Thinkpads Forum

Just got my new Lenovo X201. I had heard that the screens are weak, but [censored]...

I use this lappy for photos. I've edited photos before on tiny screens, cheap TN screens, CRT screens, IPS screens, non-native resolution screens, cracked and damaged screens, but [censored]..... this Lenovo takes the cake.

Contrast is absolutely horrible. Color saturation is very weak. The color / brightness shift as you change vertical viewing angles is extreme and takes very little change in angle to produce a large shift.

Uhhhh... good thing I know how to read my histogram really well.

Anyone know how I can replace this bottom of the barrel screen on this thing to at least a *normal* TN one?

It's a Thinkpad, designed to run Office (any vintage and flavor) not Photoshop. Have you looked into the W500? Or other models or even brands with a different purpose? We all feel the way you do, but for its intended purpose, the x201 kicks behind won't you agree?

Have you calibrated it? The Screen on my X201 is fine. Holds its own against my AFFS Boe Hydis even. Of course viewing angles will have an impact on a non-flexview laptop screen. It hasn't been a problem for me to just keep the angle correct.

I mean, all the other specs on the Thinkpad are great, but I'm just saying that I have NEVER seen a screen THIS bad before. Like I said, I've done photo work on a lot of screens and machines NEVER intended for photo work and it has always been ok. I read that the screens were bad, but I figured that with all my experience with "bad" screens that it wouldn't be that big of a deal.

I was wrong.

Calibrating it tonight with my colorimeter, but I honestly don't think it's going to make that much of a difference...

Am I the only one confused by the inclusion of IPS screens in your list of bad screens you have made do with?
Here's my X201 next to a Boe-Hydis 1600x1200 AFFS screen, basically the king of laptop screens for photo work
http://davidson.smugmug.com/photos/8986 ... z7a-XL.jpg

Are you sure you're not just used to seeing artificially boosted screens, which are fairly popular and don't match prints, and thinking that's what good is? Do you have a fully color managed workflow?

marlinspike wrote:Am I the only one confused by the inclusion of IPS screens in your list of bad screens you have made do with?
Here's my X201 next to a Boe-Hydis 1600x1200 AFFS screen, basically the king of laptop screens for photo work
http://davidson.smugmug.com/photos/8986 ... z7a-XL.jpg

Are you sure you're not just used to seeing artificially boosted screens, which are fairly popular and don't match prints, and thinking that's what good is? Do you have a fully color managed workflow?

I was putting IPS and CRT up there just to show that I've used a lot of different screens.

I just got the laptop yesterday so I haven't calibrated it and all that, but just from initial impressions I'm shocked at the low contrast and large shift with viewing angles.

I know the difference between an artificial screen that boosts eye candy and a properly calibrated screen that will match prints. All I can say now is that there is no way the current screen and default calibration will even come close to matching prints. I'll report back after calibration.

Yes, workflow is fully color managed.

I do not know if your X201 has the Intel Graphics Controller program but I'll post this anyway

Right-click (or if you have it on the taskbar click on it) and it will show three options- "Graphics properties," "graphics options," and "exit tray." Choose graphics properties which should bring up the Intel Graphics and Media Control Panel. Choose Color Enhancement and you can fiddle around with the gamma, contrast, and brightness to at least find a happy medium. I'm hoping you do!

For the times you may play a video on it you can use the same control panel and choose "media." I ticked override applications settings and adjusted the settings to at least have the lights light and the darks dark when watching a video when I have no choice but to use the Thinkpad LCD.

I found that doing these adjustments made my screen look better than the default settings. The defaults IMO were too contrasty and washed the blacks out!

I'll just throw in that if you're using a hardware calibratoin device, you need to disable that intel graphics software thing that emeraldgirl is talking about.

marlinspike wrote:I'll just throw in that if you're using a hardware calibratoin device, you need to disable that intel graphics software thing that emeraldgirl is talking about.

Thanks for the tip!

