the point that we would immediately recommend it over competing offerings, but the construction of the stand and main panel is clearly an order of magnitude better than the cheap plastic used on the Acer AL2216W. Unfortunately, the propensity for dust and fingerprints to collect on the surface of the monitor was definitely a strike against it.
Another potential concern we noticed is that the ability of the display to scale non-native resolutions up to 1680x1050 wasn't all that great. Lower resolutions fared a bit better, but 1440x900 in particular looked very poor. We of course recommend that anyone using an LCD try to run at the native resolution if at all possible; for certain content (gaming or movies) the poor scaling was not as noticeable, but surfing the web or working in office applications is not something we would want to do at anything other than 1680x1050. Luckily, that shouldn't be a problem for any computer built in the past five years.
Except where noted, the remaining tests were run after calibrating the displays using Monaco Optix XR, both the professional version of the software as well as an XR (DTP-94) colorimeter. In some of the tests calibration can have a dramatic impact on the result, but viewing angles and response times remain largely unchanged. We also performed testing with ColorEyes Display Pro, although the overall results were better when using Monaco Optix XR - more on this in a moment.
As usual, we spent some time using the display both before and after calibration. Many users don't have access to color calibration tools, while for imaging professionals some form of hardware calibration is pretty much required. We will start with our subjective evaluation before getting to the actual quantitative results.
A funny thing happened during our testing of the HP w2207. We hooked it up to a laptop, since that was most convenient - a laptop we hadn't used with previous LCDs. Our initial impressions of the w2207 were, frankly, horrible! Colors were off, text didn't appear as clear as it should, and even after calibration we felt that the display really had nothing good to offer compared to previous LCDs that we've used. Using a VGA connection from the laptop was even worse. However, we noticed some distortion that was being caused by the laptop at that point, so we decided to go back and retest using a different laptop.
We've always felt that DVI connections are all basically the same - they're digital, so there shouldn't be any concern of signal degradation, right? That's the theory anyway. In practice, all we can say for certain is that the display outputs on the ASUS G2P laptop we were initially using apparently have serious problems. The difference between what the display looked like with that laptop and what it looked like when attached to a different laptop was astonishing! So, if you have an LCD and image quality/clarity isn't what you would expect (particularly with a DVI connection), you might want to try hooking it up to a different graphics card or computer before determining that the problem lies with the LCD.
Once things were running properly, we were quite happy with the w2207. Brightness, colors, contrast, and response times were all what we would expect to see in a modern LCD - particularly in a 22" LCD that costs almost 50% more than competing 22" models. Black levels and contrast ratios in particular are better than what we've seen in other LCDs. Was the LCD significantly better overall? Not to the point that we would immediately recommend it over competing offerings, but the construction of the stand and main panel is clearly an order of magnitude better than the cheap plastic used on the Acer AL2216W. Unfortunately, the propensity for dust and fingerprints to collect on the surface of the monitor was definitely a strike against it.
Another potential concern we noticed is that the ability of the display to scale non-native resolutions up to 1680x1050 wasn't all that great. Lower resolutions fared a bit better, but 1440x900 in particular looked very poor. We of course recommend that anyone using an LCD try to run at the native resolution if at all possible; for certain content (gaming or movies) the poor scaling was not as noticeable, but surfing the web or working in office applications is not something we would want to do at anything other than 1680x1050. Luckily, that shouldn't be a problem for any computer built in the past five years.
Except where noted, the remaining tests were run after calibrating the displays using Monaco Optix XR, both the professional version of the software as well as an XR (DTP-94) colorimeter. In some of the tests calibration can have a dramatic impact on the result, but viewing angles and response times remain largely unchanged. We also performed testing with ColorEyes Display Pro, although the overall results were better when using Monaco Optix XR - more on this in a moment.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
43 Comments
View All Comments
Dantzig - Thursday, August 2, 2007 - link
I recently picked one of these up for $360 - 10% off coupon + tax at Circuit City. The final price was about $340 which I feel is very competitive when compared to the Samsung 226BW/CW. I could have purchased a 226BW for slightly less and had to wait for it to be shipped and played the panel lottery or spent more for the 226CW which doesn't have a high gloss screen and has an annoying silver bar on the bottom of the display frame.It's just simply a beautiful monitor. I switched my home monitor from a Dell 2005FPW with an S-IPS panel to the HP and took the Dell to work. While I know that the HP uses a 6-bit panel, the colors look better to me than those of the 2005FPW. The different in response time is definitely noticeable while gaming and moving mouse pointers quickly around the screen.
If you're in the market for a 22" widescreen display with a TN panel, this is the one to get.
zemane - Wednesday, August 1, 2007 - link
Isn't 4:3 the standard aspect ratio?
JarredWalton - Thursday, August 2, 2007 - link
Yes, for everything but your typical 1280x1024 (5:4) 19" LCDs. There are some 4:3 19" displays (1400x1050 resolution), but most are 5:4.Bonesdad - Wednesday, August 1, 2007 - link
Consider the Acer AL2051W if you want to do a MVA panel review. I just bought one for $190 on Newegg and am very pleased so far. Fantastic viewing angle, stated at 176 degrees and from the looks of it, its not far off. A bit of backlight bleeding, but not out of the ordinary. This is an excellent panel for the price.Pirks - Wednesday, August 1, 2007 - link
there are two nice 28" monitors at newegg, see models aboveboth are about $650 which is dirt cheap for 28"
could you guys do a review of one of those, or even both?
I'm sure EVERYBODY would be interested!
these two seem like a huge hit, they just BLOW dell's 27" panels
JarredWalton - Wednesday, August 1, 2007 - link
I asked for one from ViewSonic at one point. I don't recall why we didn't get one - we've been working on getting a ViewSonic contact. As far as quality, a few people are saying that they use a TN panel, so they certainly wouldn't be as good as stuff like the 27" Dell (which uses PVA). That would probably account for the lower price as well -- at least somewhat.CSMR - Wednesday, August 1, 2007 - link
Great to have the detailed light/dark/contrast measurements at different brightness settings. Good work.augiem - Wednesday, August 1, 2007 - link
Thank you so much for including viewing angle pictures! I can't tell you how important this aspect of a monitor is to me. Doing graphics work, TN panels are simply unusable because of the vertical viewing angle issues. This is the first site I've seen do photographic comparisons and it's AWESOME! :)zero2dash - Wednesday, August 1, 2007 - link
We bought this w2207 a few weeks ago to replace 2 aging 21" Trinitron CRTs...one that has a "too bright" problem (despite brightness being 0) and another in which the red gun is going out (causing the monitor to have 'red seizures').This monitor is great.
Originally I was going to get a 226BW but I didn't want to bother with getting one panel over another (ie trying to find an S panel but getting a C instead). The glossy coating on the w2207 makes it even better, even though (as mentioned) it's a PITA to keep it clean and clean it when it's dirty/dusty. Seems like it takes 5 minutes to completely clean the screen with a damp cloth and have it come out clean but without any dust at the same time.
That being said...I highly recommend this monitor. When we bought ours, it was on sale for $339 at Sears; a week later, it was down to $249 (and I called and got the $90 credit). Wish I would've had the money then to buy a 2nd for that price. =)
JarredWalton - Wednesday, August 1, 2007 - link
If you could find this on sale for $250, it would definitely be a no-brainer. At current prices, you'll have to think about it a bit more. It may very well be the best 22" monitor on the market, but I would take a 24" Gateway over it (even with the higher cost).