Posted by Michael Renner on November 29, 2006 at 4:22 PM
Hi all,
I have a good CRT, but the continually dropping prices of LCD's and Xmas around the corner...
Does anyone have any recommendations on brand? I have seen some people/review sites speaking highly of Gateway, Dell and HP. For those that have switched, have you had any issues calibrating or with image quality, etc?
I figure that this is a good audience to ask, as I think most of us have pretty high requirements in terms of image quality on our displays. Things like uneven backlighting, etc drive me nuts.
Michael
Posted by Jack Brauer on November 29, 2006 at 6:26 PM
I love my Mac 20". I've heard Sony makes great LCDs too.
Posted by Les Barstow on November 29, 2006 at 6:27 PM
The higher-end Dells are supposed to be quite good. Don't go cheap, though, or you'll pay for it in image calibration quality (or lack thereof).
Posted by Mel Ladewig on November 29, 2006 at 7:05 PM
I have a Samsung 730B I think and like it. This monitor has plenty of adjustability and can be calibrated. Works much better on a digital cable than VGA, so that cost me an extra $80. I have a Dell on my desk at work, and it is OK for me (1707FP), but I don't think that it is very adjustable. I just got a new HP computer (E6300 Core 2 Duo ) with an HP TFT LCD. I just got this PC and haven't had much time to work with it, but the monitor is just as adjustable as the Samsung though the contrast curve is different. This may have something to do with it being a TFT screen. The contrast ratios are the same.
Posted by Joshua Hardin on November 29, 2006 at 7:06 PM
I've been using a Dell 2405FPW 24" LCD at work for the last year and it has been great. I would highly recommend it, but these puppies cost around $700, so for home use that might be a steep price. It's much easier on the eyes than the 19" I had before when editing photos. I've had no problems with the Dell calibration or printing what I see on the Canon i9900 printer I have here as well.
Posted by Bret Edge on November 29, 2006 at 10:50 PM
I'm on a Dell 20" UltraSharp LCD monitor and I love it. It's easy to calibrate and, more importantly, accurate.
Posted by Les Barstow on November 29, 2006 at 10:58 PM
Mel, I have the 1707FP at my office as well, and it's not high end enough to do well as a photo monitor. I find it lacks significantly in adjustability, and I can't get enough saturation and contrast on some images. Still, it's much better than a CRT in a room lit by fluorescents, so I'm not complaining too much!
Posted by Rick Dunn on November 30, 2006 at 5:02 AM
I have the Dell UltraSharp 19" that I've been using for 3 or 4 years now. It's been a great performer for me, and I've never (gasp!) calibrated; no color issues with prints over that time. Its color accuracy, contrast and stability of both has been excellent.
I'm vasilating between going Mac soon or getting another Dell; if I go Dell, I'll stick with the Dell monitors (don't know who makes them) and get the 24" widescreen.
Posted by Michael Renner on November 30, 2006 at 10:05 AM
Well - based on these responses it looks like Dell is on the top of the short list. I was actually looking at that 24" widescreen myself. It's currently running $800 and up depending on how much you extend the warranty. Maybe they will run a Christmas deal or coupon in the near future...
Mel - How does Photoshop run on that Core 2 Duo? I was thinking about building a new PC myself using that processor or maybe the 6600. I bet photoshop screams with a dual core set up.
Thanks all for the responses!
Michael
Posted by Nat Coalson on November 30, 2006 at 10:48 AM
One more monitor to look at: LaCie 3 Series (319, 320, 321)... these are the best, most color-accurate LCDs for the price on the market today.
Posted by Rene Pirolt on November 30, 2006 at 12:10 PM
Michael – I bought a new computer and monitor earlier this year. After doing some research, and considering the "big" Dell, LaCie, and other monitors, I opted for quality over size. I bought a 19” NEC MultiSync LCD 1980SXi. The model has been updated with the 1990SXi. They also make 20” and 21” color critical monitors. With it, you can buy the optional Spectraview software that works with the monitor and most calibration devices. I did not buy the software, since I already have Monaco Optix.
Here is a link to their products http://www.necdisplay.com/products/ClassificationFamilyDetail.cfm?ID=9
So far, the monitor has been a real pleasure to look at – sharp and a bit more contrasty (like most LCDs over a CRT). I find the monitor much nicer that the standard Dell LCDs. The color does not shift as much when you view images a slight angle – which is also a problem with very large monitors.
I also looked at LaCie monitors, but after having to deal with their extremely rude customer service reps over the phone with an unrelated issue (an external hard drive that keeps failing from the time I bought it, although it’s been replaced three times), I no longer buy their products (sorry LaCie fans!). Somewhere I read that NEC/Mitsubishi makes LaCie monitors anyway.
Let us know what you end up buying.
Posted by Mel Ladewig on November 30, 2006 at 1:32 PM
I'm running PS Elements 3, not Photoshop CS2 on the Core 2 Duo E6300 - 1GB RAM - 7200RPM SATA drive. But its fast. Much faster than the Celeron 2.66GHz with 2GB of Ram. It opens the editor in about 1/4 the time of the Celeron machine. I imagine that it'll be no contest when I up the RAM. I just haven't had time to get that ordered yet. I've been very busy at work.
Mel-
Posted by Jon Leibowitz on November 30, 2006 at 4:11 PM
Posted by Andy Brehm on November 30, 2006 at 11:46 PM
just out of curosity, do widescreen monitors pose an advantage over traditional 4:3 monitors? More specifically do they hold and advantage in a dual screen setup? I too and looking into purchasing new LCDs arranged in a dual monitor setup and was wondering if I should be looking for a 4:3 or widescreen monitor?
andy
Posted by Rick Dunn on December 1, 2006 at 12:58 PM
It's currently running $800
The Dell site has it for $680 right now. You have to add it to the cart to see the 15% discount.
Posted by Les Barstow on December 1, 2006 at 4:50 PM
Andy,
Widescreen is better if you're processing horizontal 35mm or similar digital format (and for panoramics), because the screen is better at accommodating them. If you're processing verticals, widescreen panels are less functional due to the proportional lack of vertical pixels.
If you're shooting a 4/3 camera (aka Sigma), or if you're shooting medium or large format, a regular 4:3 monitor is better for you in all cases.
There is no advantage to my mind in having a widescreen over a dual-display system; the widescreen will only require a single video plug/card...
On the non-photographic front, 16:9 screens are designed to fit DVD and HDTV images. That is their design basis and their strongest selling point.
Discussion
17 repliesI have a good CRT, but the continually dropping prices of LCD's and Xmas around the corner...
Does anyone have any recommendations on brand? I have seen some people/review sites speaking highly of Gateway, Dell and HP. For those that have switched, have you had any issues calibrating or with image quality, etc?
I figure that this is a good audience to ask, as I think most of us have pretty high requirements in terms of image quality on our displays. Things like uneven backlighting, etc drive me nuts.
Michael
I'm vasilating between going Mac soon or getting another Dell; if I go Dell, I'll stick with the Dell monitors (don't know who makes them) and get the 24" widescreen.
Mel - How does Photoshop run on that Core 2 Duo? I was thinking about building a new PC myself using that processor or maybe the 6600. I bet photoshop screams with a dual core set up.
Thanks all for the responses!
Michael
Here is a link to their products http://www.necdisplay.com/products/ClassificationFamilyDetail.cfm?ID=9
So far, the monitor has been a real pleasure to look at – sharp and a bit more contrasty (like most LCDs over a CRT). I find the monitor much nicer that the standard Dell LCDs. The color does not shift as much when you view images a slight angle – which is also a problem with very large monitors.
I also looked at LaCie monitors, but after having to deal with their extremely rude customer service reps over the phone with an unrelated issue (an external hard drive that keeps failing from the time I bought it, although it’s been replaced three times), I no longer buy their products (sorry LaCie fans!). Somewhere I read that NEC/Mitsubishi makes LaCie monitors anyway.
Let us know what you end up buying.
Mel-
andy
The Dell site has it for $680 right now. You have to add it to the cart to see the 15% discount.
Widescreen is better if you're processing horizontal 35mm or similar digital format (and for panoramics), because the screen is better at accommodating them. If you're processing verticals, widescreen panels are less functional due to the proportional lack of vertical pixels.
If you're shooting a 4/3 camera (aka Sigma), or if you're shooting medium or large format, a regular 4:3 monitor is better for you in all cases.
There is no advantage to my mind in having a widescreen over a dual-display system; the widescreen will only require a single video plug/card...
On the non-photographic front, 16:9 screens are designed to fit DVD and HDTV images. That is their design basis and their strongest selling point.