Best 24" 1920x1200 LCD? (On My Shortlist)

T

The_Rebel

n00b
Joined
Jan 3, 2009
Messages
11
Dell 2408WFP
HP LP2475w
BenQ G2400WD

Which is the best bang for the buck for general computer usage (quick video playback - not watching feature films, a little gaming - mostly MAME arcade games, a lot of reading and maybe a little photo editing and web design) - or does that not count as general computer usage?
 
Of those I would get the BenQ because it has a standard gamut screen.
 
The Benq is a TN, the Dell is a VA, and the HP is an IPS. The HP is the best one, no question.
 
I have no idea why people don't like wide gamut screens. The HP is in an entirely different class than the BenQ and Dell, it destroys them in each and every possible contest (aside from price).
 
HP LP2475W. Best monitor that money can buy ($600 & under category). It's an H-IPS panel and has excellent reviews and is the best by far from that list.

Case closed.
 
I have pretty much the same shortlist as you.

strictly anecdotal...but I don't think I can use TN ever again after using a 226bw (C panel) for almost 2 years.

I hope to end up with the HP or DELL.

I wish the HP would drop in price a little more.
 
I don't think the HP is going to drop in price anytime soon, especially in the UK the falling pound is going to make consumer electronics more expensive this year, and as the dollar isn't looking too clever at the moment either imports are becoming more expensive and struggling retailers are only going to maintain razor-thin margins for so long.
 
silent-circuit said:
I have no idea why people don't like wide gamut screens. The HP is in an entirely different class than the BenQ and Dell, it destroys them in each and every possible contest (aside from price).
Click to expand...

Because having a wide gamut monitor and compensate for the colors that are off it's like buying color-cartridges for your black-and-white printer... (oh, and not just that - since the color cartriges are more expensive you settle with a cheaper brand and get worse black and white printings).
Makes sense?

And if you don't compensate for it it's like putting a taco spice mix on absolutely everything you eat. Yes, in some courses that tastes good but in some it is just god awful. And no matter what, you know that you have no idea how it should have tasted and thus you really can't tell if anything you eat tastes good or bad.
Makes sense?

If you actually do make use of it it's great, but thats like 0.01% of the market anyway so recommending it on a forum doesn't really make sense. Most people that would make use of it probably know about it already anyway so theres no need to inform them. What there is a need for is warning people about wide gamut...
Ultimately it's a matter of preferences, when I was a kid I knew people that put ketchup on absolutely everything they ate - nothing wrong with that and thats their choice, but remember that you can never allow yourself to even say that "this webpage looks nice/bad" because on a wide gamut monitor - you really have no idea. You can say that - this looks good on my monitor, but I have no idea how it looks on a real monitor.
At least if there is any colors on the page...

Who would want a monitor like that?
It's like framing your pictures with tinted glass (not just the occasional image that perhaps benefits from it, but _all_ pictures).
 
brumwald said:
but remember that you can never allow yourself to even say that "this webpage looks nice/bad" because on a wide gamut monitor - you really have no idea. You can say that - this looks good on my monitor, but I have no idea how it looks on a real monitor.
Click to expand...

If you properly calibrate and use a colour-aware browser such as firefox, then websites look fine.

Point remains it's a much better monitor than the Dell which is also wide-gamut (and actually looked more over-saturated and "cartoony" to me when I had it for a little while) and it's IPS vs TN for the Benq.
 
brumwald said:
Because having a wide gamut monitor and compensate for the colors that are off it's like buying color-cartridges for your black-and-white printer... (oh, and not just that - since the color cartriges are more expensive you settle with a cheaper brand and get worse black and white printings).
Makes sense?

And if you don't compensate for it it's like putting a taco spice mix on absolutely everything you eat. Yes, in some courses that tastes good but in some it is just god awful. And no matter what, you know that you have no idea how it should have tasted and thus you really can't tell if anything you eat tastes good or bad.
Makes sense?