Can I ask a huge favor? Can you post your monitor profile file here so I can download it? I just tried hooking up my Monaco Optix XR puck and I'm getting a BSOD for some reason whenever I try to install the driver... I have no idea what's going on and this worries me.

I don't know how lol. Give me your e-mail and I'll just email it to you. PM me if you don't want all the world to know your e-mail.

Well, after applying the profile that marlinspike was so kind to email me, the display looks a lot better - colors are more and properly saturated and contrast is higher. Of course, vertical viewing angles still suck, but at least it's ok when viewed straight on.

I have no idea why the moderator removed the expletives in your original post. I feel the same about my T410s screen and I say, if it's accurate and to the point, why not leave them in. At least in your size bracket you have options: the X201t comes with IPS screens; tablets usually do, for the viewing angles. You probably knew already?

FragrantHead wrote:I have no idea why the moderator removed the expletives in your original post. I feel the same about my T410s screen and I say, if it's accurate and to the point, why not leave them in. At least in your size bracket you have options: the X201t comes with IPS screens; tablets usually do, for the viewing angles. You probably knew already?

Probably because we try to maintain at least a modicum of dignity here, and dignified people don't engage in such speech.
Also, if you read the thread his screen was greatly improved by a calibration. I suggest you do the same, as you may be pleasantly surprised.

Please don't patronise me! I have read the thread. I do not see what calibration can possibly do about the black level, but I'll give it a try if someone wants to PM me or something (T410s with Toshiba/M a t s u s h i t a screem that has the yellow tint by default, not blue). I have adjusted the gamma and levels for RGB individually in the Intel display driver already which cures the awful yellow tint of my particular display to some degree, but as I have posted elsewhere, the dependency on viewing angle is so extreme that you do not ever get a uniform white across the whole screen; the top of the screen is slightly purple, the bottom slightly green at the same time from the same head-on viewing angle.

The only way to get a really good calibration is with a hardware calibration device that is used on your monitor (not just a similar monitor), though a similar monitor will get you close. A hardware calibration device is a good investment because you're going to want to calibrate every monitor you have. They're really not all that expensive.

I didnt see anything wrong with the displays in the store. Maybe viewing angle is an issue but you just move the screen. But I only use Office Apps and the Net.

What is the best free software for calibration?

GrandMasterKhan wrote:I didnt see anything wrong with the displays in the store. Maybe viewing angle is an issue but you just move the screen. But I only use Office Apps and the Net.

What is the best free software for calibration?

Software calibration is just something that exists to mess with people I think. I wouldn't bother. Having said that, I think Win 7 has a software calibrator in it in the color management settings.

It's also worth noting that Intel Graphic management software has the automatic option of reducing contrast while on battery. This has to be disabled for the contrast to be seen at accurate level.

fuzzybabybunny wrote:Anyone know how I can replace this bottom of the barrel screen on this thing to at least a *normal* TN one?

If you're interested, I believe you can replace the LED LCD in the X201 with BOE-Hydis HV121WX4 CFFL AFFS screen, see here. That's the X200, but because the screen in the X201 is a LED screen, you'll need to replace the inverter and the cable with ones from the CFFL X200. Consult the HMM for part numbers. There's both glossy and matte versions. The glossy screens are more numerous and less expensive. The screens are widely available on ebay to varying degrees of quality. Most of the screens on eBay have the touch surface and digitizer still attached to them. You'll need to remove at least touch surface to make it fit. There's two versions - one with a glass surface and one without. The glass surfaced one is particularly difficult to removed as it's bonded with really sticky glue, plus you have to be careful to ensure the glass doesn't break and damage the screen. Keep in mind this will likely void any warranty you have should you decide to proceed. Also I don't believe anyone's done it here. There's some risk involved, but the X200 and X201 share a HMM. I'd say it's likely it'd work, but I don't know that I'd say it's 100%.

marlinspike wrote:I don't know how lol. Give me your e-mail and I'll just email it to you. PM me if you don't want all the world to know your e-mail.

