Thinkpads Forum

w1k0 wrote:So I have to order T61 with WSXGA+ display (assuming that all WSXGA+ displays supplied by Lenovo were equally good).

evening_hunger wrote:Plus, if that joint is in Wroclaw, you could drop a link:)

w1k0 wrote:I run Linux on all my ThinkPads.

I tested my T61 using two programs – hwinfo and hardinfo – but none of them do not seem to provide the information about the producer of the display.

# apt-cache search read-edid              
read-edid - hardware information-gathering tool for VESA PnP monitors
[root]~ # get-edid --help
get-edid, from read-edid 3.0.1. Licensed under the GPL.
Current version by Matthew Kern <pyrophobicman@gmail.com>
Previous work by John Fremlin <vii@users.sourceforge.net>
and others (See AUTHORS).

Usage:
 -b BUS, --bus BUS      Only scan the i2c bus BUS.
 -c, --classiconly      Do not check the i2c bus for an EDID
 -h, --help             Display this help
 -i, --i2conly          Do not check for an EDID over VBE
 -m NUM, --monitor NUM  For VBE only - some lame attempt at selecting monitors.
 -q, --quiet            Do not output anything over stderr (messages, essentially)

For help, go to <http://polypux.org/projects/read-edid/> or
email <pyrophobicman@gmail.com>. 

# get-edid -q
Int&#MTH?@0b°2@@À0äþ L960 Graphics Chip Accelerated VGA BIOSÿÿÿÿÿÿ      åx
           þBOE HYDIS
   þHV150UX1-101

# get-edid -q
Intel(r) 82945GM Chipset Family Graphics Chip Accelerated VGA BIOS

# get-edid -q
Intel(r)Crestline Graphics Chip Accelerated VGA BIOS������$M�(�!x
���XU�($PT/��`@ 0K�E'��`@ 0K��
2�
(2
    �LP154W02-TL06�

LG.Philips LCD LP154W02-TL06
Brightness : 200 cd/m² (Typ.)
Contrast Ratio : 500:1 (Typ.)
Viewing Angle : 65/65/50/50 (Typ.)(CR≥10) (L/R/U/D)

w1k0 wrote: Conclusion

As a result I will buy ThinkPad T520 with HD+ 1600×900.

ajkula66 wrote:An incorrect presumption.

Samsung WSXGA+ LCD is notably worse than its LG counterpart, although the difference is not as striking as it is between the WUXGA panels.

w1k0 wrote:
So what happened:

1. The information from panelook.com is not reliable?

2. My assumption that slightly better brightness, slightly worse contrast, and the same view angles in the case of LP154W02-TL06 in my T61 and LP156WD1-TLB2 in T520 should produce a similar result is wrong?

3. I overlooked some crucial factor when I compared different panels to my LP154W02-TL06?

But the main drawback of most current LED backlight technologies is the narrower spectral range of the light they emit when compared to WCG (Wide Colour Gamut) CCFL backlights. This was a key reason for some manufacturers being slow to drop CCFL backlighting on some of their ‘professional’ models – almost exclusively to create wider colour gamuts necessary for image processing and viewing extended colours gamuts such as Adobe RGB.

Unlike these RGB triad designs, most modern LED backlight solutions involve placing a border (or in some case clusters) of ‘white’ LEDs behind or at the side of the LCD matrix, often near the edges and using a diffuser to spread the light across the screen. [...] Early iterations of the technology (those circa 2009-10) tended to suffer from an obvious and uncorrectable blue bias. As manufacturers became more familiar with the technology and were able to tweak the backlights, phosphor coatings and the LCD panels this tint became more workable. Despite these advances many WLED backlights used in modern monitors still suffer from certain imbalances when it comes to the spectrum of light they produce.

Provided the filters are working as intended (i.e. the monitor is properly calibrated) your typical WLED-backlit monitor will be able to make good use of the strong ‘pure blue’ spectral component to produce strong ‘pure blue’ colours. The red and green components (originating from the yellow light of the YAG phosphor coating) are relatively weak. These gaps in spectral energy and relative lack of intensity for wavelengths other than 450nm restrict the colour gamut of a typical LED-backlit monitor to roughly the sRGB colour space.
Looking at the colour reproduction in greater detail you will also find that the ‘pure blue’ component can become overpowering. When you mix this with the relatively diminutive yellow component (greens and reds) there will be some weaknesses evident. This is particularly true for shades that are mostly blue but contain a slight mixture of the other colours; it may seem counter-intuitive but most WLED-backlit monitors are not very good at displaying certain shades of blue!

For CCFL backlights a wide variety of phosphors can be used including ones that produce a wide colour gamut (WCG-CCFL).

Samsung, one of the key modern panel manufacturers, has really embraced WLED backlighting and was the first panel manufacturer to adopt it universally for all new models. They launched a number of ‘Premium’ models in their Series 7, Series 8 and Series 9 screens which broke some of the traditional technological boundaries. These models include the (T/S)(23/27)(A750/950), (S24/27)A850 and the S27B970D. They make use of improved phosphors with enhanced spectral qualities to increase energy in the ‘yellow’ region. This is particularly true for the high-end PLS models which show significant improvement in this area. These enhanced phosphors improve the coverage in the red and green sections of the gamut but also expand the range of blue shades that can be produced.

Although it can be nice from some perspectives to reach a bit beyond sRGB, as it allows slightly greater vibrancy, you would really want to reach the next ‘standard’ of gamut for colour-critical work and to really unlock vibrancy potential. This is exactly what panel manufacturers are now aiming to do, with LG Display starting to integrate a modified type of WLED backlight called GB-LED (also known as GB-R LED or GB-r LED). Rather than using a blue diode coated in yellow phosphor, the backlights combine blue and green diodes with a red phosphor. As illustrated below, this creates strong and distinct spectral peaks for blue, green and red rather than giving a blue peak and broad ‘yellow’ region. This technology is currently being implemented in LG AH-IPS (‘Advanced High-performance In-Plane Switching’) panels such as the 24” LM240WU9, 27” LM270WQ3 and 30” LM270WQ6 and also several Samsung PLS (Plane to Line Switching) panels. These are designed to provide 99% Adobe RGB coverage and 104% NTSC coverage which actually exceeds the 98% Adobe RGB and 102% NTSC typical of WCG-CCFLs.

When LED backlighting first took off manufacturers were all too keen to promote what were essentially misleading or even fabricated performance benefits. As the technology became adopted quite broadly it became all too clear that the situation wasn’t a ‘win-win’ in favour of the sender ‘white LED’ (WLED) backlight. In some areas, particularly colour gamut coverage, CCFLs could offer significant and clearly visible advantages.

ajkula66 wrote:

w1k0 wrote:3. I overlooked some crucial factor when I compared different panels to my LP154W02-TL06?

No, not really. But comparing any CCFL panel to a LED one is a difficult task.

If you're looking for a T/W 510/520, just make sure that it sports a FHD (1920x1080) LCD and you'll be getting the best pick of the litter.

1680×1050 LG.Philips LCD LP154W02-TL06
Brightness : 200 cd/m² (Typ.) 
Contrast Ratio : 500:1 (Typ.)  
Viewing Angle : 65/65/50/50 (Typ.)(CR≥10) (L/R/U/D) 
Lamp Type : 1 pcs CCFL Without Driver

1920×1080 AUO B156HW01 V4
Brightness : 270 cd/m² (Typ.) 
Contrast Ratio : 400:1 (Typ.)  
Viewing Angle : 70/70/60/60 (Typ.)(CR≥10) (L/R/U/D) 
Lamp Type : WLED Embedded (LED Driver)

n2ri wrote:when you say 'order a T61" you do realize Lenovo discontinued them long ago right?

n2ri wrote:also whyare you stuck on T series models? the later W series had way better features offered like W500 and W520 (which had the best display ever even better than W701. I own a very nice T61 and got a W500 for backup which is way better than the T61 series in many ways. now looking at W520 for same reasons over the W500

1680×1050 SAMSUNG LTN154P3-L02
Brightness : 180 cd/m² (Typ.) 
Contrast Ratio : 300:1 (Typ.)  
Viewing Angle : 65/65/50/50 (Typ.)(CR≥10) (L/R/U/D) 
Lamp Type : 1 pcs CCFL Without Driver

1680×1050 LG.Philips LCD LP154W02-TL10
Brightness : 200 cd/m² (Typ.) 
Contrast Ratio : 500:1 (Typ.)  
Viewing Angle : 65/65/50/50 (Typ.)(CR≥10) (L/R/U/D) 
Lamp Type : 1 pcs CCFL Without Driver

w1k0 wrote:I loved 4:3 screens but now they are the past.

So it seems to me that the only problem caused by 16:9 1920×1080 screen may be in my case the tiny text displayed by different programs.

ajkula66 wrote:

w1k0 wrote:I loved 4:3 screens but now they are the past.

For some of us they'll never be. This post was created on a 4:3 R61 with a Hydis LED UXGA panel.

ajkula66 wrote:If you're comfortable with your current 1680x1050 panel, you'll likely be OK with 1920x1080. The only way to find out is to actually use one...

w1k0 wrote: It is not. In the comparison to the AMOLED screens that CCFL screen is merely pretty good. On the other hand that pretty good screen is much better than mediocre LED screens in all my X60s.

RealBlackStuff wrote:I would buy some 15.4" T61 with Intel graphics and whatever screen (even broken) it comes with.
Then I would look on eBay (or elsewhere) for these screens from Sharp/Dell: (LQ154M1LW2A,LQ154M1LW02)
Combined they will make excellent laptops.

RealBlackStuff wrote:Nope, those Sharp 15.4" screens are 16:10 and only fit in 15.4" T6x/R6x/T500/R500.
T510 and upwards are 15.6" and 16:9.
The best screen for a T510 (if you can find it) would be an FHD AOU B156HW01 v.4 (FRU 04W1544)