Difference between 300 and 212 ppi

[Dryhte]

There is one case in which the added DPI helps: if you want to read PDF's without panning (ok, you might have to squint at the small text, but it will be more readable than on a lower dpi).

Case in point: I have a beautiful PDF of the Starchild anthology by James A Owen (comic, wonderfully detailed in places). It's unreadable on my Aura.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects...-essential-sta

Happily I also have it in hardcover

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by cmoim

I didn't notice any difference between the voyage and kobo .
I will order a kobo aura edition 2 .

Thank you guys

I have an original Aura (212 PPI) and a Glowlight 3 (300 PPI) and the difference in screen quality is clearly noticable. No reason to pretend they're the same. But I have no issues with eyestrain on the Aura.

The Glowlight is for my better half and while the screen is beautiful, it's not enough to make me feel the need to update from my Aura. To me, screen resolution is much less important on e-ink than it is on a tablet.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by Dryhte

There is one case in which the added DPI helps: if you want to read PDF's without panning (ok, you might have to squint at the small text, but it will be more readable than on a lower dpi).

Case in point: I have a beautiful PDF of the Starchild anthology by James A Owen (comic, wonderfully detailed in places). It's unreadable on my Aura.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects...-essential-sta

Happily I also have it in hardcover

Yeah, but you're better off reading PDFs and comics on a tablet than an e-ink screen.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Dryhte

Case in point: I have a beautiful PDF of the Starchild anthology by James A Owen (comic, wonderfully detailed in places). It's unreadable on my Aura.

Yes, DPI helps, but on a 6" eInk Reader with a latter sized page with wide margins and headers, it's not going to be readable. So even if you try to read it on a 6" 300DPI eInk screen, it's going to be unreadable.

If PDF was readableon a 6" eInk screen, there would not be 13.3" eInk screens for PDF.

[RobertJSawyer]

I carry a Kobo Aura 6-inch (original, pre-2017 model) often in my front hip pocket (with a cover on it); it's never been damaged in the slightest and fits just fine in the pocket on regular men's denim jeans. Why would I risk it? Because, should I have to replace it, it's simply not that expensive. What's the point of having consumer-electronic devices if you're going to treat them like fragile valuables?

[RobertJSawyer]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

I have an original Aura (212 PPI) and a Glowlight 3 (300 PPI) and the difference in screen quality is clearly noticeable. No reason to pretend they're the same.

Yes, my experience exactly.

[bagpiper1]

I had a kobo aura HD but I dropped it and broke the screen. So I replaced it with a a kobo aura 2. Why did I replace it with this model ? Because I got a great deal on a used one for 25 dollars on ebay. It is great working condition with no scratches on the screen.

Anyway, the screen on the Aura HD was definitely better since it was hi-def and 265 ppi but I think screens reached an acceptable level years ago and increasing the quality offers diminishing real life practical returns. Practically speaking the E-ink carta at 212 ppi should get the job done albeit in a less luxurious way. I have 20/20 vision and it works fine for me. 300 ppi and a crisper white background on a paperwhite would only seemingly matter to people that border on OCD perfectionism or have some kind of eyesight problems IMHO. I mean we are not talking about a tablet here where it would really matter more.

I love the small design on the kobo aura 2 and other design aspects so this with other features are more important to me than HD 300 ppi stuff. I mean I can't beat the bang for my buck quality of the device for $25. If I paid more than 100 dollars for it then I might be stressing over the lack of ppi or whatnot.

[cmoim]

I'm getting my kobo aura 2 in two days , i doubt 212ppi will make me regret my order .

I may notice the difference at first , but when i get into a book i will forget about it . I was worried the lack in resolution would hurt my eyes , but it doesn't seem to be the case from what i have read .

I'm excited to get my hands on it : ]

[JSWolf]

We got along with 166.67DPI before the resolution was increased and we didn't complain. So 212.34zdpi is going to be a lot better.

[ottdmk]

I have to agree. I loved reading on my Kobo Touch. Is my H2O better? Yes, it is... but I could still read just fine on the Touch if I needed to. My Playbook has a similar DPI (a little better at 169) and I still read PDFs on that all the time.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by cmoim

I'm getting my kobo aura 2 in two days , i doubt 212ppi will make me regret my order .

I may notice the difference at first , but when i get into a book i will forget about it . I was worried the lack in resolution would hurt my eyes , but it doesn't seem to be the case from what i have read .

I'm excited to get my hands on it : ]

The only time I really notice the difference in screen resolution and contrast is when I do side by side comparisons. When I'm reading, the content distracts me from the display.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by DNSB

The only time I really notice the difference in screen resolution and contrast is when I do side by side comparisons. When I'm reading, the content distracts me from the display.

Yes, this exactly. In the end, it is words on a screen. If I hadn't broken mine, I could still be happily reading on my Nook ST with its 800X600 resolution. My better half was until I bought the Glowlight 3.

[J_K]

At a normal reading distance and if you keep the screen refreshed often, the difference isn't that huge between the Aura 2 and the H2O 2.

I still use and like the Aura 2 for its size, whereas I don't use the Touch or Mini as the quality drop is too noticeable.

Plus the Aura 2 has slightly blacker text than the H2O 2 so it scores well on contrast. I've seen similar comments made about the better text contrast on the 212dpi Paperwhite 2 over the 300dpi Paperwhite 3.

[anacreon]

While I agree that there is not that much difference between 265 and 300 dpi, and that the One is "fuzzier" than the H2o2, I thought at the time that there was a noticeable difference between my old Glo at 212 dpi and my next Kobo, the Aura HD, still infrared. The Glo HD, 300 dpi and infrared, and with a very white screen is the best (except at night because it doesn't have the comfort light), pity it doesn't have the real estate.

The quality of the screen itself can compensate for the dpi difference. Kobo for mysterious reasons doesn't manage to have capacitive screens as crisp as the infrared ones - and the first Aura 6" was particularly bad, but then it doesn't bother my pre-teenage niece with her much younger eyes.

The color of my H2o2's screen is disappointing, as well as the maximum level of the lighting, much lower that my One's, but that may be the luck of the draw

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by anacreon

The quality of the screen itself can compensate for the dpi difference. Kobo for mysterious reasons doesn't manage to have capacitive screens as crisp as the infrared ones - and the first Aura 6" was particularly bad, but then it doesn't bother my pre-teenage niece with her much younger eyes.

I'm still reading on an original Aura and have no issues. Then again, I went from a Nook ST to the Aura. I wonder, if I were to spend a long time reading on the Glowlight 3, then go back to the Aura, how I would feel.