Photography Work Monitor 600€

[webzeb]

Do let me now what you decide to go for and how you get on...

Danny B

Of course.

For the moment, I am waiting for some quotations of the NEC MultiSync LCD2490WUXi (first version).
Unfortunately, the first prices I got just confirm that I couldn't afford it, even buying from the US (French VAT (19.6%), currency change fee (2.5%), custom fee and shipping cost increase the price a lot).

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

Thanks! As you can see, the screen is good for other things, but even under the widest terms, its impossible to say its suitable for color critical tasks.

Check the reds in the wood. Its like having a gradient from left to right. Here is far left vs. third from right (almost center) as example:

This is what the reviews doesn't tell you. Seeing this, would you recommend this screen for any work with color?

Edit:
I changed the brightness exposure in the picture to illustrate:

Notice the mountains as well. Detail and color gradually appearing from left to right. Its supposed to be even.

 

[dannybgoode]

I suppose it depends what you define as colour critical work. I'm an enthusiastic amateur who does some photo retouching and some computer art - mainly sketching and manga.

Is my work absolutely colour critical? No. Does the Eizo do what I want at the price I can afford - absolutely yes. Also, i cannot think of a circumstance where I'm going to be working in a repeating image such as the mountain shot.

Yes I agree it is a very good demonstration of the technical limitations of the screen but I tend to work with a photo in the middle of my screen with menus and palettes round the edges so the effect is not so much of an issue. Also with a single image the effect is not noticeable and I don't think it affects my ability to produce the result I want.

Also, I use the colour picker to match colours and for this it doesn't matter what appearance the screen gives, the picker will give the right result. When not working from a colour picker, say for web design work I tend to use hex values, the colour of which I know so again my work and the quality of it is not affected.

I agree that S-PVA screens are perfect but also maintain that IPS screens have limitations and drawbacks also, particularly at the cheaper end of the market. I think that people need to look at the whole picture (no pun intended) and its not a cut a dried case either way.

Yes I'd love to have £7-800+ to spend on a decent IPS screen but I don't. Would I recommend an S-PVA screen to someone with similar requirements to myself? Absolutely. Would I recommend one to someone who does work which is absolutely colour critical? Possibly not but there are plenty of graphics studios who do use them.

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

Yes I agree it is a very good demonstration of the technical limitations of the screen but I tend to work with a photo in the middle of my screen with menus and palettes round the edges so the effect is not so much of an issue. Also with a single image the effect is not noticeable and I don't think it affects my ability to produce the result I want.

I'm happy that you take it as a demonstration of the technical limitations rather then a personal attack of your screen. This is more a "user be aware", since it will have no meaning for us which screen the OP selects in the end. All we can do is to give him an informed choice. I find it very wrong that professional reviews doesn't test the screens as done here. They are taking a measurement with a colorimeter, checks the screen a bit and proclaim it good for color critical tasks. With a template and a camera, they are proven wrong.

You were asking for concrete evidence if IPS is technically better rather then subjectively better then PVA. The OP is asking for the potential benefits of H-IPS panels, without A-TW polarizer, over S-PVA panels.

Lets examine the picture you took as illustration objectively:

Left to right:
Brightness gets gradually darker from left to right.
Details are disappearing gradually from left to right.
Colors are changing gradually shades from left to right.
Brightness, details and colors are supposed to be identical.
On an H-IPS screen, they are identical (or supposed to be unless you have a lemon).

This tells us that any shade, brightness and detail is angle dependent even from center view. It also tells us that even a slight degree of angle change will distort any shade or level of detail. The screen itself is distorting the image you are viewing.

The video's presented in this thread also shows that a minor turn of head can alter the shade of a color and change level of detail.

There is no question about the evidence above. How it applies to your own work, is subjectively. Objectively, the screen doesn't show an accurate representation of an image. I don't think we'll disagree upon that.

Its up to OP on how he wants to use the information. These are at least some of the potential benfits of using a H-IPS panel instead of a PVA based one.


Edit: Here's an interesting thread on the subject of panels and editing photo's:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1004&thread=32497353

They have found a TN based monitor sufficient for their use in editing photo's. Cost less then the Eizo, NEC and HP.

 

[dannybgoode]

I absolutely agree with you. I posted the pictures of my monitor to prove me wrong and the other contributors to this discussion right as it is an important poitn and one that people absolutely should be made aware of. I am open minded and happy to demonstrate my own experiences where possible.

However, consider this example (and this is what happened to me).

I spent £424 on an HP LP2475W which as you know is an H-IPS screen. Unfortuantely it suffered from the well documented panel irregularities which meant that the right side of the screen was considerably warmer (redder in the case) than the left side of the screen which had a distinctly green hue to it. The difference in colour is measureable and some users are reporting in excess of 500k temperature difference between right and left.

