HP LP2475w (Possible new IPS)

ninethirty said:
Assuming that Amarie means the his/her eyes were bleeding because the text wasn't sharp enough -- i.e. with the red halo that I believe those panels were prone to -- then a 24" is the way to go.
Click to expand...

Don't think i saw such things on my HP.



ninethirty said:
The lower pixel pitch will make the text sharper. Smaller too, you're right, but that's the tradeoff.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I haven't seen a 26'' myself either but i would think bigger text for about roughly the same space on the screen is good. Too bad this HP model didn't come in a 26'' variant or i'd be more inclined to try 1 step up from 24'' to 26'' since i heard good things about bigger texts :D
 
Megalith said:
Is Best Buy or any other chain getting this?
Click to expand...

Best Buy has been liquidating there high qualtiy panels, I doubt they are persuing any professional grade units for in store sales. They may sell it online, in which case it can be returned in store, not a bad deal really.
 
ninethirty said:
Good question; I have the same questions from any Mac users out there. I'm looking into the HP for use with a Mac as well. I know that Macs have good color management, when compared to Windows -- as far as I've been able to gather Safari, the DVD player and the various OS windows themselves (Finder, the menus, etc) are all color managed via ColorSync, so they should all render appropriately with the high-gamut monitor.
Click to expand...
I'm also looking at this monitor to use it with a Mac and with Linux, mostly for text (writing software, and scientific papers in LaTeX). I've been looking also at the Cinema Displays, but the large-grain antireflective makes them unbearable to my eyes, for text. Yesterday I was looking at a much cheaper Samsung SM245B (TN panel), but the colour shifts across such a large screen is too distracting, so I'm almost convinced that I will need to spend this extra 200EUR... Also, while I'm a scientist, not a publishing pro, I've been surrounded by graphic designers and photographers for all of my life, so I've come to expect colours to look right :)
Unfortunately, the reviews always concentrate on games and colour, and almost nobody talks about text quality, image stability/flicker... the kind of things which are so important for those like me who spend their working days (and nights) looking at text on a screen. I can extrapolate a few things from contrast and black depth information, and sometimes from macro pictures made for looking at ghosting, but some more info would be nice, before spending this much money...

ninethirty said:
So hopefully someone else can chip in how much problem it will be really. Any experiences with color management w/ high-gamut monitors on Macs?
Click to expand...
Not high gamut, but I've been using (with my MacBook) an Acer P203W that was badly off with the default profile (but had sharp text, for the price), and OsX did very well in colour correcting it to a usable state, using different profiles on internal and external screen (no hardware calibrator, just with SuperCal). And, what is nice, not just with some colour-aware applications, but with all of them... Of course, if you open an AdobeRGB image in an application that does not use the Apple libraries and is unaware of color tagging (like most X11 software ported from Linux to OsX), you're looking for trouble :)

ninethirty said:
I'm not sure if there will still be problems with sRGB pictures on web pages -- perhaps Safari and Firefox will default images without color profiles to the system profile? Someone who understands this color profile thing better than I will have to fill in there.
Click to expand...
AFAIK, Safari assumes sRGB for non-tagged images. See http://www.gballard.net/psd/go_live_page_profile/embeddedJPEGprofiles.html for more details.

ninethirty said:
Assuming that Amarie means the his/her eyes were bleeding because the text wasn't sharp enough -- i.e. with the red halo that I believe those panels were prone to -- then a 24" is the way to go. The lower pixel pitch will make the text sharper. Smaller too, you're right, but that's the tradeoff.
Click to expand...
Not really; for typography you absolutely must have the correct DPI setting (in the system and, if present, in the application), so the displayed size of character does not change: a 10 points Helvetica must be the same physical size no matter the monitor resolution - the point in typography is a physical length unit, not a number of pixels. A higher DPI will give you a better defined character, a larger monitor with the same number of pixels will give you a less defined character, but more space to work. That is the actual tradeoff. And, contrary to Windows XP, OsX manages different DPI settings very well. Linux (using Gnome or KDE) does a decent job too.
 
