New Paperwhite vs Old Voyage

[Strether]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

If you want a larger screen Kindle, return the PW5 and get an Oasis 3. The PW5's screen is so-so. The Oasis 3 has a much better screen.

That's simply not true, and unlike you, i have both of them.

Jim

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

Sure. But it is all in how you implement it.



No, they can't alter the performance characteristics of the screen. But they can obscure the screen behind extra layers which can impact the experience.

Read through these boards over the years. IR touch vs. capacitive touch. Sunken screen vs. flush screen. Screen with front lighting vs. screens with no lighting. Each improvement involves adding another obscuring layer on top of the screen.

Many people here will say the old screens that did not have any lighting looked clearer than most current screens.

I have a Nook Glowlight 3 and a Kobo Clara HD. Both use the exact same 6" Carta screen. But the Glowlight 3 using IR does look better than the Clara using capacitive touch. Not mindbogglingly better. But enough that several posters who own both have commented on it.

Also, look at the complaints about the Paperwhite 4 vs. the Paperwhite 3. Both used the same screens. But the 3 had a sunken screen and the 4 had a flush screen.

Extra layers are not the only explanation. Because the flush Oasis 3 had a better screen than the sunken Libra 1, for example. Why, I don't know.

[John F]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

Sure. But it is all in how you implement it.



No, they can't alter the performance characteristics of the screen. But they can obscure the screen behind extra layers which can impact the experience.

Read through these boards over the years. IR touch vs. capacitive touch. Sunken screen vs. flush screen. Screen with front lighting vs. screens with no lighting. Each improvement involves adding another obscuring layer on top of the screen.

Many people here will say the old screens that did not have any lighting looked clearer than most current screens.

I have a Nook Glowlight 3 and a Kobo Clara HD. Both use the exact same 6" Carta screen. But the Glowlight 3 using IR does look better than the Clara using capacitive touch. Not mindbogglingly better. But enough that several posters who own both have commented on it.

Also, look at the complaints about the Paperwhite 4 vs. the Paperwhite 3. Both used the same screens. But the 3 had a sunken screen and the 4 had a flush screen.

Has there been any explanation/guess why sunken would be better then flush (other than IR)?

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by John F

Has there been any explanation/guess why sunken would be better then flush (other than IR)?

Not that I've bothered to research. TBH: I prefer flush screens even if they are less sharp than sunken screens. Just like I wouldn't buy a reader that didn't have lighting, even if it has some impact on screen clarity (I didn't buy one until the Nook Simple Touch with Glowlight came out).

I'm just mentioning what others have said and theorizing on why that may be so. In the end, e-ink screens have been good enough for me since the Pearl days.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Extra layers are not the only explanation. Because the flush Oasis 3 had a better screen than the sunken Libra 1, for example. Why, I don't know.

Do you know if that was with the lights on or off? I'm pretty sure the Oasis 3 had more LEDs than the Libra. But I am dredging that up from the hazy depths of my memory. More LEDs could be the difference, maybe?

My 6" Glowlight Plus and Clara HD both use the same screen. Glowlight is flush, Clara is not. To my eye, the screens are pretty comparable. The Glowlight 3 looks better than either. So I'd say IR vs. capacitive makes a more notable difference than sunken vs. flush (based on my sample size of 1).

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

Do you know if that was with the lights on or off? I'm pretty sure the Oasis 3 had more LEDs than the Libra. But I am dredging that up from the hazy depths of my memory. More LEDs could be the difference, maybe?

Lights on. Yeah, perhaps that may be the reason. Still, it all seems pretty arbitrary. Like, you never know what a new reader would be like, unless someone really gets one and does the comparison. At least that's been my experience with various Kindles, Kobos and a Nook.

Like you, I can swallow poorer contrast if there are other advantages. But it would be nice not to have to worry about such things. Well, the Carta 1200 seems an improvement in real life, not only on paper.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Pjama

I have the Oasis 3 and my husband has the PW5 (because I gave him it for Christmas ).

I would say the PW5 has the edge, but they are nigh indistinguishable.

