24" LCD: why pay DOUBLE?

[pcslookout]

Originally posted by: clandren
ha well that explains it. i only read the first couple pages 😛

lol i usually read backwards. I can read whole topics like that a lot easier for some reason. It doesn't seem as long either.

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: mamamia
The new Eizo CG241W doesn't say what kind of panel technology it uses, is it S-IPS, as the NEC?.... I think that should be a major considration when deciding between the two... Or am I wrong...

When I wrote the post I was fairly sure it was using an S-PVA (as the other Eizo CG24**s do). Automatically, it's not anything worth $1400 compared the NEC. When you look at it from a perpendicular (normal) viewing angle, details will be missing. Yellow and purple color shift will be apparent when viewed from other angles. It's pretty certain they've done nothing to compensate for this, or it would be a huge marketing point.

Yes, I am making an assumption here that it is using an S-PVA. If it uses an S-IPS, the viewing angle problems will be gone, but the high price is still there. Additionally, the 92% color gamut is going to throw you a curveball when you've been used to 72% all along. Colors will suddenly look more vibrant whether they match your prints or not. Wide gamut LCDs give you less accurate colors for the 72% space (although the difference here may be negligible if there is a 72% emulation mode somewhere in the LCD, like the Samsung XL20 features).

I read what you, xtknight, say about your choice of BenQ with a colorimeter, and I'm not in a position to dispute it, but I wish I could support that with what other professionals are saying, 'cause it could be an EXCELLENT solution for me... Especially since I don't really feel like spending a $1,400 for the NEC 2940 PLUS ANOTHER $250 for getting a calibration system, that would be used ONCE....

And I'm also a bit surprised to read the claim that "The Eizo is just a BenQ with some fancy marketing terms and a high price." That doesn't sound right to me...

I probably went a little far there. But after calibration, that is not far from the truth. Yes, the 12-bit LUT will bring out a few extra details but nothing that is going to help you match prints, and nothing that is worth the $700 extra. Your topic title indicates that you wanted to find the best value, and the Eizo certainly isn't it. Even if it has slight advantages it also has sizeable disadvantages (wide color gamut may cause inaccuracy, exorbitant price, viewing angle and details missing).

The NEC will almost unquestionably make it easier to match your prints than the Eizo, so perhaps the NEC would be worth it to you. But, I doubt that it is going to get you that much more than just using the BenQ with a colorimeter. Without a colorimeter the NEC would beat it, no contest.

If you want truly better performance then I would start waiting for the LCDs with LED backlights. As it stands the Eizo is just another CCFL LCD with a few extra features that aren't worth it for most people. I don't know for sure whether the wide gamut will help you match prints or not. It could really go either way.

The wide gamut LCD (TVs) I've seen didn't look all that much different than the 72% gamut ones. In fact, I chose a Mitsubishi 72% TV over a 92% Sony, simply because most material is 72% these days. You're may see more JPEG artifacts with a 92% gamut display because everything will be more apparent. If you use Adobe RGB then it might be a good thing, but otherwise I can't see it helping, only hurting.

And, NO, I don't want a 21" monitor (too small for my needs) nor am I interested in a 30" one (for the same price, large size is nice, but less quality is not nice)...

The Dell 3007WFP is actually very high quality. It uses an S-IPS panel and cost around $1300. Here are calibration results:

http://www.lesnumeriques.com/d...7&mo2=198&p2=1911&ph=6

Better than the BenQ FP241W due to the S-IPS panel (it will be able to maintain accurate colors all the way). Also, details won't be absent at perpendicular angle. No color shift with viewing angles.

I think they're only selling the -HC version now (wide gamut) and plus at that price you won't be able to get a colorimeter with it, so it's probably out of the question for you.

The BenQ FP241W has been known to display a better grayscale than the Dell 2407 and Samsung 215TW. It also has less backlight bleed, so it's a prime choice.

P.S. it's probably best to recalibrate at least once every two months if you're doing critical work, so you'll be using the colorimeter more than once, certainly. You'll have to experiment with the settings too.

Originally posted by: clandren

Originally posted by: xtknightThe Eizo is just a BenQ with some fancy marketing terms and a high price.

care to give some proof to back that up? i'm curious how you might think this.

I hope this post answers your question. If not, I'm happy to answer anything else.