These are the best steps.

This is all for you BTW :) I wish marriage came with a 4 year warranty as well ha!

But if I could watch the game in a FireFox 3 browser window with CM enabled then, problem solved. Soon Google will own all games too so we will find out :)

Snowdog said:
A step in the right direction I guess, but this almost certainly just keeping your calibrated LUT - IOW your gamma adjustments. It won't (can't) make games read the profile and do color space conversions.

So wide gamut monitors will still be out of gamut, but the gamma curve will be corrected.

Keep it up guys, in 4 years when I need a new monitor wide gamut glitches might be worked out. :D
Click to expand...
 
Moogle Stiltzkin said:
Don't think i saw such things on my HP.
Click to expand...

No, I think the red halos were a characteristic of the Dell 2708, if I'm remembering correctly. It's especially prevalent with black text on a white background, which is, oh, 99% of what some of us look at.


Sash, thanks for your input -- I'm glad to hear that OS X handles this well. I'm getting less worried about a high-gamut monitor.

sash said:
Not really; for typography you absolutely must have the correct DPI setting (in the system and, if present, in the application), so the displayed size of character does not change: a 10 points Helvetica must be the same physical size no matter the monitor resolution - the point in typography is a physical length unit, not a number of pixels. A higher DPI will give you a better defined character, a larger monitor with the same number of pixels will give you a less defined character, but more space to work. That is the actual tradeoff. And, contrary to Windows XP, OsX manages different DPI settings very well. Linux (using Gnome or KDE) does a decent job too.
Click to expand...

Hmm... i think we agree here, but not sure. I'm not talking about changing the DPI settings within the OS or application, just stretching the same number of pixels over a larger space (e.g. a 24" monitor at 1920 x 1200 vs. a 26" monitor at 1920 x 1200). With the 24", the pixels are obviously closer together (same number of pixels packed into a smaller space), so as you said, the 26" would appear larger but less defined, whereas on the 24" it would appear smaller, but crisper.
I don't know if I would say the 26" has "more space to work", exactly ... it would be the same amount of workspace (1920 x1200), the workspace would just appear larger, right? So you move the monitor back a few inches.
 
Thx ninethirty.

By the way the last calibration i posted in this thread i ran a re-review of the result and this was it.




Surprisingly contrast improved a lot !! also Delta E hasn't gone up too much and is still lower then 2 !



*If DeltaE >3, the color displayed is significantly different from the theoretical one, meaning that the difference will be perceptible to the viewer.
* If DeltaE <2, LaCie considers the calibration a success; there remains a slight difference, but it is barely undetectable.
* If DeltaE < 1, the color fidelity is excellent.
Click to expand...



How often do people recalibrate ? My Eye Monitor has a weekly notification to recalibrate :eek:
 
Moogle Stiltzkin said:
Thx ninethirty.

How often do people recalibrate ? My Eye Monitor has a weekly notification to recalibrate :eek:
Click to expand...

I think you can change it to be 1, 2, 3, or 4 week intervals for a reminder. I recalibrate every 4 weeks since I don't do color for a living. I don't think LCD's drift as much as CRT's tend to.
 
mystykmax said:
I think you can change it to be 1, 2, 3, or 4 week intervals for a reminder. I recalibrate every 4 weeks since I don't do color for a living. I don't think LCD's drift as much as CRT's tend to.
Click to expand...

Sometimes i wonder whether NEC 2690 is better since it has a 1 push button calibration :eek:
 
I really think the recalibration timer should be based on usage hours not elapsed time which will have little effect on panel changes. I changed my reminder on my NEC to once/month, but as noted, it is push a button and walk away...

But I didn't really notice the effect of calibrating the first time anyway. It is an sRGB panel and looked quite good out of the box.
 
I have my eye on this monitor for an upgrade soon, would it be a good pairing with an HD4870 for gaming?
 
Asus nVidia GeForce 8800GTS 640MB ;)

http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=633&p=2

I can barely play Crisis because of the lag. Even in Quake 4 there is perceptible lag using high settings.

