If nothing else, it seems that Samsung's newer A-MVA monitors have deeper blacks than their old C-PVA monitors. My 2333T C-PVA can hit about 2,800:1 (max) at normal luminance levels. At 110 cd/m2, my black level is 0.04 cd/m2, sometimes measuring at 0.05. PRAD measured the 650 A-MVA at ~3,700:1 at normal luminance levels, with a minimum contrast ratio of around 3,333:1 at very low luminance levels (down to 30 cd/m2). That would put the black level at 0.03 cd/m2 with white calibrated to 110 cd/m2. I was a little afraid that was too good to be true, but this picture of a 650 next to a GW2450HM (also A-MVA) is reassuring.I think C-PVA is also a single pixel structure and also has deeper blacks/better contrast than S-PVA. Although A-MVA may have somewhat better blacks than C-PVA.
I don't think there is anything inherent to C-PVA that causes it to exhibit more black crush, although I can say that my own C-PVA monitor does have bad black crush (which can be fixed with a profile, but it is bad without correction). My impression is that newer VA monitors just don't have the problem with severe black crush that some older VA monitors had, regardless of their panel type. For example, I saw a review of the F2380 stating that it crushed black/gray below 10 IRE, and I think my 2333T is probably just as bad if I disable my profile. But a review of the NEC EX231Wp said that gray was distinguishable down to 2 IRE. Unless I'm mistaken, all three of those are C-PVA monitors. And FWIW, I think PRAD's 650 (A-MVA) review states that gray/black can be clearly distinguished down to 3 IRE.and there have been some reports of black crush with that panel type. Well, there have been reports of black crush with all VA panel types really, but I should say it seems more common with C-PVA than S-PVA.
Yeah, but luckily, they seem pretty nice. I don't have any hands-on experience with one yet, but I plan to buy one later this year. According to PRAD's review, they should be better than my 2333T in at least a couple key areas: contrast ratio up to ~3,700:1 from ~2,700:1 and much better color uniformity. I'm expecting it to be better in other areas as well. Since I care very little about response time and will be using a profile for correction of color inaccuracy and black crush, my expectations are pretty high.Even Samsungs newer VA monitors don't use their own panel. Instead they use A-MVA.
Correct. The black crush of the F2380 (or other screens with similar behaviour) is just an effect of displaying gamma corrected material (in most cases sRGB sources) on a display which has a gradation that doesn't form the gamma corrections inverse. In an ICC based workflow this is no problem as long as the current screen characteristic is correlating to the display profile but in unmanaged applications this can cause the mentioned effect. Only solution is in most cases a correction via the videocard LUT in the calibration context to achieve the desired gradation.don't think there is anything inherent to C-PVA that causes it to exhibit more black crush,
I guess the Samsung 650 may be your best bet if you want an A-MVA monitor. Phillips and BenQ also make A-MVA monitors.I would like to compare my SPVA to this new AMVA.
What monitor can I buy to change my EIZO s2433 in favour of a monitor?
Obviously I will not swap my EIZO for an AMVA, but I would like to add AMVA to my collection.I guess the Samsung 650 may be your best bet if you want an A-MVA monitor. Phillips and BenQ also make A-MVA monitors.
I have a feeling you may miss some of the Eizo features, as A-MVA monitors won't have the same features as high-end monitors do. They also won't be wide gamut, but depending on what you want it for, that may be a plus. If you are happy with the Eizo, I wouldn't swap it for an A-MVA. Perhaps an A-MVA would make a decent secondary monitor for it though.
Thanks. The viewing angles for that Samsung S22A650 definitely points to either an IPS or a VA of some kind. I haven't been able to track down what kind of panel it actually does have though.Did you look at the Samsung SyncMaster S22A650S? I think it's A-MVA.
Samsung doesn't make the A-MVA panels themselves, AUO makes them.
I see they have a 21.5: A-MVA panel, M215HW02 V0 in production. Not entirely sure which monitors use that panel though. BenQ and Phillips may be places to look.
I know Eizo makes some 22"ers at that resolution (they may even be 1920x1200), but they are all S-PVA , I think.
what are the newer model over S-PVA?All *VA monitors of all generations regardless any additional letters have color shift (and black crush as its form). This is a hardware (Vertically Aligned liquid crystal display) issue and cannot be corrected.
Newer versions of *VA technology, as was mentioned, have been improved over old S-PVA (improved CR and pixel structure, no wide gamut issues, less eye strain for text work).
Only issue is the reproduction of sRGB content in unmanaged applications without color space emulation or at least sufficient precise fixed emulation presets (with current processing technology and 3D-LUTs it is even possible to realise "full featured" CMM functionality* in display hardware; examples are current Eizo displays with Color Navigator 6.x (see last two screens) or current NEC displays in combination with SpectraView Profiler 5.x (can't link to the report as it isn't free yet)).What are the wide gamut issues
The 24" and 27" 650 series is A-MVA, so logically one would assume the 22" should be the same.Thanks. The viewing angles for that Samsung S22A650 definitely points to either an IPS or a VA of some kind. I haven't been able to track down what kind of panel it actually does have though.
are this a problem of S-PVA or of any wide gamut monitors without hardware color space emulation?Only issue is the reproduction of sRGB content in unmanaged applications without color space emulation or at least sufficient precise fixed emulation presets (with current processing technology and 3D-LUTs it is even possible to realise "full featured" CMM functionality* in display hardware; examples are current Eizo displays with Color Navigator 6.x (see last two screens) or current NEC displays in combination with SpectraView Profiler 5.x (can't link to the report as it isn't free yet)).
I should add that also many "sRGB screens" don't achieve this characteristic out of the box completely especially regarding tonal response curve (= gradation) or color gamut fitting (over- and/ or undercoverages).
Emulation of CMYK process color spaces is in contrast to RGB working color spaces of course very limited (inherently). Softproofing should be carried out in a managed workflow with respect to all participating ICC profiles.
Regarding differences in text, I think it primarily has to do with having cleartype enabled, as the subpixel rendering seems to dislike the dual structure of s-pva. If no subpixel rendering is going on, then maybe the text will be a bit sharper.
These observations fall within the range of my own experience. The NEC 2490 is the sharpest display I have for text, but the greater contrast of the S-PVA displays I use makes up for some of the difference. They are all quite acceptable for use over long hours of writing and number-crunching. The NEC has an advantage for photo editing, but not one that compels me to haul it out except for something that will be published in print.I have limited experience with s-pva vs ips text, but from what I have seen myself, comparing a nec 2170/2190 & eizo s1921 vs a nec 2490 is that the text is sharper on the 2490, yet it is still mostly acceptable on the VA monitors too. Basically the 2490 looks pretty sharp while the VA monitors' text is a tad blurry, almost CRT-like -- not nearly as bad as an ancient CRT, but there is some similarity. So for text work, I do find the 2490 better, but it's not like the VAs are unusable or anything.