What I'm trying to bring to light is the overwhelming lack of evidence that anything the Eizo may offer over the BenQ is going to help you match prints. I am fairly confident that the NEC could do a much better job for the same price, simply due to its S-IPS panel. If Eizo really cared about quality they would definitely be including an S-IPS panel. There seems to be no explanation for why they keep using S-PVA panels (if that is indeed the case this time around), except to save money which means more profit for them. That alone makes me skeptical of anything else Eizo may claim. There are intrinsic properties that make S-IPS panels better for photo editing (better at distinguishing details, stable viewing angle, better real uniformity, ability to maintain a tighter gamma curve, more natural color) that are not reversible by means of more "ASICs". Which is why I generally recommend against using VAs for any critical work compared to IPS panels, but the BenQ is about as good as it gets for VA tech, and that's your only choice if you don't want to pony up $$$ for the NEC.

Also, I don't believe proofing the display with the printer is really possible because they're different mediums. Even if the Eizo helped a tad it wouldn't be worth that amount of money right now. Save it for LED backlight LCDs, or maybe even SEDs or OLEDs. I'm not sure why I'm still talking about the Eizo anyway, because the NEC would offer better performance for the same price. I don't think even the NEC is worth it over the BenQ at this point in time. It doesn't make much sense to me to pay that much when it's not going to make much difference.

P.S. this is getting a bit long.

Final thoughts:

Any of a few selected high end LCDs should be great for photo editing. Beyond that, it's just you needing to get used to the monitor's flaws. You can't seriously believe that one LCD that costs $700 more that is based off very similar technology is going to help you that much. If you just have money to throw at the wall, it would be something to consider, but then you should go for the $6000 NEC LED backlight LCD. There's a reason you don't see those all over the place (it's just not worth all that money for little benefit). I got the impression you didn't have much to spend.

The only field for which I would consider putting that much down for an LCD today is the medical field (examining high-res grayscale X-Ray images).

Originally posted by: clandren
hmm actually i just found LG L245WP - the first S-IPS 24"

This actually uses a P-MVA panel from AU Optronics.

heres a few others i found along the way:

NEC LCD2690

BenQ FP241W

and BenQ FP241WZ (didnt read any of it - so no idea what the difference is between the two is.

The 'Z' version of the BenQ employs their response time acceleration tech (backlight blinking), which has three levels of operation.

I do realize that this post was about as one-sided against Eizo as it gets. That's because I think you're being blinded by all that advertising. It gets me sometimes too. 😛

Please check reviews before making any final decisions. The Eizo (S-PVA?) has simply not proven itself yet, anywhere. AFAIK, the last Eizo X-Bit Labs reviewed was the CG21, which used an S-IPS.

 

[pcslookout]

Is the BenQ FP241W 24 inch better than the NEC 20WMGX2? Its so difficult finding a 24 inch monitor that is as good as a NEC 20WMGX2 20 inch. If the BenQ FP241W 24 inch is not as good as the NEC 20WMGX2 20 inch then is the Dell 3007WFP 30 inch?

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: pcslookout
Is the BenQ FP241W 24 inch better than the NEC 20WMGX2? Its so difficult finding a 24 inch monitor that is as good as a NEC 20WMGX2 20 inch. If the BenQ FP241W 24 inch is not as good as the NEC 20WMGX2 20 inch then is the Dell 3007WFP 30 inch?

The 3007WFP is about as good (S-IPS), but you don't get the glossy coating. The BenQ FP241W is certainly up there, but it's S-PVA which means more color shift at viewing angles and in general a less accurate color curve. The FP241W may beat the 3007WFP in contrast, though I think the 3007WFP still produces a better picture due to its tighter gamma curve (see X-Bit Labs reviews: S-PVAs have rather lousy gamma curves compared to the S-IPS panels). After calibration, the difference will be fairly small though. (It goes without saying that calibration cannot fix the viewing angle issues.)

 

[Remedy]

And I'm also a bit surprised to read the claim that "The Eizo is just a BenQ with some fancy marketing terms and a high price." That doesn't sound right to me...

It's not. The Eizo may use the same panel. But, the firmware and calibration specifics are entirely different. Including the warranty as well.

 

[mamamia]

Lots of stuff here to digest... Thanks, xtknight.

Wait, I thought all the new generation LCD monitors today have LED Backlight, no? Are you saying NONE of those we're dealing with here has LED Backlight?

And if I got it right, even though that BenQ FP241W you'd vote for does not have the S-IPS that the NEC 2490 has, after calibration the difference in color and grayscale accuracy is not gonna be significant, right?

Also, thanks for the link to DigitalVersus... It's amazing, comparing different LCDs in different categories (I wish they had the NEC 2490 there, not only the 2690...), and it's amazing to see how the super quality NEC 2690 (supposedly better than the 2490) is actually LACKING in some aspects, compared to BenQ FP241W, like in TEXT RENDERING (sharper but more ghosting), COLOR W/FACTORY SETTINGS (-- which clearly shows that even the NEC MUST go thru calibration!), and even after calibration I don't see a huge advantage on the NEC part (and, again, this is the 26" NEC not even the 24")...

