goldstin@shire (Jonathan Goldstine) (08/03/89)
I recently posted a request for information about the 16" Nanao 9070S
monitor. Responses are summarized below, but while gathering this
information, I discovered that the Mitsubishi Diamond Scan 16L
(HL6605TK) is in the same general price range. It does cost slightly
more and has higher specs (up to 1280x1024 at 64kHz vs. 1024x768 at
50kHz), but what I would really like to know is whether it is worth
the extra money when used at VGA, 800x600, and 1024x768 resolutions.
Has anyone seen or heard about the Mitsubishi 16L? Any opinions, even
second hand, would be appreciated. I will post a summary of e-mail
responses if I receive any.
Here is some additional information. I received three responses to my
request for information about the Nanao 9070S.
One respondent reported using the monitor at work and said that it is
nice to look at (good resolution, good linearity, good colors) and
that "it is a bit depressing to get home and have to use a smaller
multisync monitor. You get used to the larger display very quickly."
He included a warning, however, that the monitor was not synching
properly at the 800x600 mode (as opposed to 1024x768) with Orchid
Prodesigner boards. (Nanao informs me that there is indeed an
incompatibility with that particular board but that it can be fixed by
fooling around with some wires at the back of the monitor.)
Another respondent reported working with the Nanao 9070S, the Sony
HG1304 (this is Sony's new monitor), and the NEC 3D. He dismissed
that NEC from discussion since it won't support 1024x768 without
interlacing, and commented that good high-frequency (and admittedly
expensive) monitors used to have video amplifier bandwidths 1.5 or
even 2 times that in the input video, but that nowadays monitors were
only about 1 to 1, so he did not feel that either the Nanao or the
Sony really qualify as 1024x768 monitors. "If I had to choose though,
I'd go for the Nanao." He mentioned, however, that the Nanao comes
with "an adapter from AMP to convert DD15 to DD9. The converter had a
filter inside it to reduce/eliminate signals beyond about 35Mhz.
[This was inserted to attain an FCC B rating.] ... this makes the
video of 1024x768 non-interlaced (~65Mhz) look rather poor. Bypassing
the filter inside the converter substantially improves the video.
Taking advantage of the BNC connectors on the back of the Nanao could
also lead to improved video quality, but I haven't tried this myself."
The third respondent was running AutoCad with a Genoa VGA card; he was
"very happy with both the quality and the size of the display."
Some more details about my request for information about Mitsubishi: I
don't really understand their product line. Their current ad in
various computer magazines mention three 14" EGA or VGA monitors
(XC1410C, XC1430C, XC1429C), and four 14"-to-20" multisynching
"Diamond Scan" monitors (AUM1381A, HA3905ADK, HL6605TK, HL6905TK).
However, the review of 14" VGA monitors in the July issue of Personal
Computing gave a "top rating" to the Zenith flat-screen monitor (VGA
only) and to a different Mitsubishi, the FA3415 (850x600 resolution),
which it praised very strongly, criticizing only Mitsubishi's
technical support. And it even mentioned a 1024x768 version of the
monitor, model FA3425L9. Since these monitors have .28mm dot pitch
rather than the .31 dot pitch of Mitsubishi's other monitors, I do not
know that any of the review's comments would apply to the other
Mitsubishi's except for the criticism of the tech support. To make
things even more confusing, I have not seen any mail order ad for
either of the Mitsubishi FA models, but I have seen an ad for still
another model (FG660K), a 16" model with the same resolution as the
HL6605TK that I am asking about, but $200 more expensive. As you can
see, I am thoroughly confused about the Mitsubishi product line.
Finally, the best mail order prices that I have seen listed for the
Nanao 9070S and the Mitsubishi HL6605TK are $949 (+3% for credit
cards) from HSI in San Jose and $1149 from Telemart in Phoenix,
respectively. Sightings of lower prices or experiences with either
mail order house would be appreciated.
Mailing addresses: goldstin@psuvaxs.bitnet
goldstin@shire.uucp
goldstin@shire.cs.psu.edu