If you actually do make use of it it's great, but thats like 0.01% of the market anyway so recommending it on a forum doesn't really make sense. Most people that would make use of it probably know about it already anyway so theres no need to inform them. What there is a need for is warning people about wide gamut...
Ultimately it's a matter of preferences, when I was a kid I knew people that put ketchup on absolutely everything they ate - nothing wrong with that and thats their choice, but remember that you can never allow yourself to even say that "this webpage looks nice/bad" because on a wide gamut monitor - you really have no idea. You can say that - this looks good on my monitor, but I have no idea how it looks on a real monitor.
At least if there is any colors on the page...

Who would want a monitor like that?
It's like framing your pictures with tinted glass (not just the occasional image that perhaps benefits from it, but _all_ pictures).
Click to expand...

I have a two word response to your entire post (err...rant) and here it is: MONITOR CALIBRATION
 
PC_User said:
I have a two word response to your entire post (err...rant) and here it is: MONITOR CALIBRATION
Click to expand...

Remember though, that's only of benefit in colour managed apps (Firefox, Photoshop, Windows Photo Gallery and a few select others)
 
philjohn said:
Remember though, that's only of benefit in colour managed apps (Firefox, Photoshop, Windows Photo Gallery and a few select others)
Click to expand...

Not entirely true. The HP LP2475W, for instance, once calibrated has the best color reproduction of most monitors on the market (within that reasonable price range). This is in movies as much as regular applications, photoshop, and even games. HP claims that it has a 102% wide NTSC color gamut but other websites that reviewed the monitor list it as 92% which is ideal. I have yet to hear of colour-related issues with this model.

Most people do not even bother to properly calibrate their $1,000+ monitor and use it on a daily basis with improper brightness, RGB, and contrast settings.
 
PC_User said:
Not entirely true. The HP LP2475W, for instance, once calibrated has the best color reproduction of most monitors on the market (within that reasonable price range). This is in movies as much as regular applications, photoshop, and games.

Most people do not even bother to calibrate their $1,000+ monitor and use it on a daily basis with improper brightness, RGB, and contrast settings.
Click to expand...

Nope. Only a few applications read color profiles. Movie apps don't, games don't most applications don't. You can count supported applications on your fingers. Unsupported applications number in the tens of thousands.

While there will be more supported apps in the future, you are looking at years of colors being different in your apps that do or don't support color management. No consistency.

My NEC 2490 OTOH just looks right everywhere, every application, movies, games, windows, Linux.... Everywhere. That is why I wouldn't bother with a wide ( non standard) gamut monitor.
 
So all of these amazing monitors (HP LP2475W, Dell 3007WFP-HC, etc) which have 92% of NTSC color gamuts are worse (in terms of color accuracy and color reproduction) than the cheaper monitors that have 72% color gamut? You know better than that... ;)
 
I've heard that the HP (which uses an LG H-IPS panel) needs calibration (via hardware calibrator) to reproduce proper sRGB colours as it doesn't have a builtin LUT. Is this true or am i mixed up?

Would the monitor need to be calibrated every time i turn it on or reboot the computer?
 
The_Rebel said:
I've heard that the HP (which uses an LG H-IPS panel) needs calibration (via hardware calibrator) to reproduce proper sRGB colours as it doesn't have a builtin LUT. Is this true or am i mixed up?

Would the monitor need to be calibrated every time i turn it on or reboot the computer?
Click to expand...

The monitor does need to be calibrated. You can do this in one of two ways:
1. Download a custom ICC profile (from a previously calibrated HP LP2475W monitor) and adjust the custom settings for contrast, brightness, red, green, and blue. This can be found on TFTCentral's website.

2. Use a hardware colorimeter to manually adjust the settings and create your own profile. This is the most accurate way but method #1 should be good enough if you don't have a hardware colorimeter.
 
^^^
To add to the above and answer The_Rebel's other question, no, you do not have to calibrate the monitor every time you turn it on or reboot your PC. Generally speaking, unless you are doing professional photo work constantly it is a once every 2 to 3 years kind of thing. Effectively one time. It 'remembers' how it was calibrated, as does your PC via a monitor profile.
 
PC_User said:
Not entirely true. The HP LP2475W, for instance, once calibrated has the best color reproduction of most monitors on the market (within that reasonable price range). This is in movies as much as regular applications, photoshop, and even games. HP claims that it has a 102% wide NTSC color gamut but other websites that reviewed the monitor list it as 92% which is ideal. I have yet to hear of colour-related issues with this model.
Click to expand...
No, that's not how it works.

Gamut is not indicative of color accuracy, and calibration only affects the white point and gamma curves. It does not correct the oversaturation caused by wider gamuts. Only color-managed applications can handle color space conversions. Most applications are not color managed, and anything that isn't color-managed is displayed in your monitor's color space, which results in oversaturation on wider gamut monitors. Several people have complained about reds being too intense on wider gamut monitors, and there's nothing they can do about it.



PC_User said:
So all of these amazing monitors (HP LP2475W, Dell 3007WFP-HC, etc) which have 92% of NTSC color gamuts are worse (in terms of color accuracy and color reproduction) than the cheaper monitors that have 72% color gamut? You know better than that... ;)
Click to expand...
They are worse for displaying sRGB and Rec. 709 (HDTV) content.
 
Remember also that the brain has an amazing knack for tuning out extraneous information - after a few weeks you probably won't even notice the WG as much (especially if you are not using other sRGB monitors).
 
philjohn said:
Remember also that the brain has an amazing knack for tuning out extraneous information - after a few weeks you probably won't even notice the WG as much (especially if you are not using other sRGB monitors).
Click to expand...

Maybe if you don't calibrate and never look at other monitors. If you calibrate it, you will get normal colors in some applications and out of spec, over saturated looking in others, so you will be constantly reminded of the difference.

PC_User said:
So all of these amazing monitors (HP LP2475W, Dell 3007WFP-HC, etc) which have 92% of NTSC color gamuts are worse (in terms of color accuracy and color reproduction) than the cheaper monitors that have 72% color gamut? You know better than that... ;)
Click to expand...


I had a 3007WFP-HC. It made my cheap TN screen look good.

The colors on this were unusable, one of the main reasons it went back and I traded up for an NEC 2490.

Image quality on the NEC is a 9, the dell (wide gamut) was a 5.
 
Snowdog said:
While there will be more supported apps in the future, you are looking at years of colors being different in your apps that do or don't support color management. No consistency.
Click to expand...
Honestly, it would be better if the OS could handle color management instead of individual programs. Calibration doesn't even make sense if you think about it. Instead of calibration, the monitor should simply be profiled, and the OS should handle the proper color conversions needed to output the correct color, like color-managed programs do now.

Unfortunately, nothing was designed to work that way, so we're left with the kludge we have now.
 
So what's the optimal choice then? Because you have a monitor with an H-IPS panel, better than most other panels out there, and it has wide gamut 92% of NTSC so in effect the colors are still incorrect and worse than other monitors? Should one then choose the TN panels or go with an S-PVA (but most of those also have 92% NTSC)? What choices besides the $1100 NEC 24" does one have?

TFTCentral's review of the HP LP2475W says that the colors are the best they have ever seen from any monitor they have reviewed. Prad.de gives that monitor an excellent rating in 9/10 categories. What does that mean if the colors are really oversaturated and incorrect? How to interpret this information?
 
I am in a similar situation as the OP.

I can either go with the 24 inch wide gamut monitors or go with a less expensive but normal gamut TN panel.

So lets say I buy the HP LP2475W, its wide gamut. I bring it home and calibrate it, now my color aware apps (like ffox3) are displaying the colors correctly, but then I fire up iPhoto (not color aware) and my colors on my pictures are now off. I just don't see the wide gamut benefit, it seems more of a pain in the ass to me.

Also on an unrelated note, I was reading this one amazon review where the reviewer was complaining that TN panels cause eyestrain due to their dithering and how they should be avoided at all costs. Is this true? Are TN panels really more prone to eye strain? I mean i would gladly pay an extra 100 dollars for a PVA so I wouldn't have a headache after an hour...
 
To be honest, I would still recommend the HP LP2475w in this case, simply because it's the best bang for the buck in IPS panels, and there are color-managed programs for web surfing (Firefox) and image editing (Photoshop). Most people won't care about the saturation anyway, but some people might be bothered by it. It's hard to recommend anything because there aren't that many higher quality monitors to choose from these days, especially at a lower price point. Manufacturers are focusing their efforts on cheaper TN monitors.