When I opened to identical pictures side by side the actual colour of these photo's was very different - noticeable on skin tones, backgrounds, flowers, sky you name it.

I now have a screen where the colour is accurate right to left although when comparing images the brightness is a little out but gives me no where near the issues of the HP. I actually find the screen very even and if you measure it with a colorometer then the results are equal.

So, for £430 I can either have a monitor that measurable has substantial screen irregularities or one that have perceived irregularities. Of course the advantage with the Eizo I know that the monitor itself is showing the image accurately, just my eyes are seeing it wrong. With the HP the fault lay with the screen.

The other issue with PVA screens is of course the black crush effect but I have managed to largely negate this (and the brightness inconsistancies) by tilting the screen a couple of degrees downward. Not perfect but good enough for me.

So, in the interests of good debate I pose the same question to you but a little altered. Would you recommend a screen with measurable defects or one with perceived defects to someone where colour accuracy was critical?

I've said in earlier posts, if I had the money I'd love to give an NEC 2490WUXI2 a go but marriage and a £700 don't necessarily mix so again I maintain my opinion that for the money the Eizo is an excellent screen and people should not write it off as a choice merely because its an S-PVA. Bear in mind it has an internal 10 bit LUT which is a big bonus in this price and goes some way toward making up for its other deficiencies.

Thanks again for the healthy discussion, makes for interesting reading I hope.

Danny B

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

So, in the interests of good debate I pose the same question to you but a little altered. Would you recommend a screen with measurable defects or one with perceived defects to someone where colour accuracy was critical?

I haven't read up on the defect that the HP has or if it affect the whole lineup. Its not a characteristic of the panel at least. On the Eizo, the "defect" is a part of the panel characteristics. In both cases, the "defects" are measurable. On the Eizo, you require same equiptment the manufacturers use to measure the panel for the datasheets themselves. Regular users need to use a template and then rather measure the color differences as shown earlier.

Its not true that the "defect" on the PVA's only affect brightness. As you can see, brightness, contrast, gamma and color is being distorted.

These two pictures are supposed to be identical:

It doesn't matter if a defect or a panel characteristic makes the panel useless for someone where color accuracy was critical. Its still useless regardless, so my answer would be that I wouldn't recommend any monitor that is defective either by characteristics or by defect. If the HP can be RMA'd with the possibility to get a non-defect screen, I would recommend that one.

As pointed out, whatever is measured 2mm from the display is worthless information if the values are distorted at normal user distance. Your colorimeter tells you your screen is colormetrical accurate, your camera told you its not.

I use a wide gamut screen (LCD2690WUXi). Though I have a working sRGB preset, I play games, watch movies and surf internet in wide gamut (both, since I use IE8 and color managed firefox). It doesn't matter that the wide gamut isn't colormetrical accurate according to the sRGB material. I find the colors more flattering and appealing with wide gamut.

BUT, if I should look at pictures and evaluate them, I want them colormetrical accurate (or at least as close as possible). My screen then is a tool which I need to trust. As many others, the screen is used for the purpouse of being able to edit and judge pictures myself. As last stop before print.

To achieve this, I need to have a consistent color control. Some defects I can live with (dead pixels, backlight bleed and low contrast). Fortunately, my screen doesn't have those defects (though contrast could be higher, optical black is good). However, I can't use a screen which is not consistent in color regardless if its a defect (like the HP you got) or a panel characteristics (like the Eizo you now have). Most of the screens realestate would then be useless (for the purpouse of photo's, not nessesarily other things).

With my screen, I can more trust what the colorimeter tells me. On a PVA screen, it would lie to me and therefore be without any real value in my color management. I can download the printer profile, paper type etc. from the print service and softproof the picture. By using spectraview, I can change the monitor's calibration by just loading the appropriate profile on the fly so to match even better. On a PVA screen, the picture will be warped regardless of calibration (as shown in your picture). The two pictures I linked looks like they are from two different sources even though they are from the same source.

The OP is looking at the 2490WUXi2. It has colorcomp for even brightness and color distribution, 12-bit gamma for tonal seperation, 12-bit lut for color accuracy, internal stabelizer for color and brightness drift etc. With the use of spectraview, he can have unlimted hardware calibrated profiles which alters the monitor LUT itself and adjusts all settings on the fly reducing chances for loss of shades and banding as software calibration has.

It doesn't have the polarizer and is standard gamut, but he can trust that the image he sees has the same colors as the source material (besides the out of gamut ones). Karl Lang (father of Sony artisan) has deemed the previous model of this screen to be one of the best there is for color critical work.

If you take a picture of the screen with the same template, you'll see that its even.

