Are 16:10 monitors pretty much gone?

Started Mar 22, 2019 | Discussions
xPhoenix
xPhoenix Senior Member • Posts: 1,748
Are 16:10 monitors pretty much gone?

I currently use a Dell u2412 (1920x1200, 16:10) screen, and can't really complain about anything. I was looking into a new monitor since I also like to use my PC for flight sim stuff. Unfortunately, it seems like the trend has been going towards 16:9 screens, which I despise (at least in smaller sizes). There are still some 16:10 screens out there, but looks like slim pickins.

Getting another 24" screen, but in 16:9, seems like a downgrade, so I suppose the thing to do would be go larger. If I want to keep about the same screen height that I have now, I'd need at least a 27" 16:9 screen. Something like the Acer Predator comes to mind, but it's 1920x1080, which to me is not good. I'd have fewer pixels stretched over a larger area.

http://www.displaywars.com/24-inch-16x10-vs-27-inch-16x9

So I guess it would seem I'd need a larger screen and also more resolution. I can see 16:9 being better for gaming, but for everything else, I prefer 16:10. Annoying. I may just stick with what I have for now. Just curious how the rest of you feel about this.

 xPhoenix's gear list:xPhoenix's gear list
Nikon D850 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm F4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm F4G ED VR Nikkor AF-S 300mm f/4E PF ED VR +4 more
ppage
ppage Senior Member • Posts: 2,096
Re: Are 16:10 monitors pretty much gone?
1

NEC still offers the NEPA243WBK

PA243W-BK 24.1" 16:10 Wide Gamut IPS Monitor (Black)

  • 24.1" In-Plane Switching (IPS) Panel
  • DisplayPort / DVI-D / HDMI / VGA Inputs
  • 1920 x 1200 Resolution
  • 1000:1 Contrast Ratio
  • 350 cd/m² Brightness
ppage
ppage Senior Member • Posts: 2,096
Re: Are 16:10 monitors pretty much gone?

Forgot to mention that I have a NEC PA241 but because of eyesight problems I'm thinking of going for a larger 27" monitor and I'm looking at the BenQ SW2700PT which is 16:9 rather than 16:10, is very affordable, and has really excellent reviews.  The only problem with it is an apparent lack of quality control in their production line so one must be prepared to inspect and return a monitor if it's not satisfactory.

Peter

CAcreeks
CAcreeks Forum Pro • Posts: 15,801
Re: Are 16:10 monitors pretty much gone?
1

xPhoenix wrote:

So I guess it would seem I'd need a larger screen and also more resolution. I can see 16:9 being better for gaming, but for everything else, I prefer 16:10. Annoying. I may just stick with what I have for now. Just curious how the rest of you feel about this.

I don't like it either!

Apple and Microsoft make specialized devices with higher aspect ratio.

I'm waiting for an ultra widescreen 5K2K monitor about the same height as the 24" 1920x1200. So far they cost more than two UHD monitors, but I'm tired of side-by-side. Mind the gap.

DonA2
DonA2 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,656
Re: Are 16:10 monitors pretty much gone?
2

With you on that one.  The 16/9 screens were foisted on us by the wide screen movie/TV  industry.  For PC monitors the 16/10s are 100% better in every way.  A real shame they are a dying, or hard to come by item.  My years old Dell U2412M has served me well and in no way will I give it up until we both pass on.  Whichever comes first. 

 DonA2's gear list:DonA2's gear list
Canon PowerShot S2 IS Canon PowerShot SX10 IS Canon PowerShot S100 Canon PowerShot SX40 HS Canon PowerShot SX50 HS +2 more
Austinian
MOD Austinian Forum Pro • Posts: 10,622
Re: Are 16:10 monitors pretty much gone?
1

xPhoenix wrote:

So I guess it would seem I'd need a larger screen and also more resolution. I can see 16:9 being better for gaming, but for everything else, I prefer 16:10. Annoying. I may just stick with what I have for now. Just curious how the rest of you feel about this.

I'm not as concerned about aspect ratio as I am about having plenty of pixels.

16:9 4K/UHD works fine for me with a 43" monitor; I find that the extra width nicely accommodates editing control menus to the left and right of the image itself.

Having said that, if I had a monitor that was purely for image display purposes, I think I'd like 3:2 to match my cameras. And an equally high resolution. 

 Austinian's gear list:Austinian's gear list
Sony a7R III Sony a7R IV Samyang 14mm F2.8 ED AS IF UMC Sony FE 50mm F2.8 Macro Sony FE 24-105mm F4 +2 more
NAwlins Contrarian Veteran Member • Posts: 5,479
No, just less common / popular
1

I currently use a Dell u2412 (1920x1200, 16:10) screen .... There are still some 16:10 screens out there, but looks like slim pickins.

If I want to keep about the same screen height that I have now, I'd need at least a 27" 16:9 screen. Something like the Acer Predator comes to mind, but it's 1920x1080, which to me is not good. I'd have fewer pixels stretched over a larger area.

So I guess it would seem I'd need a larger screen and also more resolution. I can see 16:9 being better for gaming, but for everything else, I prefer 16:10. Annoying. I may just stick with what I have for now. Just curious how the rest of you feel about this.

As a Dell U2415 user (also 1920x1200), I'm sensitive to the issue. But in addition to the still-available / quite popular U2415, B&H appears to have 62 other options at the moment (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?ci=25766&fct=fct_aspect-ratio_960%7c16-10&N=3878805756).

So what else is there of particular interest to me? The Benq SW240 seems like an excellent photographer's monitor for $399. If you want to go larger than 24 / 24.1 inches, then the pickings are slim: a 25" curved Acer for $199 or some 30" options that are not cheap--the Dell UP3017 for $1149 and some NECs for $2000 to $2250.

But you of course might prefer one of the other 57 options.

 NAwlins Contrarian's gear list:NAwlins Contrarian's gear list
Nikon Coolpix S30 Canon PowerShot S120 Sony Alpha DSLR-A580 Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di USD +5 more
wklee Veteran Member • Posts: 9,449
Resolution width

Austinian wrote:

xPhoenix wrote:

So I guess it would seem I'd need a larger screen and also more resolution. I can see 16:9 being better for gaming, but for everything else, I prefer 16:10. Annoying. I may just stick with what I have for now. Just curious how the rest of you feel about this.

I'm not as concerned about aspect ratio as I am about having plenty of pixels.

16:9 4K/UHD works fine for me with a 43" monitor; I find that the extra width nicely accommodates editing control menus to the left and right of the image itself.

Having said that, if I had a monitor that was purely for image display purposes, I think I'd like 3:2 to match my cameras. And an equally high resolution.

I am concerned about width for example in the following ratios  : 16:12 1200 pixel vs 16:10 1080 pixel vs 16:9 1020 pixel. With Photoshop and Lightroom there is never enough. I only have a Dell UP2414Q which I will keep for as Long as possible.

-- hide signature --

Never buy version 1.0 of anything.
Don't it always seem to go
That you don't know what you've got
Till it's gone
They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot
Joni Mitchell's Big Yellow Taxi

threw the lens Senior Member • Posts: 2,760
Re: Are 16:10 monitors pretty much gone?

I got a QHD which will generally allow for two windows side by side in landscape mode.

I had been rotating my monitors into portrait mode for the last decade because most of my photos are in portrait mode and portrait mode helps me read ebooks.

9:16 however isn't very helpful for reading webpages, because webmasters know most screens are widescreen formats and they insist on filling up the sides of the screen with sidebars on PC mode.

I did look for a good 5:4 monitor once to put in portrait mode, I find this fairly ideal, but they don't seem to do them in vertical array and they tend to be rather small. Funnily enough I rejected a 16:10 because it was only IPS.

BG454 Veteran Member • Posts: 7,278
Re: Are 16:10 monitors pretty much gone?
1

xPhoenix wrote:

I currently use a Dell u2412 (1920x1200, 16:10) screen, and can't really complain about anything. I was looking into a new monitor since I also like to use my PC for flight sim stuff. Unfortunately, it seems like the trend has been going towards 16:9 screens, which I despise (at least in smaller sizes). There are still some 16:10 screens out there, but looks like slim pickins.

