[XG2431 Europe?] ViewSonic XG2431 alternatives for Europe?

[peixotao]

Man I tried to buy this ion Amazon and the prices double bnecause of import fees and currency conversion from Dollar to Euro.. that socks!!!

[peixotao]

With sadness i give you this information:

Viewsonic wrote me stating that the XG2431 will not be selling in Europe...

[Sauphi]

With import fees the XG2431 is actually a bit more expensive than the XG270. Which one would you go for? The XG270 is a bit older, but as I understood it, it is the better monitor?

[Chief Blur Buster]

With import fees the XG2431 is actually a bit more expensive than the XG270. Which one would you go for? The XG270 is a bit older, but as I understood it, it is the better monitor?

Well, that depends on what you define as better. The XG270 is bigger for example.

But for adjustability, XG2431 supports ViewSonic Strobe Utility -- www.blurbusters.com/xg2431
Some people are willing to pay twice the price for a monitor that supports Strobe Utility.

[Chief Blur Buster]

With sadness i give you this information:
Viewsonic wrote me stating that the XG2431 will not be selling in Europe...

I will re-confirm. A contact at ViewSonic Europe informed me in January that it was going to arrive in Europe in Q2 2022. I am asking them if this story changed due to the china supply chain crisis.

It's getting even worse. China shut down over 60,000 companies in Shanghai due to COVID infections. And over 500 container ships are waiting outside chinese ports -- anchored and idling off coast -- trying to thread the needle of a slow-functioning container ship ports that are far behind schedule. That's literally a 1 to 2 months anchor-drop for some of the ships. Ugh.

I would not be surprised if it was punted further down the road. I'm not happy about it, but what can we all do...

[Chief Blur Buster]

How much worse would a VG279QM be compared to XG2431? Were there UFO comparison shots posted anywhere?

XG2431
Ultra PureXP+ enabled, non-QFT (crosstalk can be improved) 120Hz and 240Hz
[snip]

UPDATE:
This is a reply to an old post.
I just discovered these photographs are damaged specimens (from a camera artifact)

I discovered why these specific old August photographs are much worse than an actual XG2431. The camera exposure setting is set incorrectly because there are camera artifacts embedded in this (that are not seen by human eyes) -- the many vertical flicker bars do not show up -- you know how you point a camera at flickering sources, there can be "bars" in the photograph that are not seen by human eyes -- e.g. pointing at cheap LED lightbulbs too, also shows bars across a real-life image.

(real life photograph of a flickering light fixture)

(real life photograph of a flickering light fixture)

Flickering lights can add bars to all images, even images of real life. Right now, the photographs you shared has artifacts that invalidate the WYSIWYG look of the image. For strobe-crosstalk photography, the camera exposure setting must be configured in a 3rd party camera app (e.g. DSLRCamera or ProCam for iPhone) to a shutter speed of exactly the same of a refresh cycle (e.g. 1/120sec or 1/240sec) to capture exactly only one strobe-backlight flash. Alternatively, if doing pursuit camera with iPhone, the camera settings must be set correctly.

So, the new rule is for DIY photographing strobe crosstalk -- you must download a 3rd party camera app that lets you set the exposure length to one refresh cycle. The built-in camera app for iPhone/Android is somewhat flawed for strobe crosstalk photography, but a smartphone can still be used and trusted -- provided a 3rd party app is used instead. This is already the rule for DIY handwave pursuit camera -- but the techniques for stationary-camera photos of TestUFO strobe crosstalk requires a precise camera exposure setting (shutter length) of exactly one refresh cycle, to avoid camera-artifacts not seen by human eyes.

I just wanted to share a new discovery of why these earlier August smartphone photographs (shared by an end user) were flawed -- because the monitor consistently looks better than those old August photographs;

[Discorz]

UPDATE:
This is a reply to an old post.
I just discovered these photographs are damaged specimens (from a camera artifact)

I discovered why these specific old August photographs are much worse than an actual XG2431. The camera exposure setting is set incorrectly because there are camera artifacts embedded in this (that are not seen by human eyes) -- the many vertical flicker bars do not show up -- you know how you point a camera at flickering sources, there can be "bars" in the photograph that are not seen by human eyes -- e.g. pointing at cheap LED lightbulbs too, also shows bars across a real-life image.

(real life photograph of a flickering light fixture)
f66CfkB.jpg
(real life photograph of a flickering light fixture)

Flickering lights can add bars to all images, even images of real life. Right now, the photographs you shared has artifacts that invalidate the WYSIWYG look of the image. For strobe-crosstalk photography, the camera exposure setting must be configured in a 3rd party camera app (e.g. DSLRCamera or ProCam for iPhone) to a shutter speed of exactly the same of a refresh cycle (e.g. 1/120sec or 1/240sec) to capture exactly only one strobe-backlight flash. Alternatively, if doing pursuit camera with iPhone, the camera settings must be set correctly.

So, the new rule is for DIY photographing strobe crosstalk -- you must download a 3rd party camera app that lets you set the exposure length to one refresh cycle. The built-in camera app for iPhone/Android is somewhat flawed for strobe crosstalk photography, but a smartphone can still be used and trusted -- provided a 3rd party app is used instead. This is already the rule for DIY handwave pursuit camera -- but the techniques for stationary-camera photos of TestUFO strobe crosstalk requires a precise camera exposure setting (shutter length) of exactly one refresh cycle, to avoid camera-artifacts not seen by human eyes.

I just wanted to share a new discovery of why these earlier August smartphone photographs (shared by an end user) were flawed -- because the monitor consistently looks better than those old August photographs;

Those old images are not great. At the time avalibility issues were taking place and those were the only pursuit photos we had (from user GammaLyrae). Camera artifacts are very obvious but ufo columns in-between the bars/tears should be good. Now we have a bit better shots uploaded to google drive by user teo. If I had the monitor I'd do pursuits of all the possible setting combinations; Diff Hz-PureXP off/on-crosstalk-overdrive-Utility custom-VT... But we'll take what we can get.

Lol, I noticed the scotch taped mini garden on that room pic.

[Chief Blur Buster]

Those old images are not great. At the time avalibility issues were taking place and those were the only pursuit photos we had (from user GammaLyrae). Camera artifacts are very obvious but ufo columns in-between the bars/tears should be good. Now we have a bit better shots uploaded to google drive by user teo. If I had the monitor I'd do pursuits of all the possible setting combinations; Diff Hz-PureXP off/on-crosstalk-overdrive-Utility custom-VT... But we'll take what we can get.

Lol, I noticed the scotch taped mini garden on that room pic.

Just wanted to post to others useful knowledge for future people posting future photographs, because of an additional camera behavior that human eyes don't have. So I posted mitigation measures to create more WYSIWYG photographs of strobe crosstalk, especially for people who prefer to take stationary photographs rather than pursuit-camera photographs.

It came from Google Images, actually -- not my garden. LOL

[Malitomim]

Any updates on this? It' June now.

[dshna]

Updates? It's july now.