Buying an LCD monitor

[Loa]

Hello,

Thinking of upgrading my monitor. Anything in particular I should look out for?

From a photography standpoint, I think the most important thing to consider is the contrast ratio.

Anything else?

Thanks,

Loa

[brian.austin]

Brightness, ability to calibrate, and pixel size would be on my list.

[Tom Swaman]

There are a number of threads and posts on LCD monitors here that are detailed, timely and information-packed. You may, if you have not already done so, want to search these and review these.

I just bought a new LCD monitor which I installed within the last few weeks. Frankly, and with much thankls to the advice and experience offered in this forum, I now am having fun and I have graduated from painful editing to pleasurable editing.

You ought to make certain that you have the ability to adjust your monitor to fit your needs. All monitors are not precisely adjustable. Also, I think I can accurately and safely tell you that just because you spend more money today does not mean you buy a better monitor, particularly in the mid price range. I also suggest you pick your monitor for the aspect ratio you typically shoot. My new 16:10 monitor puts my old 4:3 monitor in the category of a toy.

Eizo and NEC, are probably the ultimates, but so are their price tags.

I think you also ought to make certain you can match your monitor to your computer, PC or MAC. If you use PC, as I do, I would strongly suggest you look at LCD monitors near the 24 inch size as these currently have, IMHO, the best price to value ratios. Bigger is too expensive and hard to justify and use and smaller is a bit less functional and relatively high priced. So with that said, I found that the best price range today is for monitors which are current and priced between about $500 and about $675 US.

One final word, be careful when comparing monitors as many of these contain all sorts of extras including card readers, sound bars, fancy stands, etc., etc., etc. and their prices may reflect the total package and not just the monitor.

Tom

[Crotographer]

For myself I just bought a Dell 2407 WFP 24" for a little over $800.00.

A great monitor w/ 1000:1 contrast ratio. I can see all the shades of gray between absolute black and white. ( Well, maybe not ALL of them but at least 3 X as many as I could see on my old Sony.) I also bought the Eye One Display 2 calibrator which works wonders. $000000000.02's

[Tom Swaman]

Crotographer,

I just bought the DELL 2407 and I added the Dell sound bar to this so that I could use this with my computer when not in edit mode. I actually paid $^79 less $65 as a concession from DELL as they made a mistake in telling me this was made by Samsung when it is made by Ben-Q. I love my new monitor. Believe it or not I use the Eye One Display 2 calibrater and it works wonders for me. I have my contrast ratio turned far down and my brightness turned even further down.

I guess this just goes to show that great minds and old farts edit the same! By the way, the prices I quoted were on the DELL website under "BUSINESS". I often find that DELL business prices are lower. I actually wanted to buy from DELL the Samsung 245 BW(SynchroMaster) which they had on sale at below their cost for $479 U.S., but this will not take the sound bar which I needed and wanted as i did not want loose speakers on my desk. The Samsung is truly great and was my first choice, but so far I am totally satisfied.

Oh yes, and great minds and hionest folks work together also!
Tom

[Loa]

Hello,

Thanks for the comments guys. I checked across the board (brands and models) and almost all the 24 inches are about the same specs: 1920X1200 resolution, 1000:1 ratio, 450-500 nits, 5-6ms response and 0.27 dot pitch.

If all those things are equal, is there something else I should look for?

Thanks,

Loa

[Crotographer]

Well, at least we can get together and commiserate when the first one fails!

What conversations did you read when you were researching? I mean, in general.

This monitor is really wonderful as is the eye 2. On my Sony I used Adobe Gamma and it was pretty good as I think I have a fair idea of zones. However, this eye 2 software is KA, to use an abbreviation to a modern terminology about donkey abuse.

I didn't need the sound bar as I have a system that I never use anyhow. When I am working on photos I am not to be abstracted. (Or, is that distracted?)

[Crotographer]

Loa, Be careful not to buy a pixel at a time when you can get 100 for less. What I mean is that you don't have to buy "Pro" equipment and spend a few thousand.

I was very careful when I researched and purchased my Dell Monitor. There is a difference between Industrial strength for publication editors and photographers and the average Pro. You have to understand the end game. Who are you doing the work for; Madison Ave or a customer/client.

It takes a lot of very sophisticated NASA type clients to tell the difference in a print from an $800.00 monitor vs a $4000.00 monitor when the contrast is close.

Look at my images and others here. Do they look OK? Mine are done on the Dell and I have clients that I work for and with. I bought a Dell. Better value, great results.

[JDArt]

Originally Posted by Crotographer

What I mean is that you don't have to buy "Pro" equipment and spend a few thousand.

I agree with this. I just don't see the value in LCDs that are twice as expensive as any other in the same size class.

[Loa]

Originally Posted by Crotographer

Loa, Be careful not to buy a pixel at a time when you can get 100 for less. What I mean is that you don't have to buy "Pro" equipment and spend a few thousand.

Hello Crotographer,

That's exactly why I asked that question: if all those stats are the same for all 24 inch monitors, why shouldn't I take the least expensive one???

Also, I'm not looking for a professional monitor: can't afford it. Add to that the fact that my first generation G5 tower is just starting to show signs of age (it's now 4 years old), so I know I'll have to replace it within a year or so. At least I'm not planning to change my D70s body anytime soon!

Thanks for you comments,

Loa

P.S Thanks JDArt for confirming Crotographer's opinion!