Interestingly, according to that site, the Samsung 244T is NOT at all a comparable option among the 24" monitors...

 

[lopri]

Yeah I'd get the 30" for that price really.

 

[IlllI]

Originally posted by: mamamia

Wait, I thought all the new generation LCD monitors today have LED Backlight, no? Are you saying NONE of those we're dealing with here has LED Backlight?

don't know where you got that information from, but thats highly inaccurate. i'd go so far as to say 99% of all lcds still use ccfl backlights

 

[bfdd]

Originally posted by: lopri
Yeah I'd get the 30" for that price really.

Yea I can't see why anyone would pay 1400 for a 24" instead of a 30" even if the color/contrast is slightly better, the 30" can do much higher resolutions.

 

[mamamia]

don't know where you got that information from, but thats highly inaccurate. i'd go so far as to say 99% of all lcds still use ccfl backlights

I was also a bit surprised, and was responding to what xtknight was posting last night: "If you want truly better performance then I would start waiting for the LCDs with LED backlights." -- "Start waiting" to me sounded as if it's not here yet...

Yea I can't see why anyone would pay 1400 for a 24" instead of a 30" even if the color/contrast is slightly better, the 30" can do much higher resolutions.

I don't need 30", and besides, I don't trust Dell as much... I think Dell has been cutting corners for quite a while... I'd regard NEC as a more professional, trustworthy company, compared to Dell...

 

[IlllI]

Originally posted by: mamamia
I was also a bit surprised, and was responding to what xtknight was posting last night: "If you want truly better performance then I would start waiting for the LCDs with LED backlights." -- "Start waiting" to me sounded as if it's not here yet...

he also wrote something about saving your money for a sed or oled display...which might be a quite a while to wait 😛

 

[bfdd]

Originally posted by: mamamia

don't know where you got that information from, but thats highly inaccurate. i'd go so far as to say 99% of all lcds still use ccfl backlights

I was also a bit surprised, and was responding to what xtknight was posting last night: "If you want truly better performance then I would start waiting for the LCDs with LED backlights." -- "Start waiting" to me sounded as if it's not here yet...

Yea I can't see why anyone would pay 1400 for a 24" instead of a 30" even if the color/contrast is slightly better, the 30" can do much higher resolutions.

I don't need 30", and besides, I don't trust Dell as much... I think Dell has been cutting corners for quite a while... I'd regard NEC as a more professional, trustworthy company, compared to Dell...

Samsung has a 30" out now check it on Newegg. It looks pretty bitching. I have the 23" gateway atm I like it a lot, just don't like the 1680x1050 res. Plan on upgrading to a 30" soon and that's the one I've been waiting for to come out.

 

[Synomenon]

Don't buy monitors from Newegg. Their 8 dead pixel policy sucks.

 

[xtknight]

Indeed 99% of LCDs today use CCFLs. The only LED backlight LCDs are the Samsung XL20 ($2000 AMVA) and the NEC 21" reference series (2180WG, $6000 S-IPS).

New panels are coming soon from Samsung, CMO, and eventually AUO that use LED backlights. http://www.pclaunches.com/moni...h_an_led_backlight.php

Originally posted by: mamamia
Lots of stuff here to digest... Thanks, xtknight.

Wait, I thought all the new generation LCD monitors today have LED Backlight, no? Are you saying NONE of those we're dealing with here has LED Backlight?

None of those LCDs have an LED backlight. I'm 99% sure the Eizo uses a wide gamut CCFL. Something like 85% sure it uses an S-PVA.

And if I got it right, even though that BenQ FP241W you'd vote for does not have the S-IPS that the NEC 2490 has, after calibration the difference in color and grayscale accuracy is not gonna be significant, right?

That's right. I don't think it's anything worth $700 (not for "people like us"), that's for sure, even if it's a little better.

Also, thanks for the link to DigitalVersus... It's amazing, comparing different LCDs in different categories (I wish they had the NEC 2490 there, not only the 2690...), and it's amazing to see how the super quality NEC 2690 (supposedly better than the 2490) is actually LACKING in some aspects, compared to BenQ FP241W, like in TEXT RENDERING (sharper but more ghosting), COLOR W/FACTORY SETTINGS (-- which clearly shows that even the NEC MUST go thru calibration!), and even after calibration I don't see a huge advantage on the NEC part (and, again, this is the 26" NEC not even the 24")...

Interestingly, according to that site, the Samsung 244T is NOT at all a comparable option among the 24" monitors...

Yeah the 244t has some issues with midtones, apparently.

 

[mamamia]

Interesting how some posters here claim LED backligfht is what 99% of these monitors already have, while xtknight says the exact opposit...