Color accuracy is not an easy thing to test because it depends on what content is being displayed and what correction is being done, if any. The color tests that tftcentral and prad are doing simply test the accuracy of the monitor's color space before and after calibration. That doesn't really tell me much about how the monitor actually performs in the real world.



synergyID said:
So lets say I buy the HP LP2475W, its wide gamut. I bring it home and calibrate it, now my color aware apps (like ffox3) are displaying the colors correctly, but then I fire up iPhoto (not color aware) and my colors on my pictures are now off. I just don't see the wide gamut benefit, it seems more of a pain in the ass to me.
Click to expand...
Most of Apple's programs are color-managed for tagged images, including iPhoto, so it's color-managed where it matters most, but non-tagged images and everything else will still be oversaturated. Also, Mac OS X creates a profile that takes the gamut reported by the monitor into account when you plug in the monitor, so you can take advantage of color management even without calibration, although calibration is always recommended.

synergyID said:
Also on an unrelated note, I was reading this one amazon review where the reviewer was complaining that TN panels cause eyestrain due to their dithering and how they should be avoided at all costs. Is this true? Are TN panels really more prone to eye strain? I mean i would gladly pay an extra 100 dollars for a PVA so I wouldn't have a headache after an hour...
Click to expand...
Eye strain is a subjective thing, as different people are affected by different things. I don't see why the dithering would cause eye strain. I would think that PVA panels are more likely to cause eye strain due to the viewing angles causing each eye to see a slightly different color, making it harder to focus, but not everyone is affected by that. Different backlights also have different properties, so some people might be affected by certain monitors and not others. It's hard to say really.
 
ToastyX said:
No, that's not how it works.

Gamut is not indicative of color accuracy, and calibration only affects the white point and gamma curves. It does not correct the oversaturation caused by wider gamuts. Only color-managed applications can handle color space conversions. Most applications are not color managed, and anything that isn't color-managed is displayed in your monitor's color space, which results in oversaturation on wider gamut monitors. Several people have complained about reds being too intense on wider gamut monitors, and there's nothing they can do about it.




They are worse for displaying sRGB and Rec. 709 (HDTV) content.
Click to expand...

So even with hard and or soft calibration, I'll still have over-saturated colours in non-colour managed software?

Thanks for all the input so far guys, not sure why some people are getting upset with this thread (or the posts in it)..

EDIT: I've been starring at CRT's all my life and this will be my first LCD (for PC usage) so i want to get it right as I'm sure I'll notice every disadvantage a TFT has compared to CRT (as well as the advantages)
 
The_Rebel said:
So even with hard and or soft calibration, I'll still have over-saturated colours in non-colour managed software?
Click to expand...
Yes, that's the problem with wider gamut monitors, but many don't seem to find it a problem. Red is still red, and green is still green. It's just more saturated. At this point, it's getting harder to find non-TN monitors that don't have a wide gamut.
 
ToastyX said:
Yes, that's the problem with wider gamut monitors, but many don't seem to find it a problem. Red is still red, and green is still green. It's just more saturated. At this point, it's getting harder to find non-TN monitors that don't have a wide gamut.
Click to expand...

I see, well I'm going to try her out. I can always end up selling it and getting a good TN if this over saturation is really a issue for me.
 
Most great monitors (such as this HP) have 92% gamut, if not more. The Dell 2408WFP has 110% NTSC gamut. As ToastyX pointed out, its hard to find a new-generation quality (non-TN) monitor that still has the old 72% gamut. There are obviously advantages to having 92% wide gamut over the standard 72% gamut just as there are disadvantages.

Basically, I bought the HP because it had excellent reviews, excellent post-calibration color reproduction, an input lag of newer S-PVA models (around 25ms on average), a high-quality LG H-IPS panel, and was reasonably priced for a monitor of that caliber at $600 shipped.

You can go with a cheaper 24" TN panel and although you may not experience as much saturation, you'll experience worse colors from the 6-bit panels in other areas and the dithering effect.

Basically, there are both advantages and disadvantages to this particular model (as with most other monitors) and no one model is perfect. But if you have $1200 USD to spend, you can get very close to perfect with the NEC 2409. IMHO, the HP LP2475w isn't too bad for half the price.
 
