A choce of LCD PC display

A

alexz

Well-known
Local time
10:17 AM
Joined
Nov 19, 2006
Messages
862
Location
Israel
View My Gallery
I've approached the time to upgrade my PC which is 7-8 years old now. Will do that gradually, first decided to start with monitor.
Right now I have Samsung CRT 19" which I'm not really fond of despite of the common online ravings upon which I made my choice a while ago.
Now, obviously I'll be willing to proceed LCD route. Of course, the primary target is image representation, photoshop, etc...(other major tasks arennt' particularly display quality consuming..)
Among all the brands available at the shop I tend to trust for pricing and service there are two brands that I'll probably consider: NEC and Samsung, all within 20" to 22" ranges.
I notice Samsung models are generally 30-40% cheaper per given size then these of NEC.
So, is there an experienced users of these kind of LCDs or alike who can advise/recommend how to see the choice in a proper perspective ?
B&W performance is important to me, hardware calibration ability as well, color imaging is also considered of course.

So, what would you say ?
 
There is a whole debate about LCDs. Mainly around the different type of panel technologies. In short, for photographers / people interested in colours, there is concensus that IPS based panels are best although (like Beta vs VHS debate) many would argue the more common PVA technology is now comparable (but not the same).

IPS still has the advantage of not colour shifting off centre (moving to FAR right or FAR left of eg. screen will shift colours) whilst this is inherient on PVA panels (no matter price). Many however now argue unless you work with someone often, you'll sit centre on anyhow and panel companies are supporting PVA in the whole.

So...if you can afford it go IPS (more $$$), otherwise PVA panels are pretty good these days. Macs / topend Eizo & Lacies are ALL IPS. If you're in the US - go for NEC IPS. Not available in Europe.

Top end models have INTERNAL LUT (look up table) to really help with calibration but you'll then also need a top end calibrator that can take advantage of it.

Ultimately comes down to budget. The more you spend the better.


Try this site for some ideas. Service is superb and they're targetted at photog/pros but they only stock the good stuff.
www.colourconfidence.com


Good luck
 
Thanks a lot guys.
In fact, browsing shop's online catalog and searching Google for opinions, I'm narrowing my choices for two contenders: NEC and EIZO, both 20".
In particular:
NEC: LCD20WGX2PRO S-IPS
EIZO: FlexScan S2001W

What isn't clear for me is whether aforementioned NEC offers manual color temp. adjustment (in 500K steps) like EIZO does, which one is more calibrating-friendly, etc....

BTW, in Israel, where I am, NEC S-IPS are also available (at least in teh ship I intend to buy from). The model I mentioned above of NEC is S-IPS.
 
Last edited:
If you're looking at 20" then it's a lot more affordable and calibrable. Get a IPS panel and buy a decent calibrator. Lower end get the Huey Pro (not the non-pro) but save up for the Eye-One (X-rite) Display 2 or better.

Finally, the other VERY impt considration is wide vs normal gamut. Any LCD that covers more than 72% gamut = wide. But most software today XP/browsers etc... all CANNOT cope with wide gamut and colours will look oversaturated. You cannot calibrate this out. If you work on OS/apps that are "colour aware" and therefore can cope with wide gamut LCDs then you're ok - these include Mac OS X & Photoshop, Lightroom etc. But if you go on the net - you will have that problem. I personally decided to go with a standard gamut screen for next 3-5 years until the dust settles and the software catches up but most importantly the pix/graphics on the net catches up. Until then, i don't fancy looking at overly saturated colours.
 
So you would still prefer NEC because of IPS technology over EIZO which apparently is not IPS ? I can understand that.
Having said that, figured a review of NEC very close to the model I mentioned - good on colors, however they lament on blacks which might be a hindrance for photo editing work.
Do you think blacks indeed a bit suffer with NEC's (IPS models) ? A vast amoutn of my photo work is in B&W so that sounds to be important.
And yes, Photoshop is my primarily editing tool, while I prefer XP OS over new Vista (not sure whether XP is color management-aware OS)
 
alexz said:
So you would still prefer NEC because of IPS technology over EIZO which apparently is not IPS ? I can understand that.
Having said that, figured a review of NEC very close to the model I mentioned - good on colors, however they lament on blacks which might be a hindrance for photo editing work.
Do you think blacks indeed a bit suffer with NEC's (IPS models) ? A vast amoutn of my photo work is in B&W so that sounds to be important.
And yes, Photoshop is my primarily editing tool, while I prefer XP OS over new Vista (not sure whether XP is color management-aware OS)
Click to expand...

Black crush ie. how good it shows up black/shadows is hard to tell from *just* panel technology. Some would say IPS is better in this regard but I believe it's got more to do with the overall implementation of the end product. I won't choose IPS vs PVA based on perceived ability to show black shades. IPS vs PVA is impt for colour shift - this includes B&W shifting side to side. I think how good a screen can be calibrated will have more impact in showing up true Blacks & Whites.

XP is NOT colour aware. Neither is Internet Explorer so if you get wide gamut, it'll look funny incl any photo you post on the web esp the reds. Within PS it will be fine but anything outside will be a problem.

My suggestion? Go standard gamut - either NEC or Eizo will be great. Eizo makes the best panel given the technology. If you don't look side to side much (on 20" i doubt you will), then PVA is fine.

best.
 
Actually, one has to be careful with the recent iMacs, if the comments regarding IPS vs. TN panels are any indication. There are only a few models of iMac that have the "better" panel, as Apple has begun to use the less expensive panels in these models. I think the 20" aluminum model is a "good one".

For some, this difference might be subjective. I recently had my old Dell 1800FP die on me, and when I went to buy a replacement, I realized that getting an LCD with an IPS panel was a hard sell. Most panels available these days (especially the large ones) are optimized for high refresh rates (for video/gaming, naturally) which coincidentally makes the TN panels perfect for these applications.

Color stability and calibration is a secondary matter for these units.

I actually ended up fixing the Dell with a couple of parts available on the web for about $60 total. Not bad.


Cheers,
--joe.
 
Correction.

Correction.

Sorry about that - I should have said that the 24" aluminum model was the good one; I was thinking about the white models, all of which I think had the IPS panels. Carry on.


Cheers,
--joe.
 
Thanks guys, I ended up ordering 22" EIZO model (A-PVA panel) - earned quite rave reviews on usability for graphic work, calibrability and general quality. Not the cheapest one sure, but I hope it will prove itself...

As about MAC remarks - have never tried MACs so far, albeit would love to try out those for graphic work. However, a large percentage of the job that my PC will have to cope with will be engineering software (MATLAB, FPGA design, etc..) so MAC as a platform wouldn't probaly be suitable for these...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom