Ja ik heb ze grotendeels gelezen en ik ben op de hoogte ervan, maar ik wil nu gewoon betrouwbare "tweaker" ervaringen horen.

Ben bijna overtuigd om de laptop aan te schaffen maar ik heb nog me pijnpuntjes waar ik over aan het twijfelen ben, want het kan naar mijn idee net iets beter... De reden wat deze laptop me zo trekt is het volgende: Nette bouwkwaliteit, gewicht, uiterlijk, backlit keyboard en een erg goede kwaliteit Full Hd scherm die gemiddeld eigenlijk zelfs beter is dan het Full HD scherm van de XPS15.
Hier heb ik een link en een quote gepost door Regeneration in een andere forumpost over het scherm.
Allereerst vergelijking met de XPS15
- Viewing angles: Sony is better hands down. The Dell panel seems to have pretty good viewing angles for TN, but it is TN.
- Contrast ratio: Sony is somewhat better at about 670:1 (source: personal measurement) versus 570:1 for the Dell (source: notebookcheck.net).
- Max brightness: Sony is a bit brighter at 305 cd/m^2 versus 265 for the Dell. However, both max brightness numbers are in the range I would consider eye-stabbing. Unless you're working outdoors, both screens should be plenty bright.
- Color gamut: The Dell has a wide gamut whereas the Sony looks like it has about a 70% gamut (haven't done the exact calculation yet). If you work with color-managed applications a lot, the Dell would be better. If you don't, and dislike oversaturated colors in non-color-managed applications, then the narrower gamut would be better.
- Color accuracy: The Sony screen doesn't seem as accurate as my desktop monitor, but to explain this fully will take a separate writeup.
http://forum.notebookrevi...hread-29.html#post7995251 (In de link staan er een hoop foto's)
Hier een uitgebreide test van het scherm...
The following are my comments on the Vaio SE's display. I may do another post commenting on performance and thermal issues later. In this post I cover viewing angles, backlight bleeding, white level, black level, contrast ratio, color gamut width, color accuracy, and external display connectivity. I wanted to measure display lag, but I don't have good software for doing so. Based on inaccurate tests with a CRT, any possible display lag didn't seem too objectionable.
Viewing angles
Viewing angles are pretty good, although not quite on par with desktop IPS monitors. There is never color inversion as with TN panels, but contrast drops somewhat off-axis, with a bit of a purple glow being introduced at larger angles (similar to the "white glow" in H-IPS panels, and perhaps the purple glow in older S-IPS panels). The purple glow is a bit more evident in person than in photos. The following photos illustrate what type of viewing angles you can expect from the display. Some are deliberately shot slightly out of focus in order to keep nasty moire patterns from showing up in the photographs. The camera was kept on fixed white balance, aperture, shutter speed, and ISO for all these shots, so they are representative of real-world performance.
Backlight bleeding
This shot shows that there is some backlight bleeding. I don't mind the bleeding along the bottom so much, but the vertical stripe 1/3 of the way in from the left is a bit disturbing. Admittedly, I can't perceive this unless the screen is mostly black and there is little ambient light. Under normal usage, it's imperceptible.
Contrast ratio, gamut width, color accuracy
I ran ColorHFCR's grayscale, primaries, and secondaries tests using an i1 Display 2 colorimeter (same unit that notebookcheck uses). I set the brightness to maximum for this initial measurement and left the display uncalibrated. I only measured in the center of the screen, rather than in 9 sectors like notebookcheck does. (They're the professionals; I'm not.) The measured white level was 305.735 cd/m^2, versus a black level of 0.459 cd/m^2. This makes for a contrast ratio of 666:1. In the CIE chromaticity diagram below, the gray dots show the chromaticity of the measured grayscale values (0% - 100% grayscale in 10% increments). Ideally they should all be on top of each other. Historically the D65 illuminant dot should be where they all stack up, but in modern LED-backlit displays, the native white point may differ. The gamut width is shown as a white triangle, compared to sRGB, a dark triangle. The width of the gamut is about 82.6% of sRGB, or 59.5% NTSC. Calibration brings the grayscale under control, but can't do anything about the gamut width, which is significantly narrower than sRGB. The poor red reproduction was the most noticeable to my eye. The display is incapable of producing a really bright, vivid red; what you get instead has a tinge of orange in it. Also, there is some kind of bug in the switchable display drivers which causes Windows to sometimes "lose" your ICC profile, if you've loaded one. Any kind of resolution change, speed/stamina switch, UAC prompt, or other events I may not have noticed causes the profile to be forgotten. Therefore, color management at the OS level may be more of a hassle than it's worth. Presumably if you use color-managed applications such as Firefox, Photoshop, etc., they will not be subject to this problem.
Video output
The integrated HDMI output is only capable of doing 1920x1200 at 60 Hz. This is frustrating because, at least according to spec sheets, the Intel HD 3000 should be capable of doing 2560x1600 over DisplayPort (*), while the Radeon 6630M can do 2560x1600 over DisplayPort (if configured with a DisplayPort output).
Subjective remarks/Conclusion
The Vaio SE's display subjectively looks really good. The combination of reasonable viewing angles, small dot pitch, high resolution, and high contrast make it quite pleasant to work with. The weak point seems to be color reproduction -- the gamut is both smaller than sRGB and noticeably shifted in chromaticity. The limitation to 1920x1200 video output also means that it's not possible to connect to the largest desktop monitors for doing color-accurate work. (Well, it's possible, just at a low resolution.) The Vaio SE is at an interesting position in the notebook market, as I'm not aware of any other systems featuring high-quality, non-TN panels near this price point. (If you are, please let me know!) The Dell XPS 15's 95% gamut panel is an obvious rival, but it is TN, and each display has some strengths relative to the other. I think given the choice of the two, I would probably stick with the SE, but your requirements might make you choose differently.
Heel erg indrukwekkend.
Ook had ik hem al goed bekeken in de mediamarkt en het verschil is heel erg duidelijk te zien met andere laptops. En dat is wat ik moet hebben in combinatie met een lage gewicht en bouwkwaliteit lijkt deze me bijna perfect... Alleen de wisselvallige Vaio kutservice is mijn enigste twijfelpunt dus moet deze laptop extra perfect zijn om het te nemen voor mij (Zoals de Vaio Z)...
Dell Alienware M15X - Core i7 730QM - GTX460M | Sony Vaio Z21L9E | Blackberry Z10