Articles: Monitors

Bookmark and Share

Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 ]

This is the standard menu of inexpensive monitors from Acer. It is quite easy to use but doesn’t offer any unusual or remarkable options.

The monitor has 100% brightness and 80% contrast by default. To achieve a 100nit brightness of white I reduced the contrast setting to 33% and the brightness setting to 32%. The monitor’s brightness is controlled by means of pulse-width modulation of the power of the backlight lamps at a frequency of 270Hz.

Color gradients are reproduced well enough at any brightness/contrast settings. There are minor defects, which won’t be a problem at regular use.

The viewing angles aren’t very good because it is a TN+Film matrix. Any deflection of your head upwards or downwards results in a considerable change in the brightness of the screen (fortunately, this technology already provides wide enough horizontal viewing angles as to provoke no complaints about them).

The gamma curves look surprisingly good for such an inexpensive model. There is a certain misbalance between the different colors, but there are no serious defects. The curves keep their shape at the reduced brightness/contrast: the monitor reproduces all the color tones it is expected to.

The AL2017 also features a surprisingly good color temperature setup: there is a very small difference between the levels of gray. There are unfortunately only two color temperature modes, except for the user-defined mode: Warm (it yields a color temperature of about 6500K which is usually called Normal rather than Warm in most other monitors) and Cold (about 9000K). I think the first mode will suit a majority of users.

The AL2017 does well in this test in comparison with other RTC-less models. Its response time is 25 milliseconds at the maximum while you can find monitors with a max response of 30 or even 35 milliseconds. On the other hand, it is no competitor to monitors with RTC which are many times faster than the AL2017.

The monitor’s contrast ratio is average (as TN+Film matrixes go), never reaching 300:1.

So, the only exceptional thing about the AL2017 is its somewhat unusual matrix that has a native resolution of 1400x1050 pixels and a diagonal of 20”. Otherwise, this monitor doesn’t have any remarkable features whatsoever. The AL2017 is set up very neatly (I’d even say unexpectedly neatly for its price), but has an average contrast ratio and a slow matrix. The lack of a DVI interface and the flimsy stand are disappointing, too. However, this monitor may seem interesting to undemanding users as an inexpensive model for home or office.

Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 ]


Comments currently: 9
Discussion started: 12/15/15 08:14:24 PM
Latest comment: 12/21/15 11:40:03 AM

View comments

Add your Comment