where have all the CRTs gone?

[dh003i]

Pardon the Paula Cole reference.

I currently have a Sony GDM-F520 CRT. I'm very happy with it, it's just astounding. 2048x1536 and just gorgeous (paired with a VP2290B LCD).

However, I figure that some day, it will start to become green, dull, and bite the dust. Thus, I'm looking for a replacement.

I remember Mitsubishi / Diamondtron had a high gamut CRT, I think it was the RDF225WG. I remember seeing it for some very large price on Froogle a while ago, but I don't see it there anymore. Does anyone know if these high gamut CRTs are still available?

[BetterSense]

I do not believe they are. Even the Sony trinitons are gone, from what I have heard. It looks like CRTs are joining the list of lost technology. Maybe if I hold onto my Sony triniton tube TV long enough, it will start appreciating.

[Marko]

The CRTs are long gone. Just like the carburetors. They did a great job in their day, but their time is over. Even the LCDs are beginning to join the list of yesterday's technologies these days, even though they weigh only 10% and use up about 15% of the power the CRTs did. They also can't kill you if you open the hatch and touch the wrong place.

[dh003i]

Too bad, LED-based LCDs are the only ones even coming close to what CRTs offered in terms of uniformity and other aspects of quality, although I don't think even those come close to the contrast-ratios CRTs could produce.

I've worked in front of a CRT for a long time, and know many other people who have too. I've never heard of anyone being killed by a CRT, and it seems like a silly thing to worry about.

[Michael Jones]

Landfills or attics.

Mike

[Jeffrey Sipress]

I have a Mitsubishi DiamondPro 2070 SB, still works great. Want it?

[dh003i]

Not yet, don't have room for two 90 pound beasts. :-)

I'm sitting in front of a modern Mac LCD right now, and I can say the 5+ year old GDM-F520 wipes the floor with it ;-)

[Aahx]

Heh.. my 12 year old NEC P1150 at home still beats my Eizo CG241W at work for contrast. Though it is starting to show signs of age at the corners. But I do agree with you that CRT's still are worth it for the quality one gets. It's too bad it is not economical for them to make them even in small batches anymore.

[paulr]

I buy a new used one whenever my old one dies. I'm now on my third La Cie electron blue. Soon, I fear, this plan is going to run out of steam ... each new old one is likely as close to death as the dead one it replaces.

I'm just hoping I can keep this juggling act going until an LCD that I like drops into my price range (or into my lap).

These are great monitors. But truly, I only use them because I'm a cheapskate with computers. LCDs, especially the newer ones, are a much more environmentally sound technology. And take up so much less desk space.

[Steven Barall]

I like my LCD much better than my old CRT. The color doesn't change, it takes up less space and there are no reflections although the new LCDs are highly reflective. My LCD also has USB ports which do come in handy. Give in and get a good LCD. The world is no longer flat but the monitors are. Good luck.

[dh003i]

Environment enshmirement, isn't really a big concern of mine; although I think its better for the environment that these things that took lots of resources and energy to make be used while useful instead of dumped ;-)

I have an LCD too, the VP2290b. It's also older, I think from 2001 or so. Its basically a re-badged IBM T221; aside from having a 9-megapixel display, it was way ahead of its time for color-accuracy, viewing angles, and other things relating to image-quality. (IBM T221's are still going for $3.5k on eBay). You can put it against the most expensive 30-inch LCD you can find (Samsung 30in XL, or maybe on of the Eizos or higher-end NECs), and it will still blow them away at least on resolution. There is no modern equivalent to these LCDs unfortunately (although if there were, it'd be priced around $10k or higher, outside of a normal person's price-range).

[paulr]

I think its better for the environment that these things that took lots of resources and energy to make be used while useful instead of dumped ;-)

Well, sure.

And it's good that current monitors use fewer resources to make and use a lot less energy to operate. Especially the newest generation that uses LED illumination, and the ones that have reduced reliance on toxic materials.

I just personally don't have the resources to jump up and get one ... at least not one of the ones whose performance I like enough for photography.

[IanMazursky]

I too feel your pain. My eyes dont do well with LCD's at all. I come form a pre press environment and really prefer CRT's.
PC Mall had a few good ones a few years ago when i had to replace my mitsubishi 2060u.
Im not sure they have any top of the line ones anymore but i saw a few ok ones online.
This is going to be bad when i have to replace my 22". I may have buy an Eizo LCD and some eye drops.

[pherold]

I wrote an article a while back to try and help our customers make the plunge into LCD. In some ways, comparing these two technologies is like apples and oranges. There are some great benefits to LCDs, so it might not be so much that they are bad as much as they different to what you're used to.

For example, much is made of the LCD being unable to reproduce shadow detail. But in fact, a halfway decent Eizo can bring you blacks as low as .14 cd/m2 - and since they can be brighter than CRT's, this expands the practical contrast ratio. In other words, you can see your shadow detail without having to be in a cave.

http://www.colorwiki.com/wiki/Monitors_Part_One

[jp]

My sony CRT died after about 8 years. I considered it a decent lifespan for a piece of computing equipment.

Now, I have a much bigger Samsung LCD display that I am happy with.

Also, if you have a bad video card (not a super high quality signal output), an LCD display will look bad, as it isn't going to hide or smooth a thing. (sorta like news anchor's makeup looking bad now that you've got a big hdtv lcd display). Make sure you have a high quality DVI link between the computer and monitor with a video card meant to handle the resolutions.

[Brian Ellis]

Last week I used my daughter's new Mac with one of the glossy screens. What an abomination that screen was. I'd take a CRT over it any day.

[Ben Hopson]

I have a Mitsubishi DiamondPro 2070 SB, still works great. Want it?

I have a DiamondPro 2070 SB also and no longer use it. I am using a mat screen 23" Apple Cinema Display that I personally find to be much better. I hope it holds up for a long time. I hate the glossy screens the new ones have.

Ben

[PenGun]

I managed to score one of the last of the great ones. A Sony 34XS955. The same as the XBR960 basically, with a Super Fine Pitch tube which was the closest to a pro Sony a mere mortal could get. Had it shipped from NY NY to BC Canada. One of the last on the continent.

No regrets. An awesome TV and amazing monitor. With the GTX 260 I can throw 1920x1080 full Monty video games that are smooth as silk. I have an advantage in deathmatch, that guy just round the corner down the corridor is much bigger on my monitor.

Sorry could not resist the CRT splurge.

[Paul Kierstead]

Sheesh, what a bunch of traditionalists. Y'all probably use those old-timey cameras with the sheet over your head and stuff too.

[Peter De Smidt]

Check out a Dell 2209WA, and S-IPS panel, $200-300, depending on current specials. Get one as a second monitor for palettes. Calibrate and profile it, and see how you like it. I use one for my main editing monitor. (I also have Sony and NEC high end monitors, but they're relegated to scanning systems. Where I used to work, we used high end Eizo monitor (and some Apples.)

Once set and profiled correctly, I find the Dell perfectly adequate for photo-editing. No, it's not quite as uniform as the much more expensive displays, and it doesn't have the largest color gamut in the world, but then it's not used for final output, i.e. I'm not hanging LCD's on my wall to show my images. For that I use prints. No monitor, no matter how expensive, will exactly match a print. Monitors get you close, and then you have to make some test prints, if you want to be picky. So you might try saving some money by not getting a super high-end display. At the worst, you have a great monitor to hold your Photoshop palettes.

[lilmsmaggie]

Those big, heavy, real estate hogging dinosaurs are long gone. Personally, I prefer a LCD to a CRT any day. I'd check what Dell has to offer, as well as maybe Apple.

As long as the monitor is properly calibrated, you should get good color and contrast.

[8x10 user]

Watch as soon as I finally obtain a led based color reference monitor they will come out with a laser version with a bigger gamut and better shadow detail then any CRT.

[paulr]

Those big, heavy, real estate hogging dinosaurs are long gone. Personally, I prefer a LCD to a CRT any day.

It's still too early to generalize. The very best LCDs available today (like the top end Eizos) I think are better in every way than any CRTs. They also cost a fortune.

I still think the very best CRTs (at least the ones that still work) are better than middle of the road LCDs. This is looking solely at image quality and color accuracy. LCDs are certainly better in terms of energy use, desk real estate, longevity, stability, sexiness, etc. etc.

My opinions are based on years of using Apple and Dell LCDs at work, and coming home to LaCie or Sony CRTs. Those LCDs were great for design work, but not as good for critical photo work.

[domaz]

They also can't kill you if you open the hatch and touch the wrong place.

And LCDs can kill you if you open it up and start eating the wrong component..Seriously the thing I miss most about CRTs is that they can truly change screen resolutions (without gross scaling) and can go to very high resolutions relative to there size. Other than that LCDs are better in every other category.

[dh003i]

The best LCDs still don't compare with CRTs in terms of black levels.

[erie patsellis]

The same holds true in the home theater arena, if you want accurate black levels and real resolution, CRT projectors are the only way to go.

[8x10 user]

My friend told me about a demonstration he saw of the upcoming laser technology. They compared it to the best LCD in total darkness. It was easy to see that the blackest setting on LCD still put out a lot of light while the Laser system actually produced a black black. Its too bad though... I was following up with him about laser technology and he said that it didn't scale down too well and that it was unlikely that there would be any laser based monitors in the near future.


http://www.mitsubishi-tv.com/laser.html