Keep in mind my preferable resolution is native 1900x1200 usually at high settings. I don't really play Crysis so i think i can hold out a bit more till the next high end graphics card comes, hopefully it has HDMI or Display Port :D

Because i heard DirectX is coming out soon in the next card thats why i am hesitant to spend so much to upgrade just yet.
 
ninethirty said:
Hmm... i think we agree here, but not sure. I'm not talking about changing the DPI settings within the OS or application, just stretching the same number of pixels over a larger space (e.g. a 24" monitor at 1920 x 1200 vs. a 26" monitor at 1920 x 1200). With the 24", the pixels are obviously closer together (same number of pixels packed into a smaller space), so as you said, the 26" would appear larger but less defined, whereas on the 24" it would appear smaller, but crisper.
I don't know if I would say the 26" has "more space to work", exactly ... it would be the same amount of workspace (1920 x1200), the workspace would just appear larger, right? So you move the monitor back a few inches.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't push it further away, after having paid more for the extra inches ;)

IMHO "workspace area" is a question of usage. When I write code, I only care about apparent size - the character size must be comfortable; for this kind of use, I agree with your view. For typography instead real size is what matters, since one is actually trying to simulate a piece of paper with a screen; especially because only working at a 1:1 scale gives you the best "feeling" of the final result, zooming in and out tends to confuse the perception. If you move a piece of A4 paper further away, its real size does not change, its apparent (angular) size does, but your brain "knows" that it's further away, and you still perceive it as the same object, same size. Same thing happens for a screen; it's the physical size that matters, not the number of pixels; 26" is still bigger than 24" even when it's further away. For DTP, people started to use near page-size monitors (21") already back when their resolution was just 1280x1024; that resolution could have been handled by cheaper 17" monitors, but the real size was important enough to justify the higher cost of the 21".
Let's turn this the other way round - think about a printer: you wouldn't call a 600DPI printer "twice the size" of a 300DPI printer, when they both do A4/US Letter size. And you wouldn't (I hope ;)) use it to print a letter with a 6 points font instead of the standard 12, although 6-points on the 600DPI would result in the same number of pixels as 12-points on the 300DPI.

Anyway, forgive me for the long and boring "lecture" - all of this is really relevant only to those like amarie who care primarily about typography; for the rest of us, including me, apparent size is more important, so your point of view applies :)
 
I'm showing insanely high prices on this monitor practically everywhere. A "Froogle" shows most places asking $620-800 for it. Provantage wants $760. Buy.com wants $640.

My thing is that the Planar 26" recently dipped down to $750 and is now hovering around $790. I'm not sure I can see a persuasive case for the 24" HP unless you just really want a smaller screen. Imo, it needs to be solidly under $600-650 from reputable vendors to make a persuasive argument to the consumer.

Can anyone think of any reason to go with the HP over the Planar?

-S
 
semisonic9 said:
I'm showing insanely high prices on this monitor practically everywhere. A "Froogle" shows most places asking $620-800 for it. Provantage wants $760. Buy.com wants $640.

My thing is that the Planar 26" recently dipped down to $750 and is now hovering around $790. I'm not sure I can see a persuasive case for the 24" HP unless you just really want a smaller screen. Imo, it needs to be solidly under $600-650 from reputable vendors to make a persuasive argument to the consumer.

Can anyone think of any reason to go with the HP over the Planar?

-S
Click to expand...

Interesting, I was just making the case on AT that there wasn't any reason to go for the Planar over the HP. The Planar is $820 on Newegg, though; I didn't realize it had dipped lower elsewhere.
The HP is $620-650 at a couple places online (PCNation and CostCentral) -- not first-line retailers, but apparently reputable from what I can tell.

I don't consider the 26" to be an advantage over 24"; Sash and I have been discussing it upthread but being the same resolution, it seems to be a matter of personal preference. You don't see more, you just see it slightly larger. So unless you have a real preference toward the .29mm dot pitch instead of .27, the HP looks quite attractive -- better inputs, similar color spectrum, and cheaper.
The main advantage of the Planar is a very good warranty and dead pixel policy directly from the manufacturer. I'm not sure what HP's warranty service is like, although someone posted their dead pixel policy up the thread.
 