The 2490WUXi2 (without the polarizer) should, in my opinion, be able to give predicable results in a controlled color managed enviroment. Therefore, I can recommend it for color critical tasks even if the pictures should be in aRGB. For me, it would have been worthy with the extra $$$ just not having to second guess the colors of the screen.

Edit:
Even though its a "dead horse" debate, you have managed to make it interesting. (Thus the long post from me).

 

[dannybgoode]

Thank you for taking time to respond so comprehensively. I know the debate is an old one but it is a new subject to me and it has been very interesting and educational.

I agree with all your points and as stated in my previous posts I'd love the NEC monitor but it is substantially (for my budget and possibly that of the OP as well more expensive which leads me to an interesting conclusion regarding IPS technology.

I think your point about the problems with the HP not being a problem with the panel perhaps should be rephrased to 'not being a problem with the technology'

It is almost certainly a problem with the panel as users of the Philips 240PW9ES (or EB for the black cased version) which uses the same LG panel report the same issues.

Now, that is either a manufacturing defect or evidence the IPS panels supported by cheaper ancillary components do not yet perform consistently. The NEC is a quality screen and it shows however having researched the HP and done some of my own testing there are questions over the quality of the compenents (shielding seems a particular issue). If I come by a £200 or so I may well RMA the Eizo and get the NEC. If not I'll use it and enjoy it for now.

I'll leave it there!!

Thanks again

Danny B

 

[webzeb]

Hi,

I would like to thank you all for your help.

Finally, I decided to increase my budget and I just ordered an...HP LP2480zx.
In fact, I got a used unit from an OEM evaluation programme, for a fairly good price (£811.33 shipped).

I hope this unit is in perfect condition, as it is supposed to be.

lélé

 

[psyside]

WOW nice price! even for refurb.That monitor is maybe one of the best monitors together with NEC2490, good luck with your unit and i'm waiting for review

 

[webzeb]

WOW nice price! even for refurb.That monitor is maybe one of the best monitors together with NEC2490, good luck with your unit and i'm waiting for review

Actually, I got it from Demand-IT, a division of Added Dimension Ltd. (UK).
Added Dimension Ltd. website is ugly, amateurish and above all completely outdated. The Dimension-IT (equipment hire) and ex-Demo Sale (and I guess, ex-hire sale) websites look hardly better. They simply do not inspire confidence.
However, the company have solid feedbacks on both eBay and Amazon, including recent sales. I guess the company simply abandoned its websites in favor of such platforms. Additionally, their communication seems to be pretty good: fast, appropriate and polite. (We will see if it is still good when problems come.)

According to the monitor serial number - I got it from my on-line invoice -, it is about one year old.
Since this model was released in summer 2008, and since this unit is supposed to be from an OEM evaluation program, it seems coherent.
Warranty expires on the 6th August 2011 (checked on HP website with the serial number).

So now, my main concerns are:

1. To receive the monitor, of course.
2. To receive a monitor without any scratch or mark.

Having that said, this monitor comes with an on-site professional warranty.
Therefore, if there is any problem (e.g. color temp or brightness variation across the screen, mura effect, or anything else), getting it replaced should not be a problem.

I got the tracking number one hour ago (ParcelForce)
It should arrive on Tuesday.
Wait and see!

lélé

 

[webzeb]

01-08-2009 00:38 International Hub Left origin country
01-08-2009 00:29 International Hub Arrived at outward Office of Exchange
31-07-2009 21:16 National Hub Sorted in hub
31-07-2009 18:54 Reading (Satellite) Depot On route to hub
31-07-2009 16:46 Reading (Satellite) Depot Collected from customer
31-07-2009 11:43 WDM Online

It's coming !

 

[~ Andrea ~]

Hi,
I've red all the thread and I'm not really satisfacted from the final choice because the HP 2480 is out from the LCD range of this discussion, anyway I'm curious to see the same test shot of this model.

I'm interested because I would like to get a good LCD for my amatour photography, obviously I've a limited budget; I like the NEC 2490WUXI (with AT-W polarizer) but I can't find it in EU, here we have only the 2490WUXI2.
So I would like to understand how much difference there's between the first and second version.

Also the wide-gamut can be a problem for me because I don't like oversaturated colours and now all the new LCD seems to be wide-gamut!!
Is the NEC 2490WUXI2 wide gamut too?

Actually I'm thinking about:

- NEC 2490WUXI BRAND NEW - I can't afford it;
- 2490WUXI REFURBISHED or 2490WUXI2 BRAND NEW - almost same price, I can afford it;
- The NEW DELL U2410 - IPS, but wide gamut, good price;
- EIZO 2431 - yes it's PVA but it's not wide-gamut and the price isn't so bad.

The 2490 first version will be perfect for me but I have to get it refurbished when for the same price I can get the second revision (without AT-W polarizier) brand new and with warranty; so does the 2490WUXI really worth this?

Many thanks for all the help.

 

[Surly73]

Hi,
I've red all the thread and I'm not really satisfacted from the final choice because the HP 2480 is out from the LCD range of this discussion, anyway I'm curious to see the same test shot of this model.

I'm interested because I would like to get a good LCD for my amatour photography, obviously I've a limited budget; I like the NEC 2490WUXI (with AT-W polarizer) but I can't find it in EU, here we have only the 2490WUXI2.
So I would like to understand how much difference there's between the first and second version.

Also the wide-gamut can be a problem for me because I don't like oversaturated colours and now all the new LCD seems to be wide-gamut!!
Is the NEC 2490WUXI2 wide gamut too?

Actually I'm thinking about:

- NEC 2490WUXI BRAND NEW - I can't afford it;
- 2490WUXI REFURBISHED or 2490WUXI2 BRAND NEW - almost same price, I can afford it;
- The NEW DELL U2410 - IPS, but wide gamut, good price;
- EIZO 2431 - yes it's PVA but it's not wide-gamut and the price isn't so bad.

The 2490 first version will be perfect for me but I have to get it refurbished when for the same price I can get the second revision (without AT-W polarizier) brand new and with warranty; so does the 2490WUXI really worth this?

Many thanks for all the help.

The 2490WUXi2 is sRGB gamut.

You're right, most of what's out and coming up is wide gamut. If you simply cannot handle wide gamut, you might be limited to the Dell 2209WA (only 22" but great bang for the buck). The HP L2475W is 1920x1200, and typically good value, but is wide gamut.

I'm not sure why your 2490 v1 refurbs are selling for the same price as new 2490 v2s. I didn't think NEC made much of an adjustment to MSRP when they released the new version.

 

[Jonte]

...

I'm not sure why your 2490 v1 refurbs are selling for the same price as new 2490 v2s. I didn't think NEC made much of an adjustment to MSRP when they released the new version.

They did in Europe.
Price was slashed from around 1000-1100 euro (in my country) to about 730-800 euros.

A user in Germany seemed very satisfied, 5/5 stars and wrote
26.08.2009

Über den Monitor muss man kaum noch was schreiben, ich bin begeistert. Der winzige Subpixelfehler ist schon fast kein Kommentar wert und sei nur aufgrund der ausgezeichneten Beratung und des Service erwähnt! Die ausführliche, freundliche und kompetente Beratung am Telefon waren sehr hilfreich und verringern die Nachteile durch einen Onlinekauf auf ein Minimum! Ein wirklich ausgezeichneter Shop bei dem wirklich alles stimmt!

Well, actually, it's only the first sentence where he speaks of the monitor, it's stunning. The rest is about stuck? subpixels and the service from the store...

I PMed two of the members here who have v.2 and asked if they could share their opinions and hopefully take som pictures of it.
Luke Sena's experience (is that the right word?) wasn't good at all and made me worried. Sure, white glow is a serious problem on my 2209WA, but only on black/very dark shades. I think the angles are as great as on my NEC 2090 with the polarizer when displaying a more colorful motive.

 

[~ Andrea ~]

Hi,
many thanks for the replies, I've checked after my post on the NEC website and I've noticed that 2490 (v1 and v2) are sRBG monitor and 2690 (v1 and v2) are wide gamut monitor, sorry but I've not noticed this difference before.

Also the Spectraview FAQ's page has been very useful: http://www.necdisplay.com/supportcenter/monitors/spectraview2/faq/

So the 2490WUXI2 has been improved regarding sRGB color space, from the Spectraview FAQ:
The color gamut has been modified slightly to more closely match that of sRGB. The sRGB coverage is 96.7% (vs 93.5% on the LCD2490WUXi) in CIE xy.
But it doesn't have oversaturation problems with non color managed applications, is this right?


IMHO, we can't get a perfect product for this price (700-800 EUR), if the only problem of the 2490WUXI2 compared with the previous version is the lack of the AT-W polarizer, I will live with white glow.
DELL 2209 have same problem and any other monitor that I've consider don't have an AT-W polarizer, so there's no way regarding this feature.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

@Surly73, unfortunately I have to get the 2490 v1 in the US because I've not found any reseller here in EU, so the price is the same because I have to consider shipping and customs.

I've already tried the DELL 2209WA (yes!! really great bang for the buck) but I don't like 1680x1050 on a 22 inch monitor, all is bigger than in my Macbook Pro 17 that do the same 1680x1050, I would like a bigger resolution.
I've also think about EIZO S2242W that have 1920x1200 and is 22 inch (I like thin bars nad text) but I've not found any discussion about.

@Jonte If are you speaking about 2490WUXI2, I agree the price is about 730-800, I hope to speak with real users soon.

Thanks guys!!!