Can this help? From the specs sheet of the new Eizo CG241W, at the bottom, dealing with warranty: "However LCD panel back light (brightness guarantee includes) guarantee period is within 3 years than the day when it is purchase. (Back light at recommendation condition limits to the use within 10,000 hours.)" (bolding the words was mine) --- is this not the LED backlight we're arguing about?

Also, back to this new Eizo CG241W -- nowhere in their spec sheet or news release do they indicate anything as to what kind of PANEL TECHNOLGY is used... If it's IPS, than it may be definitely worth the price (rumored to be around $1,500 suggested retail)...

HOWEVER, I have a feeling I'd be silly to make up my mind about which monitor to purchase -- TODAY, with so much new stuff coming up within the next couple months... Seems like the 24" size is the HOT size that every manufacturer feels the urge to have part of...

 

[IlllI]

Originally posted by: mamamia
Interesting how some posters here claim LED backligfht is what 99% of these monitors already have, while xtknight says the exact opposit...

Can this help? From the specs sheet of the new Eizo CG241W, at the bottom, dealing with warranty: "However LCD panel back light (brightness guarantee includes) guarantee period is within 3 years than the day when it is purchase. (Back light at recommendation condition limits to the use within 10,000 hours.)" (bolding the words was mine) --- is this not the LED backlight we're arguing about?

backlight is a generic term.

why would you think its led backlight? when it doesnt say led backlight? it just says backlight. the two monitors that xtknight mentioned are the only two led backlighting that i know of that exists. its still pretty 'new' technology. plus ccfl lcds are vastly cheaper.

Also, back to this new Eizo CG241W -- nowhere in their spec sheet or news release do they indicate anything as to what kind of PANEL TECHNOLGY is used... If it's IPS, than it may be definitely worth the price (rumored to be around $1,500 suggested retail)...

HOWEVER, I have a feeling I'd be silly to make up my mind about which monitor to purchase -- TODAY, with so much new stuff coming up within the next couple months... Seems like the 24" size is the HOT size that every manufacturer feels the urge to have part of...

i dont think you'll see much of a difference between something thats out today and one that will be out in a coupld months. you could always maybe write eizo and inquire about which panel they use in that model. you never know, they might reply.

 

[xtknight]

Eizo has a 22.2" CG221 LED-backlight LCD also, which also cost around $5500. They would be in the red if they put LEDs in a $1500, 24" LCD. "Backlight" is a term meaning a light source. It could be a CCFL or LED. In the CG241W's case, it is most likely a CCFL with special phosphors designed to reach a higher gamut.

I would not wait for more LED LCDs; instead save now and buy when they are available. It'll probably be at least a year until they're half the price of what they are now. It is your choice in the end.

 

[pcslookout]

Originally posted by: xtknight
Eizo has a 22.2" CG221 LED-backlight LCD also, which also cost around $5500. They would be in the red if they put LEDs in a $1500, 24" LCD. "Backlight" is a term meaning a light source. It could be a CCFL or LED. In the CG241W's case, it is most likely a CCFL with special phosphors designed to reach a higher gamut.

I would not wait for more LED LCDs; instead save now and buy when they are available. It'll probably be at least a year until they're half the price of what they are now. It is your choice in the end.

Wow that better be one nice lcd monitor that surpasses all CRT monitors! I bet it will take longer than 1 year for them to be come affordable.

 

[mamamia]

Let me check if I got it right:

If the NEC 2490 we were discussing DOES HAVE LED BACKLIGHT (as mentioned here), and an S-IPS panel -- all for about $1,400 --- wouldn't it be the one and only obvious choice for a graphic designer or a photographer?

 

[IlllI]

Originally posted by: mamamia
Let me check if I got it right:

If the NEC 2490 we were discussing DOES HAVE LED BACKLIGHT (as mentioned here), and an S-IPS panel -- all for about $1,400 --- wouldn't it be the one and only obvious choice for a graphic designer or a photographer?

you sure you read that correctly? i dont remember anyone writing that it has led backlighting

 

[mamamia]

Yes, you're rigtht, clandren, I guess it was too late at night for me to think clearly (or more, WISHFUL THINKIN')...

I wonder what kind of price tag we'll see for the upcoming Samsung 24" LCD with LED backlight that was mentioned here...

Also, going back to this excellent site where they check and compare different LCD (I wish they had more models):

http://www.digitalversus.com/d...&mo2=1l49&p2=1606&ph=6

See the comparison of COLORS AFTER CALIBRATION between BenQ FP241W and what's suppose to be the best of NEC (in our price-range), 2690WUXi... Not a huge difference, and in the case of the GRAYS, BenQ is even better, all under 2 d e 94... Yes, NEC's gamut coverage is better.