Articles: Monitors

Bookmark and Share

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

By default, the monitor’s brightness and contrast are set at 100% and 75%, respectively. To achieve a 100nit brightness of white I lowered them both to 55%. Color gradients are reproduced perfectly at any settings.

The gamma curves look neat at the default settings, except for the small bend in the top right of the graph. This bend disappears on your lowering the contrast setting by just a few percent in the monitor’s menu. The monitor reproduces all color tones at any settings that are not higher than the factory ones.

The color temperature is set up not very accurately, but satisfactorily. White is a little too warm. However, this won’t be a serious problem for most of users.

My measurements show that there is no RTC in the SyncMaster 205BW. It uses a rather fast (for its class), yet quite ordinary TN+Film matrix. The average response time on gray-to-gray transitions is 13.3 milliseconds, with a maximum of 23.8 milliseconds. The full response time on a black-white-black transition is 7.3 milliseconds. So, the 205BW’s matrix is generally good, but cannot match the speed of modern models with response time compensation.

The contrast ratio isn’t poor, but looks somewhat disappointing after the results of the 203B and 204B.

So, the SyncMaster 205BW is the last model in the new series of inexpensive 20” monitors from Samsung that consists of three models which are almost identical in their characteristics but differ in their native resolution and screen aspect ratio. To my mind, it’s good to have an opportunity to choose the resolution you need while the other parameters would be the same.

The 205BW itself is quite a good product for its class. It is accurately set up and neatly assembled. Its parameters are going to satisfy a majority of office and not-very-demanding home users. The 205BW competes with the BenQ FP202W and the NEC LCD2070WNX and beats them both. It is also considerably cheaper than the latter. The FP202W costs about the same money, but is worse in terms of ergonomics and image quality.

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


Comments currently: 11
Discussion started: 12/15/15 08:14:16 PM
Latest comment: 09/20/16 03:49:44 PM

View comments

Add your Comment