Sony :: Approved: Z11's 1920x1080 Screen Is Inferior Compared To 1600x900 One

I had the chance to review two configurations side by side in Saturn Vienna.

I assure you, the one with the 1600x900 is noticeably brighter and more saturated than the 1920x1080 one. Both are TN panels, but the colors in FHD panel have a tendency to distort sooner relative to the viewing angles. I can't say that the FHD isn't crisper than the other one because resolution does have its obvious advantage in terms of crispiness. But an uneducated eye won't be able to distinguish crispness difference between the panels when the fonts are scaled to be equal on both screens. Although both panels are LED back-lit, the FHD one looks like a fluorescent back-lit panel when compared to the 1600x900 one side-by-side.

I was both disappointed and relieved to have seen the difference. I was about to order the FHD panel, however because of some problems with the supplier, it kept on delaying. I guess there is always good in bad. Now I canceled my order entirely. I will opt for 1600x900, no matter how much I crave for the highest resolution.

In summary, the US guys who were muttering about the lack of FHD option in Sonystyle.com, don't have to anymore I would go for the 1600x900 panel every time. But this doesn't mean that the FHD is a bad panel. It just isn't AS good as the 1600x900. I wouldn't regret to have chosen it. But now that I have the choice not to, I won't. So long for the Sony Euroasia envy