Earlier quoted context omitted.
In EU, have not seen PA32QCV ever in stock anywhere.
B&H has same-day pickup in New York.
New York isn’t in the EU…
Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor
331–340 of 370 posts
Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor
#332Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes really. A pixel is a pixel. This dell monitor has pixels the size of boulders. Apple Pro Display XDR has 4.6m more pixels in a significantly smaller area creating a much denser display.
Denser pixels are worth less because you can't see them; in this case 3x-4x less.
You CAN see then, you CANNOT distinguish them apart without a closer look.
Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor
#333This has pixels the size of my hand, and it fully covers my field of view. Not my cup of tea. What I do recommend (having bought one) is the Kuycon G32p, 32 inches @ 6K. Incredible quality and unbelievable value for money ( https://clickclack.io/products/in-stock-kuycon-g32p-6k-32-in... ).
> This has pixels the size of my hand This is 128 ppi, which would be considered "retina" at a viewing distance of 70cm (27in). Are you really sitting 2 feet from a 52" monitor? I'd have to cutout a curve in the front of my desk to sit that close
> This is 128 ppi, which would be considered "retina“
If by “retina” we mean “pleasantly sharp”, not by me. I’m never buying less than the 218 ppi of my Apple Studio Display unless I absolutely have to. I’m totally spoiled.
Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor
#334I have 3 27" 5k monitors in portrait and a 32" 4k horizontal above those. It is all mounted with vesa cheeseplates to manfrotto magic arms on t slot aluminum attached to a C stand with manfrotto super clamps. I also have two genelec studio monitors which sound amazing. All of that cost less than this one monitor.
Would love to see a picture of this setup and your thought on the brands / models you have. I’m in the market for new monitors / setup and yours sounds very much like something up my alley.
Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor
#335I have a 34" ultrawide and it is huge. I can't imagine a 52" - the edges would be so far away that it must be hard to read text without physically moving left/right
Since well before the pandemic, I've have dual 28" 4K screens on my desk. When ordering them, I liked the fact that they had the same pixel pitch as my 14" 2K laptop screen. One monitor was like a borderless 2x2 grid of those laptop screens.
I found myself repositioning things so that one is in front of the keyboard as a primary screen and the other is further off to the side as a secondary dumping ground. I found myself neglecting the second display most of the time so it was just a blank background. Eventually, I noticed I wasn't even using the entire primary screen. I favored a sector of it and pushed some windows off to the edges.
Ironically, with work from home, I've started roaming around the house with the laptop instead of staying at my desk. So I'm mostly back to working in a 14" screen with virtual desktops, like I was 20 years ago. I am glad that laptops are starting to have 16:10 again after the long drought of HDTV-derived screens.
Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor
#336I refuse to buy a dell monitor again because I found their quality low and their warranty process onerous. Took hours of my time to get a replacement sent and it had I failed in a different way soon after. For a cheap throwaway monitor maybe. For anything premium no way.
Even though apple, asus and samsung have some top-notch models, premium monitors is actually where dell excels. At least the different models I’ve bought through the last decades. Cheap crap hardware are not welcome in my home.
Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor
#337Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm using three 4k 32" screens arranged vertically, for 6480 x 3840 desktop size. The only real monitor upgrade I'm willing to entertain is a ~50" 8k curved screen (basically a curved TV-sized screen), which has not been made yet AFAIK. I'm not into "ultrawide", for me it has to be "ultrawide" and "ultratall". I want all that screen real estate in high PPI. I tried test-driving a 50" 4k TV for a week and the flatness…
100% I used to have a 43-inch 4K "monitor" (16:9). The lack of curvature meant that at the sides of the screen, there was noticeable color shifting due to variations in viewing angle. That's with an IPS panel. Your dream is probably a ~50in 8K TV (with RGB pattern if you are on macOS), but curved. I don't know if that will ever exist. Personally, I found that with a bigger 16:9, I would not use the top and bottom of…
I use all of the screen, top, bottom, everything. I need the space. An ultra-wide just will not do for me, or I would have bought one already.
Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor
#338Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let me ask you ..Would it work better with a standing desk? It seems like moving around would feel more natural standing up.
I have one and while it makes you generally more movable, you shouldn't stand all the time; it's just as unhealthy as permanent sitting.
A chiropractor told me, "your best position is your next position".
Meaning to avoid staying in the same position for too long.
Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor
#339I have 3 27" 5k monitors in portrait and a 32" 4k horizontal above those. It is all mounted with vesa cheeseplates to manfrotto magic arms on t slot aluminum attached to a C stand with manfrotto super clamps. I also have two genelec studio monitors which sound amazing. All of that cost less than this one monitor.
I would pay the premium to have just this one monitor, although I find it too large.
And that’s fine for me: that different people want different setups. I’d never want a multi-monitor setup if I can avoid it, where others say it makes them more productive and whatnot.
Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor
#340Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sadly they're not super common which makes them expensive, and I don't think I've seen any that wasn't 16:9. The world has decided to go with refresh rates rather than resolution.
Which is the right choice because our eyes cannot resolve that kind of DPI at that distance. Past 2880p on most desk monitor viewing distances or past 1080p on most TV viewing distances, you hit steeply diminishing returns. Please, please let's use our processing power and signal bandwidth for color and refresh rate, not resolution. This is also why I think every console game should have a 720p handheld 'performance'…
But if I, by accident bend forward, I don’t want to accidentally be able to distinguish individual pixels!