According to the tftcentral review, the HP has the best measured black levels of any IPS panel to date, and great color accuracy once calibrated. The planar has lower input lag and a larger size. It all comes down to what is most important for you.

A hardcore FPS gamer might want the Planar for the slightly lower input lag.
I chose the HP, because I want the smaller dot pitch, better black levels and picture quality. It is all personal preference and what you intend to use it for.
 
Don't forget the HP also has a barge of inputs (2xDVI-I, HDMI w/SPDIF passthrough, DisplayPort, Component, S-Video, Composite vs. DVI-D, D-Sub), a 6 port USB hub, and a pivoting stand. The larger size seems to be your only criteria, but don't forget they're the same resolution; all you're doing is increasing the dot pitch and personally I'd take a "smaller" workspace with sharper detail over that.
 
Hey don't forget, the difference between the Planar and the HP isin't 2", it's 1.4" total.
 
All good points. Yes, size, dot pitch, and input lage are all important criteria for me. More important than slightly better blacks, at least.

At 25, I already have "old man eyes", by which I mean I tend to prefer text as large as I can get it (but I also prefer to avoid fracking with the software DPI control). I still consider 1900x1200 more than acceptable gaming resolution for everything I'm likely to play in the next 3-5 years. The extra 1.4" diagonal does not noticeably degrade image quality, imo, and the "desktop space" issue is a draw as far as I'm concerned, but I think we can all agree that we'd rather watch a DVD on a 25.5" screen than a 24.1" if overall image quality is the same.

Also, I'm not that convinced all the HPs connectivity options count as a big "pro" with me. Every college kid I know who cares about video games has something bigger than a 24" lying around to game on. I used to game on an old 30". I don't think the demand for monitors this size to double as a TV is that big. That's 26"-30" territory, imo.

As the HP inches closer to ~$600, the arguments in it's favor increase. They just need to realize that they're knocking on Planar's door with prices this high. And, imo, the same guy looking at the HP (sophisticated user who cares about color gamut, wants a large IPS and low input lag and is willing to pay extra for it) will also be looking at the Planar.

Planar keeps dropping their prices, probably in a bid for marketshare and due to competition from DoubleSight. HP needs to realize that they're in a fight, and some of these HP resellers need to get a freaking grip. If I have to choose between a $700-750 HP 24" (from a vendor I trust) and a $750-800 Planar 26" from the same guys, then the choice seems clear.

-S
 
The HP is a brand new product that has just started popping up at US retail channels this past week. I'm sure the average price will drop some once more places get them in stock. The Planar has been out for over a year, so of course the price has come down some.
 
TFTCentral measured the HP to have on average 25ms, but another poster measured around 18.
 
25ms is considerable input lag, and that is the average for this display. According to the tft review site it is 10 to 40ms. They also quote the input lag as "not quite as good as the Samsung SM245B, Hazro HZ30W or Hazro HZ26Wi (all at 7.5ms average), but remains a long way ahead of some very popular 24" screens such as the Dell 2408WFP A00 (64.1ms) and Samsung SM245T (52.5ms)". I've read reviews of people who switched from dell 2005wfp's to a faster input lcd and had to adjust their mouse sensitivity for example (the lag they were switching from was that bad).

The response time is g2g is 6ms? How is that working out for people? My 37" westinghouse had 12ms which wasn't really good for gaming with fast screen panning, or watching hd sports with fast screen panning (hockey, football kickoffs, etc). It also blurred the edges of the fast scrolling lyrics in games like rock band, which was very annoying on the eyes.

I'm not trying to bash this monitor I'm honestly interested in the answers since I'm shopping around for a monitor for my other computer. There is still a big tradeoff between TN and IPS it seems.
 
semisonic9 said:
All good points.
Click to expand...
We can agree dot pitch is personal opinion (your eyes shouldn't be going that bad at 25, seen a doctor?), but I'd rather watch DVDs on a larger TV with other people, I don't think 24-26" is enough of an increase to win that.

