Discussion in 'Lenovo (IBM)' started by kurt corbin, Nov 21, 2019.
Portability mostly. Wanted smaller size for travel
Why do you think the grid density is lower in the 14"? Do you think it's an intentional gimping? If so, by Wacom or Lenovo?
Do you know what the physical difference is between a Wacom capacitance Pen&Touch system and a Micro soft? Are the grids different, or the controllers, or the pens, or all 3? Are they patented designs? Without considering grid density (which appears to differ from one Wacom part to another), is the Wacom design inherently better? If so, why?
Thanks in advance!
Everything I'm about to say is just my guesswork, but keep in mind that Wacom came late to the whole dual role pro cap digitizer game. MS told them to start working on dual role pro cap digitizer after SP2, and that's how the AES program got started in earnest. And even though ultimately Wacom lost the SP3 contract due to AES development being too late, it is supplanting UD EMR for many OEMs due to the fact that there is reduced parts count (1 digitizer vs 2) and reduced thickness of device.
Unlike EMR. on AES Wacom is playing catch up. AES v1.0 devices seem to have been based on UD EMR analog spec: consumer level standard geared more towards inking rather than art. That's why the polling rate was closer to UD's 133Hz than DTK's 200Hz, and grid density was just good enough for writing than fine linework for art. AES 2.0 spec is a reaction to Apple Pencil more than anything IMO. which is currently the highest spec dual role pro cap digitizer. especially when it comes to grid density.
But Grid density AFAIK is not part of AES 2.0 spec. It's up to the manufacturer of that part. So I have experienced AES 2.0 device with absolute sh*t grid density like the Yogabook C940, and I have experienced AES 1.0 device with great grid density like Yoga A940 AIO.
Only thing I can say is that Wacom manufactures many AES grid densities for various sizes for whatever reasons. Main reason is probably cost. Unlike EMR. they haven't figured out how to interpolate data for higher density. Only Apple is willing to use minimum standard for physical digitizer grid density at the moment for dual role pro cap devices.
So I know you preferred the Samsung, but you really considered the 15" C940 absolute sh*t? Wasn't it a lot better than Qyygl's 14" C940?
Sorry, typed 4 instead of 3. I was talking about Yogabook C930 with the eInk keyboard.
I never tried 14" C940. I tried 15.6" C940 which was as good as Yoga A940.
Jebus Lenovo really needs to simplify their naming scheme. lol
I counted 44 nodes on Qyygle's 14". Shogmaster's 15" had 35, so yeah, the 14" would seem to have more density, but also more jitter. Why more jitter? Did Qyygle draw the line more slowly?
My only real complaint (which will sound silly to most) is the keyboard backlight: it turns off after just 15 seconds of inactivity (turns back on, of course, if you press any key).
Not silly to me. In fact, it's a deal breaker if it can't be fixed.
Notebookcheck has now reviewed the 3840:
The 3840p also has pwm = 0.
"Perhaps the most notable feature of the screen is its brightness. While Lenovo claims 500 nits for both its FHD and 4K UHD SKUs, we were only able to measure just 384 nits on our FHD test unit. Fortunately, this 4K UHD unit is as bright as Lenovo claims it to be..."
"...colors and brightness are more stable when on Portrait mode when compared to the larger 15.6-inch Yoga C940."
"The good news is that the higher native resolution allows for finer pen inputs, slightly deeper colors, and a measurably brighter backlight than the FHD SKU without impacting response times or contrast by very much. Colors and grayscale are curiously not as accurate out of the box, but an end-user calibration addresses this."
Finer pen inputs? As in less jitter? Or is that, as you say, Shogmaster, determined only by the grid density? What say you, Lisa?
Comparing his 14" with the 15" Shogmaster tried,
I counted 44 nodes on Qyygle's test and Shogmaster's had 35, so why more jitter?
Shogmaster drew his line in 6 seconds. Before we conclude the 15" has a denser digitizer, let's find out the speed with which Qyygle drew his line. I suppose we should also find out whether he used a ruler.
Separate names with a comma.