I have set them to the same page, same font and taken a picture so you can see.

They are at the same settings, Bookerly size 4, no bold, light and orange light both 16, in the second photo I changed the orange to 18 on the Oasis so they looked the same in real life.

Can we please see high resolution images of the PW5 and Oasis 3 without the front light on? Thanks.

[JSWolf]

Where does it say the PW5 has a Carta 1200 screen? I thought the PW5 has a Carta HD screen.

[JSWolf]

Regardless of the screen, Kobo does dither images better then Amazon.

[kandwo]

Originally Posted by mezzanine

I think the answer is in the unreliability of people's perceptions, generally. This is a problem I'm very conscious of in high end audio. When people are asked to find differences in nearly identical objects, often they'll invent them even though they don't exist.

There's the definitional problem, as you mentioned in an earlier post the Sage is "sharper" than the PW5. The word sharp connotes resolution even though I think you must be referring to contrast.

As has been stated the resolution is not the primary factor when discussing "sharpness", at least not for me.

In my view the Kindle 2 is almost clearer/sharper than my other e-ink devices (Kindle PW3, Hisense A5 Pro, Onyx Boox Nova 3) even though both the contrast and resolution are objectively much worse. It doesn't have a touch screen or a frontlight and the screen is indented and it doesn't feel like there's anything between you and the text.

The worst e-ink device I have for sharpness is the Nova 3. In more or less direct sunlight it looks better than my PW3, but in any other lighting conditions the text is slightly fuzzy. I think this is because of the matte glass layer (flush screen) on top. I can't read on it when even slightly tired (I feel like there's something wrong with my eyes and I need glasses) and often have to slant it at an angle to see the text clearly.

I'm very sensitive to any fuzziness and am generally amazed at how little people seem to value good sharpness in screens, favouring features instead.

I would happily give up anything and everything except the touch layer for an improved sharpness in the screen.

[cvkemp]

We all have our opinions, and they are just that our opinions. I bought the PW4 and found it less than usable for my liking. I also was given a Kindle basic, the latest version an it was no worse or better than the PW4. I bought the Oasis 2 and returned it, I didn’t like the case design, way unusable for a lefty like me. I had given up and purchased the Fire HD 10+ and really like it but it is too heavy for the amount of reading I do. I decided to try the PW5 and traded in both the PW4 and Kindle basic, and I am a happy camper.
This is only my opinion and likes and dislikes

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Where does it say the PW5 has a Carta 1200 screen? I thought the PW5 has a Carta HD screen.

What? You don't trust GoodEreader's expert analysis?

Here's a review from Android Police.

...the screen has been upgraded from 6-inches to a 6.8-inch 1236 x 1648 E Ink Carta 1200 EPD...

[John F]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

Not that I've bothered to research. TBH: I prefer flush screens even if they are less sharp than sunken screens. Just like I wouldn't buy a reader that didn't have lighting, even if it has some impact on screen clarity (I didn't buy one until the Nook Simple Touch with Glowlight came out).

I'm just mentioning what others have said and theorizing on why that may be so. In the end, e-ink screens have been good enough for me since the Pearl days.

[Seinfeld voice]You mention flush vs sunken, but you don't seem to be theorizing about them.[/Seinfeld voice]

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by kandwo

I'm very sensitive to any fuzziness and am generally amazed at how little people seem to value good sharpness in screens, favouring features instead.

I would happily give up anything and everything except the touch layer for an improved sharpness in the screen.

Perhaps because many of us have to read through glasses, often pretty thick glasses? The sharpness becomes just one factor among others then, not something paramount. And of course many people only have used 1 or 2 ereaders in their whole life, so they may not be aware at all such issues exist.

I would not trade in frontlight, warm light, buttons or the lopsided shape for increased sharpness. Which is nice to have, of course, but not the most important factor for me.

[j.p.s]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Regardless of the screen, Kobo does dither images better then Amazon.

In your opinion.

It is a fact that kobo dithering is prone to generate regular patterns. For me, those patterns reduce image quality.