The connectivity was a huge pro for me. I'll be playing on this for the most part when I'm alone because it will look tons better than an SD CRT, I simply can't also afford a large HDTV. And personally, any college student with one has their priorities screwed up or is a bit spoiled by their parents. Most people I knew picked up $30 25-27" TVs off craigslist, which in widescreen is roughly 24-25" anyway.

The retailers you're seeing are quoting the wrong price. HP lists it as $750 for companies who get bulk discounts and can haggle the salesmen, the "Smart Buy" price is for individuals at $650 - see the disparity here. As worthless808 mentioned this is a brand new product and they've yet to sort out the issue, but if you're paying over $700 total you bought it from the wrong place. Expect it to pop up on more well known sites like Newegg within a couple weeks, and then the choice may not be so clear.

elvn: You can't really include the SM245B in that comparison because it's TN which are renowned for their low input lag. The Hazro's 7.5ms is very impressive for an IPS, but nobody sells it in the US. I can't really comment on the 6ms g2g rating except to point you towards tftcentral's review with PixPerAn images.
 
philjohn said:
I respectfully disagree, it's "average" input lag. 60ms+ as seen on the Dell 2408 and the Samsung 240T is considerable input lag.
Click to expand...
I agree with Phil. 25 ms is the peak, not even the average.

I have not seen any of the effects of input lag on the Hp. I do understand there is 2 maybe 3 frames slower, but so far no issues ;) For the other pros i am getting this input lag isn't that big a deal, unlike a certain 2408 which is just plain crazy :rolleyes:
 
philjohn said:
I respectfully disagree, it's "average" input lag. 60ms+ as seen on the Dell 2408 and the Samsung 240T is considerable input lag.
Click to expand...

Hi folks. Finally joined this forum. I have an HP LP2475w since yesterday (Saturday the 24th), and based this choice for a large part on this thread.

Anyway, with regard to the input lag, I can add the experience of my brother, who I consider to be a more hardcore gamer than myself. He plays a lot of UT3, and is still on a CRT. However, he is looking towards a TFT, since I have 2 now (bought a HP w2207 in june 2007, and added the HP LP2475w just now).

I let him install his UT3 on my computer (Q6600/4GB/8800GTX machine running WinXP), and let him play. We ran into an issue with UT3 and vsync, where with it enabled, the screen tearing disappeared, but the game itself added some sort of control-lag, but with vsync disabled (and some occasional tearing), he indicated he didn't notice any input lag compared to his CRT setup.

It's in any case good enough for me; I've played a bit of Crysis, Mass Effect and a few other games, and didn't notice any extra either (compared to the w2207, which should be faster on paper).

Beyond that, I don't do any colour-critical stuff myself, so I don't mind the wide-gamut of this monitor, and I also don't see any reason to buy a hardware-calibraror myself for it. I like my colours flashy and vibrant. ;)

Hope this helps give you an idea of what to expect.

Regards, Patrick.
 
been waitin a long time to replace my 20 incher from Dell. my old IPS 2007wfp was sold for the same price that I bought it a year and a half ago! LOL! IPS screens are better than gold these days, and its hard to find something half decent that will sustain a range of features found on other lesser screens. Gonna try and find someone that has this monitor in my area, as it is really the perfect monitor, period...well for this period. Its a bit pricey for me, but I could always wait for a refurb'ed one.

Secondly, I dont know if the mods will read this, but would it be too much to have 3 sub forums for the 3 lcd types? It would make it much easier for searching... or at least create a specific tag for each one of the three, so it can be specified and sorted based on panel type. :eek:
 
Well I've had mine since Thursday now and I've got to say it's beautiful :). Such an improvement over my old 19" Samsung. Done a little colour calibration as reds/greens were just a touch too vibrant, and now it's sweet. Games look so much better, not just the higher resolution but the colour/contrast is superb. Looks great from side-angles too unlike my TN panel before.