Hi, I´m a fresh x-series owner and could really use some help with the calibration of the screen. I tried a Spider 3 but cant get even a reasonable file from it. Since it was a quick loaner I didnt really have a chance to reach any good results.
Marlinspike, I dropped you a PM in the hope of your help.

Greetings

GrandMasterKhan wrote:It's a Thinkpad, designed to run Office (any vintage and flavor) not Photoshop. Have you looked into the W500? Or other models or even brands with a different purpose? We all feel the way you do, but for its intended purpose, the x201 kicks behind won't you agree?

This is a fallacy. The thing is not designed to run MS office only. I have never been in any office or company where the only programs we ran were MS office. So no one would design a computer to run it only.

And even if that were the case, you should fire up Word and a Powerpoint presentation (even with text only) and show them side by side on sat a $1200 macBook pro vs one of these Lenovos. The difference when even viewing that simple content alone is massive.

At the end of the day Lenovo just needs to wake up and put better quality in these things. As someone above said you can calibrate until the cows come home, but that isnt going to improve poor black levels, poor contrast or awful viewing angles. Its a really cheesy screen to put on what would otherwise be near perfect laptop.

I agree the verticle viewing angles aren't great, but I don't really agree that it can't give good colors after a calibration. Here's my X201 side-by-side with a 1600x1200 Boe-Hydis AFFS screen (they're both on max brightness, I turn the x201 down one notch in actual use)
http://davidson.smugmug.com/photos/8986 ... Fz7a-L.jpg

I'm not sure a picture in darkness will really give you a good idea of color depth...

My experience is the same as that of the original poster.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Len ... 531.0.html

The maximum possible contrast of the WXGA display built into the X200s is not one of its strengths. With a black value of a comparatively high 1.33 cd/m2, the X200s merely reached a ratio of 154:1 in this exercise.

vs. a Macbook Pro....

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-App ... 780.0.html

Due to the much improved black value of 0.3 cd/m2 the new "Pro" notebook achieved an impressive 757:1. This can be subjectively seen in form of noticeably more luscious colors.

Guess what I own now?




After 15 or so years of owning only Thinkpads, I now own a Mac. So much less eyestrain, it's unbelievable.

ricerocket wrote:I'm not sure a picture in darkness will really give you a good idea of color depth...

Picture is not in darkness. That's just the amount of aperature/shutter speed/ISO that gives an accurate representation of the brightness of the monitors.

ricerocket wrote: My experience is the same as that of the original poster.

Your experience is finding the screen much improved after installing a ICC profile? Because that was his experience...

These complaints about Lenovo LCDs are endless. It is high time that Lenovo does something about them. Otherwise, they should sell or spinoff the Thinkpad division.

sanjuro wrote:These complaints about Lenovo LCDs are endless. It is high time that Lenovo does something about them. Otherwise, they should sell or spinoff the Thinkpad division.

There's a reason that accountants, rather than us forum posters, run companies like Lenovo.

Most of Lenovo's ThinkPad-buying customers are business or education customers. Neither group really cares about screen quality all that much. When a Fortune 500's Lenovo rep comes in to meet with the CIO to outfit an entire department, the issue of screen quality simply doesn't come up. The questions are more along the lines of 1) Do the laptops do what the department needs? 2) What's your best price? 3) How can you work with our in-house IT department to lower the cost of maintenance of the dozens/hundreds/thousands of machines we're going to buy?

Do the screens suck? Well... yeah. A lot of them do. The WSXGA+ on the T500 is actually pretty good (but nowhere near IPS levels of quality.) The WXGA+ on the X200s is really quite poor. All the machines I've seen, however, are totally usable for business tasks, and they'd all work fine for software development -- and since the screens don't pose a major problem to corporate customers, I don't really expect this trend to change any time soon.

ThinkRob wrote: There's a reason that accountants, rather than us forum posters, run companies like Lenovo.

