Brightness of 300 vs 350 nits - Practical difference?

**jasonsjwou** · 10-02-2006, 05:04 PM

First of all, what is the unit of brightness mean (NITS)
Is this same as cd/m2 ?

There are three screens (10.4inch) that I am considering.

Lilliput (350 nits, 180:1 Contrast)
Ebay "Munchikin" (300 cd/m2 , 400:1 Contrast)
Litton mobileVU (1300 nits)

I am quickly disregarding the litton mobileVU LCD.. it has like 8 bit color, and consumes like 60watts. It's bright alright, but may be too much.

Contrast ratio is also important in terms of picture quality.. It's a trade off. Usually really bright screens cannot achieve deep blacks.

So,

What would be the practical difference between 350 and 300 nits? Would it be okay to lose 50 nits and gain 200:1 contrast ratio? Or does the last 1 nits count?

My 06 Accord has a black cloth interior, tinted window (35%) and I'll be mounting this in the middle of the dashboard where the stock CD changer is.

**JuMpMaN6235** · 10-02-2006, 05:29 PM

can you put a link to the Munchikin one... Oh and cd/m^2 is the same thing as Nit, its a measure of luminance

**jasonsjwou** · 10-02-2006, 11:03 PM

Here

10.4" TFT LCD Touch Screen Monitor for 222 ?

and here

http://cgi.ebay.com/10-4-TFT-LCD-Tou...QQcmdZViewItem

**turbocad6** · 10-02-2006, 11:07 PM

reported nit brightness ratings is a lot like amplifier power ratings, alot can be left to interpitation & differing testing methods...

nit brightness is really measured at many different points on the lcd... some will report the highest readings as the nit brightness, other companies will report the average across the screen as the nit brightness, & the best screens will report the lowest readings as the nit brightness, meaning it is always at least as good as there spec at any given point...

I think I'd choose the much higher contrast ratio over the slightly better nit rating, but in the end, it's the reflections that will kill your display in the sun more than anything else, this is where a good anti-reflective touchscreen comes into play, or eliminating the touchscreen all togeather maybe...

**turbocad6** · 10-02-2006, 11:10 PM

off course, the variable in the above ratings are assuming there both talking about the same thing, either both before the touchscreen or both with the touchscreen attached, otherwise your comparing apples to oranges...

**jasonsjwou** · 10-03-2006, 12:24 AM

I see.

So the touchscreen layer reduces overall net brightness... then how much am I losing? If the LCD panel is 300nits without touchscreen, then will I get 250 nits with touchscreen? 200 nits? or does that depend on various things?

Do you know if anyone sells 10.4" LCD that is 500+nits, 400:1+ Contrast ratio, with the touchscreen?

**turbocad6** · 10-03-2006, 12:56 AM

it depends,, some resistive touchscreens may be like 85% transmissive, others can be over 90%, some capaciative screens are like 96% transmissive, but capaciative screens are usually more glare from the shinnier surface that's typical of capaciative screens..

there are many good screens when you talk about 10.4" sizes... all the way up to real high end & real expensive... you should be able to find many great screens if you want to spend what it'll take...

**JuMpMaN6235** · 10-03-2006, 01:00 AM

you can always upgrade the CCFL's

**turbocad6** · 10-03-2006, 01:01 AM

btw, most really cheap resistive touchscreens, like those used in lilli's & stuff, can be in the mid 70%'s range of transmissive, means a 350 nit screen will only have an effective end result of less than 220nits, combined with the glare it's no wonder you can't see it in the daytime