Yes it's a little expensive, but it's a fantastic monitor and I think worth every £. And no noticeable input lag either :D.
 
I think philjon meant 25 ms input lag is average compared to other ips models, which sounds accurate.. I mentioned it as the average amount between 10 and 40 ms on this particular monitor, according to the tft site. So according to them 40ms is the peak. "The HP LP2475W performed pretty well in this test, with an average input lag of 25ms being recorded. The input lag ranged from 10 - 40ms but never got above or below this."

I do appreciate the personal experiences with input lag and response time people are relating. And for response time, 6ms g2g response time sounds much more reasonable for a "non-tn" monitor. I just wonder how much better 6ms is vs my 12ms, and how much worse it is than 2 -3ms. Its too bad I can't take this monitor for a test drive to see how the input lag and response time are.
 
I'm soliciting data from those who own this monitor and have used a colorimeter or spectrophotometer to calibrate the monitor. My new monitor is bad. I'm curious as to whether this is a chronic problem with this product line or whether I've got a lemon.

Context:
I've read this entire thread.
Color accuracy counts for me.
I love movies and also I am an amateur photographer/printer.

I've owned a lot of monitors over the years.
Current LCDs:
Apple:
15 1280x1024 - retired to shelf
20 1680x1050 - 'retired' to server
23 1920x1200 - in use on main MacPro workstation
30 2540x1600 - in use on main MacPro workstation

Dell 2405 - 1920x1200 - 'living room' Mac mini

Current HDTV is Pioneer Elite Pro-610
58 inch HDTV at about 8 feet from viewing position

'Living room' LCD monitor must have input support for (HDCP DVI, HDMI, Component):
Mac mini
Apple TV
HD via Time Warner STB
PS3 - games and Blue Ray movies

I purchased the HP LP2475w to replace the Dell 2405 which I've used for several years now as the 'coffee table' monitor at 'finger-tip' distance which works just right for my visual acuity with a 'reading glasses' prescription. (I'm 50ish, so yes, bifocals or dedicated far/near glasses are a fact of life.)

I wanted "wide-gamut". It is not a 'handicap' for those who now how to use it. Those complaining about it should consider whether they would prefer a "Hi-Fi" stereo of the fifties or what is now standard audio quality.

OK, now for my specific problem.

This unit, has a 350k color temp delta between about three inches off the left side versus about three inches off the right side. This is enough so that when reading a web page and scanning/reading from the left/beginning of a line to the right/end of the line I'm constantly assaulted with green/pink white point shifts.

Also, there is a faint vertical bar of about 60 pixels about 25% in from the right side which is lighter/brighter.

One could argue that these are subtle issues, but they are constant, measurable, and human visible.

So, what do y'all see. (Demonstrably, measurably)

On the plus side:
This monitor does calibrate to a DE of about 0.3. Phenomenal. And it's gray level linearity is stunningly excellent from 0.2 to 140 luminance.
(But only at the specific point where the calibration sensor sits. Move it a couple inches in any direction and *that* point is now 'off-white'.)

Silent. Zero noise at 0, 15, 30, 50, 80 percent brightness. (I'm also a noise/quietness freak.)

The controls, Quick Select, PIP, and general menu navigation are excellent.

Good black level. Although even looking straight on from arm's length I do see 'white-haze' in the corners.
But I find this white-haze less distracting than the Dell 2405's 'contrast-crush' in the corners.

Black level detail is better than the Dell 2405.

Saturation, wide-gamut showing off here, is delightful.

--

However, all said, I've got to return this monitor. And I'm asking this community's assistance in deciding if a replacement has a decent chance of being 'good enough' or whether only spending another three kilo-bucks (2480zx) is the only decent bet for getting a monitor with adequate intrinsic product model design quality as well as individual unit quality assurance.
 
