I have decided to get a new monitor after having my current 19" for about 8 years. I am looking at two models and lets just say they are comparable in all ways except size (price reflects the size difference). One is 22" and one is 24". Now like most I primarily surf the intertubes and such, but I also do a bit of photo editing. I do not play games on it, I do not watch TV shows on it, basically mundane computer stuff: email, surfing, occasional word and excel document, and then the photo editing.
I am wary of the 24" seeming too big, I am not 8 feet from my monitor, but I do suppose the fine work that comes with photo editing may work better on the 24". Am I overthinking this? At what point is too big for a computer monitor?
I have 2 24" monitors and a 19". The 24" are the older, taller versions, so the resolution is 1920x1200. I love the screen real estate - in my mind, there is no such thing as “too big of a screen.”
Now, that said, I’m assuming you’re talking about the newer monitors, where the resolution is the same regardless if it’s 22" or 24". If that’s the case, it matters less, but I still think I’d opt for the 24". Even at 1920x1068, 24" is not too large.
When I got my 22" I thought it was too big and RIGHT THERE IN MY FACE. But I adjusted to it and was glad I got it. When I got my 24" I thought it was too big and RIGHT THERE IN MY FACE. But I adjusted to it and was glad I got it.
Monitors can not be too big. The universe is infinite. And even if it’s not infinite, a monitor bigger than the universe is still better than a smaller one.
I would note that at some point a size increase without an increase in resolution is not much use.
I agree. For me, it’s about the resolution, but right now I have a Dell 27" monitor (at 2560 x 1440) and a Samsung 20" (at 1600 x 1200) monitor as a secondary display, and that 20" looks so tiny. Hell, the 27" is even looking small to me now.
If the 24" has a higher resolution than the 22", I would definitely go for it. If it doesn’t, I would look up at monitors that are larger and stepped up in resolution.
At work I use a pair of 30" monitors which provides a lot of real estate, but the downside I get the occasional stiff neck from moving around. To alleviate this, I spend at least half the day with the desk and monitors elevated and me standing.
I went with a 22" because I could get better quality at the same price as a 24". A lot of 24" monitors have problems with corner bleed, as manufacturers cut corners to keep the price down. The NEC I bought gets consistently great reviews and is set up for both DVI and the older style connector.
To me, it all looks good. It’s almost the same as the 30" monitor resolution (which is 2560x1600). I don’t care about the size of the display. I care about how many pixels are displayed, as I deal with files that are up to 36 megapixels in resolution. I don’t have any difficulty reading websites or Word files or anything like that, if you’re asking.
Just the other day there was a discussion on Slashdot about ebay seller/s who are selling high-quality, high-resolution 27" monitors for under $400 on eBay.
It was much cheaper and it actually measured 23" on the diagonal while the 24" measured 23.6" on the diagonal.