You cannot compensate for a wide gamut monitor through calibration alone in most windows apps, unless the monitor has a built in LUT setting for non-wide gamut (the HP does not). If you have a well calibrated monitor and a standard wide-gamut side by side and you peruse some photos (for example through a web browser) you'd see what was wrong with the wide gamut. Basic things like the color of grass and more importantly skin tones look waaaay off on the wide gamut monitor.

Only profile aware apps like Photoshop can be fixed with hardware-assisted calibration and the appropriate profile.
 
sethk said:
You cannot compensate for a wide gamut monitor through calibration alone in most windows apps, unless the monitor has a built in LUT setting for non-wide gamut (the HP does not). If you have a well calibrated monitor and a standard wide-gamut side by side and you peruse some photos (for example through a web browser) you'd see what was wrong with the wide gamut. Basic things like the color of grass and more importantly skin tones look waaaay off on the wide gamut monitor.

Only profile aware apps like Photoshop can be fixed with hardware-assisted calibration and the appropriate profile.
Click to expand...

But are there really any great or even good 24" LCD monitors that don't have TN panels and have standard 72% gamut?

It seems that there is a trade-off because in applications that are color aware, the wide gamut is advantageous as it displays more of the color range in sRGB that you would not get with a standard gamut.
 
PC_User said:
It seems that there is a trade-off because in applications that are color aware, the wide gamut is advantageous as it displays more of the color range in sRGB that you would not get with a standard gamut.
Click to expand...

No.
sRGB is best on a non-wide-gamut monitor, even in color-aware applications.

The problem with wide-gamut is (partially) that the range of colors is wider - but not the address space. You still have 3*8 bit / 16.7 million colors - but spread out on a greater area. Therefor non-wide-gamut displays have more accuracy and detail when displaying sRGB content (wide-gamut displays have to throw away alot of colors because they are outside sRGB).


This is a problem today and it isn't easy, I haven't said that I'd prefer a normal TN over a wide-gamut IPS panel - I just say why wide-gamut is a pain. I'm thinking of buying a 30" display and there I have no choice at all since almost all 30" monitors are wide gamut (and I can barely even buy the ones that aren't). But I think consumers should be aware of this and basically it's the stupid consumers fault that we have this situation. No regular consumer benefits of wide gamut yet it's a major selling point. Worst part is that reviewers also got fooled in thinking it's a good thing. The same goes with brightness which is why all monitors come with a way to bright backlight (yes you can turn it down but most backlights can't go that low and it will compromise contrast etc.).
 
PC_User said:
But are there really any great or even good 24" LCD monitors that don't have TN panels and have standard 72% gamut?
Click to expand...


Great: NEC 2490uxi

There was someplace selling refurbished ones for under $600 IIRC.
 
vick1000 said:
Tech4less.com

http://www.techforless.com/cgi-bin/tech4less/LCD2490WUXi-BK?id=F2MIuWRX&mv_pc=471

My out look is, if you are worried about accurate colors you should be using color aware applications anyway. If not, and it's for general use, the oversaturation can be tuned down by eye enough to make the images look good.
Click to expand...

Maybe with some monitors, certainly not the case with my Dell 3007-HC. I spent a week trying to get something decent out of non color aware applications by adjusting the video card(no monitor controls for this). I gave up in frustration.

Not only that but adjust R,G,B in video card changed tint just as much as saturation, I had animated sky (Simpsons) going from green to purple. It was a nightmare.
 
brumwald said:
No.
sRGB is best on a non-wide-gamut monitor, even in color-aware applications.
Click to expand...

But aren't the color aware applications (such as Photoshop) supposed to see more of the colors so that is where the wide gamut monitors shine?

snowdog said:
Great: NEC 2490uxi

There was someplace selling refurbished ones for under $600 IIRC.
Click to expand...

I know that monitor is great, but it retails for $1,100 and refurbished still costs more than the HP. So if I follow your thinking correctly, there is no other monitor besides the NEC.

Most newer monitors are wide gamut and that is where most knowledgeable consumers are stuck. I can't go back to using a CRT so for me, the HP LP2475w is the best option. I guess my photoshop work will notice a color improvement and am hoping that more color-aware applications will be released in the future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top