I think I'll be getting one of these shortly; I've been looking for a good reasonably-priced all-rounder 24" for a while, and everything I found seems to have some kind of fatal flaw. I was considering the 2408WFP with new firmware, but that seems to be taking ages to filter into the marketplace. I'll be going from an NEC TN monitor, so I hope it'll be a pretty noticeable difference!
 
rgazaway said:
I'm soliciting data from those who own this monitor and have used a colorimeter or spectrophotometer to calibrate the monitor. My new monitor is bad. I'm curious as to whether this is a chronic problem with this product line or whether I've got a lemon.

Context:
I've read this entire thread.
Color accuracy counts for me.
I love movies and also I am an amateur photographer/printer.

I've owned a lot of monitors over the years.
Current LCDs:
Apple:
15 1280x1024 - retired to shelf
20 1680x1050 - 'retired' to server
23 1920x1200 - in use on main MacPro workstation
30 2540x1600 - in use on main MacPro workstation

Dell 2405 - 1920x1200 - 'living room' Mac mini

Current HDTV is Pioneer Elite Pro-610
58 inch HDTV at about 8 feet from viewing position

'Living room' LCD monitor must have input support for (HDCP DVI, HDMI, Component):
Mac mini
Apple TV
HD via Time Warner STB
PS3 - games and Blue Ray movies

I purchased the HP LP2475w to replace the Dell 2405 which I've used for several years now as the 'coffee table' monitor at 'finger-tip' distance which works just right for my visual acuity with a 'reading glasses' prescription. (I'm 50ish, so yes, bifocals or dedicated far/near glasses are a fact of life.)

I wanted "wide-gamut". It is not a 'handicap' for those who now how to use it. Those complaining about it should consider whether they would prefer a "Hi-Fi" stereo of the fifties or what is now standard audio quality.

OK, now for my specific problem.

This unit, has a 350k color temp delta between about three inches off the left side versus about three inches off the right side. This is enough so that when reading a web page and scanning/reading from the left/beginning of a line to the right/end of the line I'm constantly assaulted with green/pink white point shifts.

Also, there is a faint vertical bar of about 60 pixels about 25% in from the right side which is lighter/brighter.

One could argue that these are subtle issues, but they are constant, measurable, and human visible.

So, what do y'all see. (Demonstrably, measurably)

On the plus side:
This monitor does calibrate to a DE of about 0.3. Phenomenal. And it's gray level linearity is stunningly excellent from 0.2 to 140 luminance.
(But only at the specific point where the calibration sensor sits. Move it a couple inches in any direction and *that* point is now 'off-white'.)

Silent. Zero noise at 0, 15, 30, 50, 80 percent brightness. (I'm also a noise/quietness freak.)

The controls, Quick Select, PIP, and general menu navigation are excellent.

Good black level. Although even looking straight on from arm's length I do see 'white-haze' in the corners.
But I find this white-haze less distracting than the Dell 2405's 'contrast-crush' in the corners.

Black level detail is better than the Dell 2405.

Saturation, wide-gamut showing off here, is delightful.

--

However, all said, I've got to return this monitor. And I'm asking this community's assistance in deciding if a replacement has a decent chance of being 'good enough' or whether only spending another three kilo-bucks (2480zx) is the only decent bet for getting a monitor with adequate intrinsic product model design quality as well as individual unit quality assurance.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your honest feedback.

I also have a colorimeter a eye one display 2 in fact. I also bought the hp lp2475 to replace my Dell 2405FPW as well ;)

I did note that after review, the results seemed to changed a bit. Keep in mind i let my monitor warm up an hour before i did calibration, and i ran the re-review like 15 or so minutes later without having screensaver on or turning of the monitor.

I also wondered how the result can change so soon, maybe it is because as you say :eek:

However i did not see the other problems you mentioned.

Overall i feel this monitor is very good and that there is no better monitor in this price range. I took a screenshot for a comparison for other popular monitors for 24'' and 26''




I need to do more calibration testing over the weekend when i am free to check again. INQ has helped me with some more calibration ideas, which i am going to try.
 
I had the same problem (though nowhere near as bad as you describe) with the left and right sides, sent it back for a new one and "touch wood" this one is fine, probably just another example of LG.Display's "quality control" IMHO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top