Getting another 24" screen, but in 16:9, seems like a downgrade, so I suppose the thing to do would be go larger. If I want to keep about the same screen height that I have now, I'd need at least a 27" 16:9 screen. Something like the Acer Predator comes to mind, but it's 1920x1080, which to me is not good. I'd have fewer pixels stretched over a larger area.

http://www.displaywars.com/24-inch-16x10-vs-27-inch-16x9

So I guess it would seem I'd need a larger screen and also more resolution. I can see 16:9 being better for gaming, but for everything else, I prefer 16:10. Annoying. I may just stick with what I have for now. Just curious how the rest of you feel about this.

I also use the Dell 2412and I completely agree with everything you say.

However, I just took a quick look at a UK computer component dealer site and they list 24inch 16:10 monitors from Dell, Iiyama, AOC, Philips, NEC, Eizo, Samsung, HP, Asus and Benq, so they are available. Even the Dell 2412 is listed as a current model.
I suppose ultimately we are going to be forced into using 2560 x 1440 Resolution 16:10 monitors, but these can result in tiny text size with some programs and there is not always a work around.

 BG454's gear list:BG454's gear list
Sony RX100 Olympus PEN-F Canon EOS 80D Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon 6D Mark II +17 more
hesbehindyou Senior Member • Posts: 1,970
Re: Are 16:10 monitors pretty much gone?

MisterBG wrote:
I suppose ultimately we are going to be forced into using 2560 x 1440 Resolution 16:10 monitors, but these can result in tiny text size with some programs and there is not always a work around.

Bigger monitor, sufficient to keep the same size pixels, is an excellent compromise. Desk size permitting of course.

BG454 Veteran Member • Posts: 7,278
Re: Are 16:10 monitors pretty much gone?

hesbehindyou wrote:

MisterBG wrote:
I suppose ultimately we are going to be forced into using 2560 x 1440 Resolution 16:10 monitors, but these can result in tiny text size with some programs and there is not always a work around.

Bigger monitor, sufficient to keep the same size pixels, is an excellent compromise. Desk size permitting of course.

True - but a 24 inch screen is about the maximum I can comfortably accommodate.

 BG454's gear list:BG454's gear list
Sony RX100 Olympus PEN-F Canon EOS 80D Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon 6D Mark II +17 more
Tom_N Forum Pro • Posts: 18,450
Re: Are 16:10 monitors pretty much gone?

MisterBG wrote:
I suppose ultimately we are going to be forced into using 2560 x 1440 Resolution 16:10 monitors, but these can result in tiny text size with some programs and there is not always a work around.

2560 x 1440 – a common resolution for 27" monitors – is 16:9.

There might be a few 30" 2560 x 1600 monitors still around, but if you can find one, you will probably pay dearly for the extra vertical resolution.

BG454 Veteran Member • Posts: 7,278
Re: Are 16:10 monitors pretty much gone?

Tom_N wrote:

MisterBG wrote:
I suppose ultimately we are going to be forced into using 2560 x 1440 Resolution 16:10 monitors, but these can result in tiny text size with some programs and there is not always a work around.

2560 x 1440 – a common resolution for 27" monitors – is 16:9.

There might be a few 30" 2560 x 1600 monitors still around, but if you can find one, you will probably pay dearly for the extra vertical resolution.

I was looking at the Dell P2418D 23.8" QHD LED IPS Monitor, which is quoted as being 2560 x 1440, which is of course 16:9.

Like the OP, I prefer 16:10 aspect ratio, but if the manufacturers decide not to produce such a thing, then we have to use what we can.
From what I understand, LG is the only manufacturer of 24" 16:10 displays.

 BG454's gear list:BG454's gear list
Sony RX100 Olympus PEN-F Canon EOS 80D Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon 6D Mark II +17 more
Gridlock347 New Member • Posts: 24
Re: Are 16:10 monitors pretty much gone?
1

The monitor I've been using since April, 2017 is the Dell UP3017. It's 2560 x 1600 (16:10), and covers 99% of AdobeRGB. It has Dell software that connects directly to the i1 Display Pro for profiling. While the text is sometimes on the small size, I don't really have the tiny-text issues some 'see' with 4K monitors and Win10.

When I first got this monitor, the issue I was having was that while I could get an image looking 'perfect' on screen, I could not achieve an exact match when printing to the Canon Pro 100. I solved that by adding the i1 Studio to my color chain for printer profiling, and now what I see on the monitor in AdobeRGB is EXACTLY what I get using Canon paper and inks.

I've been very pleased with the UP3017. It does all I ask of it.