Most of Lenovo's ThinkPad-buying customers are business or education customers. Neither group really cares about screen quality all that much. When a Fortune 500's Lenovo rep comes in to meet with the CIO to outfit an entire department, the issue of screen quality simply doesn't come up. The questions are more along the lines of 1) Do the laptops do what the department needs? 2) What's your best price? 3) How can you work with our in-house IT department to lower the cost of maintenance of the dozens/hundreds/thousands of machines we're going to buy?

Do the screens suck? Well... yeah. A lot of them do. The WSXGA+ on the T500 is actually pretty good (but nowhere near IPS levels of quality.) The WXGA+ on the X200s is really quite poor. All the machines I've seen, however, are totally usable for business tasks, and they'd all work fine for software development -- and since the screens don't pose a major problem to corporate customers, I don't really expect this trend to change any time soon.

Your explanation makes a lot of sense. What some diehard thinkpadders want is an option for high quality screens. Either as a extra charge item or something like a special edition model.

That way Lenovo can have the best of both worlds in terms of pricing and quality. This probably makes too much sense...

sanjuro wrote:These complaints about Lenovo LCDs are endless. It is high time that Lenovo does something about them. Otherwise, they should sell or spinoff the Thinkpad division.

The question becomes who's doing anything that's significantly better? Sure the MBP screens are nice, but they don't offer the angles like the IPS/AFFS LCDs. The MBP isn't really the competition for ThinkPads anyway, but rather the Dell and HP business notebooks are the competition for Thinkpads. Are Dell or HP offering screens that are significantly better than what's being offered on Thinkpads? Not from what I've seen and until they do, Lenovo has no incentive to offer anything better.

sanjuro wrote:
Your explanation makes a lot of sense. What some diehard thinkpadders want is an option for high quality screens. Either as a extra charge item or something like a special edition model.

That way Lenovo can have the best of both worlds in terms of pricing and quality. This probably makes too much sense...

It makes sense to me -- but I'm not a beancounter. The thing about offering such an option is that (while popular with groups such as this) it likely wouldn't do much for Lenovo's bottom line. They tend to go after business/education quite heavily, and enthusiasts like ourselves aren't really a significant portion of their customer base. While I could definitely see a company like IBM offering such an option to a such a limited market (the ThinkPad division wasn't profit oriented -- from what I heard they actually broke out champagne the first year they weren't in the red), Lenovo has been trying desperately to increase the profit margins of the Think line. As a result, it's unlikely that the costs of sourcing, engineering, and testing would be something that they'd undertake given the limited market for a high-end screen option.

And yet Thinkpads arguably still have the best keyboards out there. Not only that, they're actively being improved, what with the bigger Esc and Del keys and tighter spacing from the T400s onwards. A historical accident? Clearly, Lenovo are capable of sourcing parts to their own, better specifications when they want to, just like Apple do with screens. Apple call their latest a 'retina' display. They obviously think they can market high quality displays and even invented a trendy name for one. So why does Lenovo think there's only a market for high quality keyboards? And lest you're going to say this is not a valid comparison, because Apple operates in the consumer space, then what's that touch-screen doing on my T410s? When you see the inertia-based scrolling under Windows 7, Apple's influence is never more clearly felt. Useful for business at this time? I doubt it.

In the end the problem is that Lenovo are followers, followers of their competition and of their own heritage. Typical sales/marketing-driven approach. Yes they still have a design department and they're not doing nothing, but the company as a whole is not committed to them in the way that technology-driven companies like Google and Apple are. People buy products from the latter, because they execute those products extremely well. This gives them enormous marketing clout, even when you subtract the hyperbole and 'reality distortion field' surrounding Steve Jobs. Lenovo does some of the same when it comes to the quality keyboard, expected of the Thinkpad brand. Shame they can't see an opportunity in the mediocre (or downright bad) screens peddled by everyone these days, like Apple do.