[Crotographer]

Thanks. I probably went on and on but I feel the same way. Don't tell anyone, but, "Pro" equipment is over priced. Though, not in all cases. I still feel that lenses are the make-or-break of a photo. That said, there are a lot of "Prosumer" lenses that have sufficient Bokeh for most clients.

[Crotographer]

Loa, you are so welcome. I appreciate your search. I just did it and it is confusing without a doubt. Lenses are another story, as I just posted. Don't scrimp on them. Buy the best lens you can afford and make it work. I still do this.

I have lenses that make great photos that are antiques. Not up to par, until you take a look at the finished photo. Spend less on the monitor and go for the " Quality is the photo" equipment. Lens. A photo from an old lens: here

[Tom Swaman]

LOA,

Despite the specs appearing the same, there are visual differences and I suspect construction quality differences. The only thing that I know about that I found when doing my research is the stand. I found monitors which were sold as a screen independent of the stand and I found stands with wide differences in their adjustability with respect to stand position. You all ready know the opinion of the majority and both of the monitors mentioned here are among the least expensive of those on the market manufactured by quality vendors. The Eye One Display2 calibrater is about $160 US plus or minus and worth every penny of it IMHO, but there are several less expensive calibrating tools on the market.

Good luck and please let us know what you purchase and learn uin addition to what is stated here.

Thank you,
Tom

[thoots]

I recently found the new HP w2408 24-inch monitor selling for about $600 -- it sure looked good to me. I haven't seen much in the way of reviews to know if it is "really" good or not, but, again, it sure looked nice to me.

It featured a "glossy, reflective" screen, which I know looks really good in a store, but might be holy heck to deal with in the real world. Still, the drool factor was high with this one -- I might start saving some pennies towards something like that!

[brian.austin]

Originally Posted by thoots

I recently found the new HP w2408 24-inch monitor selling for about $600 -- it sure looked good to me. I haven't seen much in the way of reviews to know if it is "really" good or not, but, again, it sure looked nice to me.

It featured a "glossy, reflective" screen, which I know looks really good in a store, but might be holy heck to deal with in the real world. Still, the drool factor was high with this one -- I might start saving some pennies towards something like that!

Having had several LCDs with both glossy and "non-reflective" screens, I'd have to say that the glossies have that initial WOW factor but fail miserably for total satisfaction. Those reflections get darn irritating after a while. Works great in a dark room, though.

[thoots]

Originally Posted by brian.austin

Having had several LCDs with both glossy and "non-reflective" screens, I'd have to say that the glossies have that initial WOW factor but fail miserably for total satisfaction. Those reflections get darn irritating after a while. Works great in a dark room, though.

Ahh, thanks for the feedback -- that's what I expected. "Oooh, shiny!" in the store, but frustrating as all heck in actual use!

[mbanstendig]

I just posted another thread about getting two monitors side-by-side to match. Both are good quality, the one with the best viewing angles (the Apple 30") the Dell with more adjustments (the Apple has essentially none, except for brightness, but has good specs in the rest).

The Apple is almost 3 years old, but was just totally redone by Apple, as its evenness was going. It came back quite good, with almost everything new.

We just bought two Dell 27" and one 24", and had a samsung 24" that went back immediately (uneven, bad viewing angles, etc. Just an unappealing monitor).

We also have the older original Mac 23" Cinema Dispaly (all plastic lean-back only frame), which is the most even of all and has the best viewing angles, and has kept up better than the newer 30".

We have other monitors, including a quite good Samsung 21" (what happened to the newer models, I haven't a clue), a great Dell 20" 3x4 monitor, an older 19" SONY LCD which is marvelous, with adjustable everything, and many great CRTs, inclouding the SONY GDM-F and FW 900s, with vertically flat and flat screens, 22.5" viewable, and more.

LCDs are still new and in development. None can match a great CRT, except for a higher luminance, which makes little difference. And re angle of view, there is nothing like the CRTs.

Also, with LCDs, you are locked into the native resolution, which is generally too high!!!!

1920 x 1200 is simply too high a res for comfortable viewing on a 23" or 24' monitor. Everything is too small, especially things that cannot be enlarged like URL entry bars in bowsers and dialog boxes and help menus, etc. They are torture to read. And lowering the res on an LCD makes the image blurry and unsharp.

That is why we bought the two Dell 27" monitors. They still have the 1900 x 1200 res, but the extra 3 or 4 inches makes a great difference.

Eventually, one expects the O cvSes to have full scalability for everything (Apple has recent patents on the process) . But that does not seem soon, unlesds Apple surprises us with it in the next OS, coming in October. But image scalability is not announced!

Getting two monitors to match, even with a great calibrator is just about impossioble. So where is the color accuracy, ultimately? It simply isn't. Or so it would seem (I am waiting for replies to my other thread about this from more knowledgeable members). And I have a much better calibrator than the eye one II.

I have become inclined to think that spending the extra money for an Eizo may be worth it.....if they really are color accurate, as many say. But they only make 24" models, and I need the larger model for my 70 year-old eyes. But if they bring out a larger model, I will be checking it out very carefully.

Also, if some good firm finally brings out a 30" monitor with only the 1920 x 1200 res and no need for those super-expensive video cards to drive it, I will probably snap it up.

Mark

[Crotographer]

I use the Dell 2407 and feel it is fine as I do everything I can to not have to do post processing. What is your work flow that you need so many monitors?

I am asking this as I am just starting to use the digital medium and have been a film photographer since the late '60's. Being a darkroom person for all these ye