 Gridlock347's gear list:Gridlock347's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 5DS R Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM Canon EF 50mm F1.4 USM +14 more
xPhoenix
OP xPhoenix Senior Member • Posts: 1,748
Re: Are 16:10 monitors pretty much gone?

Thanks for all the input!  I'm actually pretty content with my 24" screen for web browsing, photo editing and other typical tasks.  I was thinking just  a little bigger would be nice, like 27", but then I saw the lack of 16:10 options.  I'm thinking a bigger screen might work better for the flight sim I use, but not sure it'd be worth it.

I will probably go to the store and see a few in person.  I am a little worried about going to 4K and having problems with text that is too small.  Things look good now, so I don't want to make things worse.

 xPhoenix's gear list:xPhoenix's gear list
Nikon D850 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm F4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm F4G ED VR Nikkor AF-S 300mm f/4E PF ED VR +4 more
Tom_N Forum Pro • Posts: 18,450
Re: Are 16:10 monitors pretty much gone?

xPhoenix wrote:

Thanks for all the input! I'm actually pretty content with my 24" screen for web browsing, photo editing and other typical tasks. I was thinking just a little bigger would be nice, like 27", but then I saw the lack of 16:10 options. I'm thinking a bigger screen might work better for the flight sim I use, but not sure it'd be worth it.

Here are a few 16:10 monitors:

Dell UltraSharp 30 Monitor with PremierColor: UP3017

Dell UltraSharp 24 Monitor: U2412M

Dell 24 UltraSharp Monitor: U2415

A search for "16:10" monitor on the B&H site turned up more – from Acer, BenQ, Eizo, HP, NEC, and Samsung.  Except for the Dell UP3017, all of those mentioned on the first page were 24", 1920x1200 pixel monitors of varying feature sets and price levels.

DonA2
DonA2 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,656
Re: Are 16:10 monitors pretty much gone?

Tom_N wrote:

xPhoenix wrote:

Thanks for all the input! I'm actually pretty content with my 24" screen for web browsing, photo editing and other typical tasks. I was thinking just a little bigger would be nice, like 27", but then I saw the lack of 16:10 options. I'm thinking a bigger screen might work better for the flight sim I use, but not sure it'd be worth it.

Here are a few 16:10 monitors:

Dell UltraSharp 30 Monitor with PremierColor: UP3017

Dell UltraSharp 24 Monitor: U2412M

Dell 24 UltraSharp Monitor: U2415

A search for "16:10" monitor on the B&H site turned up more – from Acer, BenQ, Eizo, HP, NEC, and Samsung. Except for the Dell UP3017, all of those mentioned on the first page were 24", 1920x1200 pixel monitors of varying feature sets and price levels.

Also the ephotozine.com site reviews a new BenQ SW240  24"  16/10 monitor. Worth a look as it checks all the boxes.

 DonA2's gear list:DonA2's gear list
Canon PowerShot S2 IS Canon PowerShot SX10 IS Canon PowerShot S100 Canon PowerShot SX40 HS Canon PowerShot SX50 HS +2 more
CAcreeks
CAcreeks Forum Pro • Posts: 15,801
Re: Are 16:10 monitors pretty much gone?

xPhoenix wrote:

Thanks for all the input! I'm actually pretty content with my 24" screen for web browsing, photo editing and other typical tasks. I was thinking just a little bigger would be nice, like 27", but then I saw the lack of 16:10 options. I'm thinking a bigger screen might work better for the flight sim I use, but not sure it'd be worth it.

I will probably go to the store and see a few in person...

Good idea.

A 24" 16:10 monitor is actually almost as tall as a 27" 16:9 monitor.

Solving (16x) ^ 2 + (10x) ^ 2 = 24 ^ 2 and (16x) ^ 2 + (9x) ^ 2 = 27 ^ 2, you get 12.7" high for the 16:10 and 13.23" high for the 16:9.

https://www.mathpapa.com/algebra-calculator.html

Tom_N Forum Pro • Posts: 18,450
Re: Are 16:10 monitors pretty much gone?

CAcreeks wrote:

A 24" 16:10 monitor is actually almost as tall as a 27" 16:9 monitor.

Assuming 1200 pixels tall for the former, 1440 pixels tall for the latter, the 27" monitor offers 20% more vertical workspace.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads