Posted by Paula Graham on July 31, 2007 at 8:03 AM
I am aware that this topic comes up regularly and I did look in the 'search' for recent posts but could not find any, so..here goes again.
I bought last year a secondhand LACie Blue 22", an enormously heavy (30kg) machine. I run it with its native resolution of 1600x1200 so you can see a lot of your pic. I find, however, it is very, very difficult to see if the image is sharp or not at the final stage of the workflow. The whole screen looks a bit unsharp (the windows icons and text). The prints I do with it are pretty good, I suppose because you realy can see detail in black and white and it calibrates to perfection.
I am now considering getting an sleek LCD monitor but which????? it must be so I can calibrate it realy well to get good prints with my profiles etc.
I am at a loss and the obvious ones like Nec, and Lacie or Eizo are so very expensive.
Can I get a large LCD screen for around 400/500 pounds or would I be wasting my money and be unhappy??
You help and suggestions hugely appreciated, as always.
We run 3 PCs in the office. When one of our Iiyama monitors neared the end of it's life, I "borrowed" a Dell 2407. To say I feel in love with it was an understatment.
It might not have all the bells and whistles as the Eizo etc but then it costs less than £500. We now have 2 and will shortly be ordering another. Sharpness and contrast are excellent and as part of a fully calibrated system, the results are spot on
I have a Eizo 24" (Eizo S2411W) as a one and only monitor. Is one that the graphics card in your machine has to be calibrated. (i.e. not the one where the monitor holds the calibration as it was ££££). Whilst it may be slight outside the price range the 21" version of it should not be.
It is very good and I am really impressed and the wide screen is a real bonus when working with lightroom.
T
Posted by Peter Barritt on July 31, 2007 at 10:49 AM
I'm with Dell too Paula and am very happy with it, calibrated with Spyder 2. If you buy a reconditioned computer from Dell they chuck in a screen at cost price!! I ordered their top of the range ultrasharp big job (scuse the complicated technical language) and a new computer for about £450. what a bargain!!
Good luck Pete
All I use is a simply Gateway TFT LCD 17" monitor that was purchased from Staples 2 years ago for £150 , now I think they are about £99 lol. This works for me perfectly & the images I take & view look clear & vibrant, well some of them anyway
In addition to this I didn't have to calibrate this monitor either, simply plug & play.
Sometimes I get a bit confused about the high spec costly monitors out there, what is wrong with the cheaper ones like the one I use.
I use the Lacie 19" LCD and it is great, I downsized the the Lacie 22 CRT. If you do go this route then get the lacie Blue Eye calibrator too as it works well with the monitor and calibrates quickly and much better than other software I have used.
At the end of the day you get what you pay for, the Lacie is pricey but you get higher colour accuracy which may or may not be important to you. If not then Vincent's choice will be perfect, but if you are anal like me then it has to be the Lacie.
ebuyer.com currently has a LG 22" LCD screen for £199 inc VAT, I've been looking for one myself to replace the 17" LG LCD I bought for the same price about 2 years ago! There is a Samsung model on there two for a few pounds more but has a higher contrast ratio and quicker reaction time. Samsung are one of the market leaders when it comes to LCD displays and supply many other big name brands with the panels.
Also consider buying two LCDs to use in dual monitor mode. I use a calibrated CRT next to a cheap and cheerful £140 LCD. I run them in 1280x1024 so I get a combined screen width of 2560x1024. I like this arrangement, I can have lightroom/Breezebrowser open on one screen and Photoshop on the other.
It's just a different option to going for a large widescreen monitor. Most PCs support dual monitors but you need to check.
I havn't personally seen one displayed yet but the Apple Cinema Display's seem to come very highly recommended and IMHO would certainly be worth considering.
Another model which I'd have a very close look at would be the Eizo 21 inch widescreen which is very close to your budget, or if you can afford to go a bit higher the 24 inch screen is very nice,both are available HERE.
I was given a demonstration a couple of weeks ago of the two Eizo screens mentioned above and having seen them in action it's hard not to want one.
Although they can be a bit pricey particularly the 24 inch models and upwards, in the grand scheme of things it's certainly going to be money well spent.
After all we pay thousands for our lenses and camera bodies, if not tens of thousands over the years, we spend hundreds on the very sturdiest tripods and heads, all in the quest for ultimate sharpness and definition, not to mention thousands upon thousands of hours locating, watching and photographing our subjects, so with all that in mind I think a really decent quality monitor should really be a priority to view,and enjoy,our hard earned efforts at their best.
The above paragraph was more in response to Vince's question about why pay more money for a screen instead of a cheap and cheerfull £99 job.
I believe the quality of the Eizo's is second to none and they also come with a 5 year warranty.
Agreed with that Eizo are great, know a bunch of pros that use them and no complaints. You are so right too Justin, the more the pay you the better you get. Does it make a difference, well none of us would waste money if it didn't. But everyone has different ideas Paul so you should just take the advice here and make up your own mind, I would say though that if you spent less than 500 quid on a monitor it would be a mistake - IMHO
Posted by Paula Graham on July 31, 2007 at 6:51 PM
Folks, thank you so very much.
When one wants perfect prints and perfectish digital files to send to competitions and salons it does make a difference to be able to see fine detail in both ends of the scale, blacks and whites.
I do work with two monitors with the 22" Lacie Blue being the calibrated one and indeed a cheap and cheerful LCD for PS tools etc, and what a joy such a large screen is. The bulk of it is a nightmare and I only paid 120 pounds for it, so I must not grumble. I am just not sure if it has come to the end of its life or that it is my eyes that stop me seeing if my file is sharp or not.
I do agree that all the money spend on the gear and all the effort in going out to get the shots it would be silly to skimp on the monitor on which I work every day when at home and is a great joy to me too.
And if a monitor will last 5 years it is not so much per year I presume! I can see that I am talking myself into an expensive Eizo or Lacie!!
About the Dell 24", what worries me is that it has such a high contrast ratio while the Lacie/Nec/Eizo have a much lower ratio and can you calibrate it well so your prints come as you expect them to be?
I do thank you all so much for your input and shall now agonise a bit longer between the Dell and the Eizo!!
Monitor calibration has little to do with print accuracy. You need your monitor calibrated so that colours. tones, etc are reproduced faithfully on the screen so that you are conscious of what you are adjusting based on a faithfully reproduced image. Whether this is then translated into an accurate print is a function of the printer profiles rather than the monitor profile. You can get an accurate print from an image viewed on an uncalibrated monitor but you will not get an accurate print from an uncalibrated (unprofiled) printer (except by good luck). Don't get me wrong, of course you should have a calibrated monitor but it is only a small part of a bigger equation.
Whilst accepting the Eizo is a good choice, there is a huge degree of snobbery in this sort of equipment as there is with everything else. Ask many pros about Sigma lenses a few years ago and they'd scoff at you. These days - it's very common to see pros using them. Same goes for the monitors. Why spend a couple of thousand unless the badge makes a difference. Yes it is probably much more 'tailorable' and the top end ones will support the Adobe RGB colourspace (but for a massive price) but in all honesty, most people can easily manage without
Barrie
Posted by David Kjaer on August 1, 2007 at 5:49 AM
Hi Paula
I use an Eizo ColorEdge CE210W which I have had for approx 8 months and I love it. I did notice shortly after purchase that with a higher contrast I wasn't seeing enough detail in the blacks but on the model I purchased I was able to fine tune the black level. If you work at night with overhead lighting or other strong lighting I recommend you purchase the hood. I can't fault mine and it comes with a 5 year warranty!
David
Posted by Mark Smith on August 1, 2007 at 12:59 PM
I have to agree with Barrie on this one, I personally would not spend a fortune on a monitor especially LCD, this technology is moving very quickly, and a cheap LCD today will be easily comparible with a highend one from only a couple of years ago, as I previously stated I currently use a LG LCD that I've been extremely pleased with, and when posting images on here and other places no one has ever mentioned problems with colour casts or images being too bright/dim etc. The only reason I've been looking at other monitors is that I will be upgrading my Mac from an 8 year old G4 to something a little more modern!
Mark
Posted by David Taylor on August 2, 2007 at 1:29 PM
Hello Paula. I bought an Eizo CRT with my Acorn RISC PC in 1995. The RISC PC still works the Eizo has just conked out. It cost around £1200 at the time so that works out at about £2 per week for excellent display until recently.. Four years ago when buying my first Windows PC a Sony Vaio desktop I bought two Samsung SyncMaster 172T 17" LCDs. The Sony has just been 'upgraded' to Vista and a new hard drive, the Samsungs are still excellent. I no longer use my RISC PC as I have the virtual version installed on the Sony. Samsung or Eizo
you can't go wrong I think two displays (at least) are a 'must'.
Hi Paula I use samsung TFT's the 214/215 and on my other 2 PCs I use the 913n all the recent samsungs are capable of being correctly calibrated the individual colour channels for the monitor can be calibrated in increments of five units you have a choice of at least three gamma ratios as default, they have a fast response time 8 milliseconds and are very high contrast range 700 to 1 to 1000 to 1, I will definitely be buying another samsung when these decide to give up the ghost, even my 36 inch TFT TV is samsung which I can run on my PC if I like.
Phillip.
Ps the LACie Blue and Eizo tft and crt are actually made by another firm they only supply some of the hardware that actually runs the monitor. I think NEC make them for one of them if I remember right
Discussion
21 repliesI bought last year a secondhand LACie Blue 22", an enormously heavy (30kg) machine. I run it with its native resolution of 1600x1200 so you can see a lot of your pic. I find, however, it is very, very difficult to see if the image is sharp or not at the final stage of the workflow. The whole screen looks a bit unsharp (the windows icons and text). The prints I do with it are pretty good, I suppose because you realy can see detail in black and white and it calibrates to perfection.
I am now considering getting an sleek LCD monitor but which????? it must be so I can calibrate it realy well to get good prints with my profiles etc.
I am at a loss and the obvious ones like Nec, and Lacie or Eizo are so very expensive.
Can I get a large LCD screen for around 400/500 pounds or would I be wasting my money and be unhappy??
You help and suggestions hugely appreciated, as always.
We run 3 PCs in the office. When one of our Iiyama monitors neared the end of it's life, I "borrowed" a Dell 2407. To say I feel in love with it was an understatment.
It might not have all the bells and whistles as the Eizo etc but then it costs less than £500. We now have 2 and will shortly be ordering another. Sharpness and contrast are excellent and as part of a fully calibrated system, the results are spot on
Barrie
As good a screen for photos as any and it will fall into your budget area too.
It is very good and I am really impressed and the wide screen is a real bonus when working with lightroom.
T
Good luck Pete
Also take a look at Neovo screens. I have a flat screen which is light, big and I find it great for images.
Best wishes
Phil
Here is my 2 pence worth if it helps.
All I use is a simply Gateway TFT LCD 17" monitor that was purchased from Staples 2 years ago for £150
In addition to this I didn't have to calibrate this monitor either, simply plug & play.
Sometimes I get a bit confused about the high spec costly monitors out there, what is wrong with the cheaper ones like the one I use.
Vince
At the end of the day you get what you pay for, the Lacie is pricey but you get higher colour accuracy which may or may not be important to you. If not then Vincent's choice will be perfect, but if you are anal like me then it has to be the Lacie.
Mark
Vince
After reading this thread with interest I have been looking at the spec of the above monitors including the Lacie, that is a lot of dosh Andy
Is the quality difference really noticible & worth the larger amount spent?
Vince again
Also consider buying two LCDs to use in dual monitor mode. I use a calibrated CRT next to a cheap and cheerful £140 LCD. I run them in 1280x1024 so I get a combined screen width of 2560x1024. I like this arrangement, I can have lightroom/Breezebrowser open on one screen and Photoshop on the other.
It's just a different option to going for a large widescreen monitor. Most PCs support dual monitors but you need to check.
cheers
Sean
I havn't personally seen one displayed yet but the Apple Cinema Display's seem to come very highly recommended and IMHO would certainly be worth considering.
Another model which I'd have a very close look at would be the Eizo 21 inch widescreen which is very close to your budget, or if you can afford to go a bit higher the 24 inch screen is very nice,both are available HERE.
I was given a demonstration a couple of weeks ago of the two Eizo screens mentioned above and having seen them in action it's hard not to want one.
Although they can be a bit pricey particularly the 24 inch models and upwards, in the grand scheme of things it's certainly going to be money well spent.
After all we pay thousands for our lenses and camera bodies, if not tens of thousands over the years, we spend hundreds on the very sturdiest tripods and heads, all in the quest for ultimate sharpness and definition, not to mention thousands upon thousands of hours locating, watching and photographing our subjects, so with all that in mind I think a really decent quality monitor should really be a priority to view,and enjoy,our hard earned efforts at their best.
The above paragraph was more in response to Vince's question about why pay more money for a screen instead of a cheap and cheerfull £99 job.
I believe the quality of the Eizo's is second to none and they also come with a 5 year warranty.
When one wants perfect prints and perfectish digital files to send to competitions and salons it does make a difference to be able to see fine detail in both ends of the scale, blacks and whites.
I do work with two monitors with the 22" Lacie Blue being the calibrated one and indeed a cheap and cheerful LCD for PS tools etc, and what a joy such a large screen is. The bulk of it is a nightmare and I only paid 120 pounds for it, so I must not grumble. I am just not sure if it has come to the end of its life or that it is my eyes that stop me seeing if my file is sharp or not.
I do agree that all the money spend on the gear and all the effort in going out to get the shots it would be silly to skimp on the monitor on which I work every day when at home and is a great joy to me too.
And if a monitor will last 5 years it is not so much per year I presume! I can see that I am talking myself into an expensive Eizo or Lacie!!
About the Dell 24", what worries me is that it has such a high contrast ratio while the Lacie/Nec/Eizo have a much lower ratio and can you calibrate it well so your prints come as you expect them to be?
I do thank you all so much for your input and shall now agonise a bit longer between the Dell and the Eizo!!
Monitor calibration has little to do with print accuracy. You need your monitor calibrated so that colours. tones, etc are reproduced faithfully on the screen so that you are conscious of what you are adjusting based on a faithfully reproduced image. Whether this is then translated into an accurate print is a function of the printer profiles rather than the monitor profile. You can get an accurate print from an image viewed on an uncalibrated monitor but you will not get an accurate print from an uncalibrated (unprofiled) printer (except by good luck). Don't get me wrong, of course you should have a calibrated monitor but it is only a small part of a bigger equation.
Whilst accepting the Eizo is a good choice, there is a huge degree of snobbery in this sort of equipment as there is with everything else. Ask many pros about Sigma lenses a few years ago and they'd scoff at you. These days - it's very common to see pros using them. Same goes for the monitors. Why spend a couple of thousand unless the badge makes a difference. Yes it is probably much more 'tailorable' and the top end ones will support the Adobe RGB colourspace (but for a massive price) but in all honesty, most people can easily manage without
Barrie
I use an Eizo ColorEdge CE210W which I have had for approx 8 months and I love it. I did notice shortly after purchase that with a higher contrast I wasn't seeing enough detail in the blacks but on the model I purchased I was able to fine tune the black level. If you work at night with overhead lighting or other strong lighting I recommend you purchase the hood. I can't fault mine and it comes with a 5 year warranty!
David
Mark
you can't go wrong I think two displays (at least) are a 'must'.
Phillip.
Ps the LACie Blue and Eizo tft and crt are actually made by another firm they only supply some of the hardware that actually runs the monitor. I think NEC make them for one of them if I remember right