Quote:
Originally Posted by Pajamaman
I have a Nova (non-flush) and a Nova Pro (flush). I have examined closely and I can see absolutely zero difference between the two screens. I expected to see a difference, and did not. So no, IME the flush makes no difference.
The Onyx screens have a lower contrast than a Kindle. I presume it's because Amazon have more resources to get the maximum contrast. The same for Kobo. I have a Nook GL3 and the contrast is better than the Onyx. From what I read, the PW3 is clearer than the PW4 because bizarrely the higher screen resolution makes the text look thin.
I do tend to put the light on on the Onyx to bump up the contrast. It's fine, and I'm fussy.
|
Interesting! Thank you for the analysis, it's very helpful! This makes screen quality somewhat more of a mystery to me. The voyage is said to be better than the Kindle PW3, whereas both the PW4 and later Oasis models are supposedly worse. It's hard to guess why that is..
What do you mean by "the higher resolution" of PW4? Aren't both 300PPI? Aren't they using the same screen?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quoth
In order of sharpness (all except last are quoted as 300 dpi):
Mars 7.8"
Kobo Libra 7"
Kindle PW3 6"
Kindle PW4 6"
Original Aura HD H2O 6.8", it's lower resolution, but sharp because there are less layers.
In order of brightness/contrast, with a reading lamp:
Original Aura HD H2O, it's lower resolution, but has IR touch, less layers than capacitive.
Kobo Libra, Mars and Kindle PW3 are about the same.
PW4 is duller.
I'm wondering are the 7.8" eink really 300 dpi, or 307 dpi?
The DXG 9.7", KK3 6", and Sony PRS-350 5" are all a similar greyness, OK with a good lamp but the kindles are poorer than all above for sharpness as they are low resolution. I think the PRS-350 has the same number of pixels as KK3 (800 x 600), so looks sharper. You really don't want the older eink like in the KK2 or DX.
I never use the front lights unless out somewhere badly lit. I'd use the same lighting as for a 40 year old paperback.
|
I actually have a practically unusable Kindle 2 (the battery is shot). I never had a problem reading on it. The background is grayer than modern e-ink and the resolution is very low, but the text still looks much clearer than on modern devices. I guess it's the lack of layers that does it.
I'd happily take a lack of touch functionality if that would improve the screen quality significantly. Or maybe choose IR touch instead. Sadly, they seem to be out of favour nowadays..
This is weird to me. For me the screen is the single most important thing on an e-reader, yet many seem to almost pay it no attention and instead focus on functionality. Maybe others aren't so picky? For me, it's all about the screen and dictionary. Mobility and an in-built dictionary are the only things an e-reader does better than a paper book in my view; and for that I wouldn't even need a touch screen (the only things the Kindle 2 lacked for me was higher resolution and wider language support (including dictionaries)).