PDA

View Full Version : Monitors for Photographers - suggestions please



NZGMW
16-01-2009, 06:49 PM
Hi - can anyone recommend a quality monitor or desktop for a keen amateur photographer. I'm currently a PC user, but I've been tempted to buy the latest Imac. However after viewing the monitor in a shop, I've decided the 'glossy' (highly reflective) screen is not appropriate for photography. Apparently the last Mac with a "matt" finish was something called the Cinema model. But this is no longer available. A check of online forums confirms there is a great deal of antagonism toward the glossy screen from serious photographers. So I've decided not to go anywhere near the Imac.

Any suggestions would be appreciated.

Blam
16-01-2009, 07:05 PM
http://ascent.co.nz/productspecification.aspx?ItemID=353673


http://ascent.co.nz/productspecification.aspx?ItemID=372712 if ur made of money...

Blam

pctek
16-01-2009, 07:06 PM
Well the best thing to do would be to go in a shop and view them side by side. Or as near to, as you can get.
Most reviews concentrate on gamers and the like.

NZGMW
16-01-2009, 07:24 PM
Thanks, but actually the lighting conditions in your average Magnum Mac, Bond and Bond etc is pretty shocking for viewing photography. My home computer is positioned away from distracting lights, windows etc. I'm hoping someone can offer a recommendation based on their experience at home or studio/office.

NZGMW
16-01-2009, 07:25 PM
Thanks blam6. Quite ugly aren't they :)

Have you used one of these?

Trev
16-01-2009, 07:33 PM
A google search gives you this as one of many NZ site selling photography monitors.
http://www.aarque.co.nz/ViewCategory.aspx?Id=276&BrandId=21
:)

Blam
16-01-2009, 07:42 PM
Thanks blam6. Quite ugly aren't they :)

Have you used one of these?

No, I haven't but my friend has been a designer for years and he's stuck with hp ones.

The colours seem pretty good for the price

Nomad
16-01-2009, 09:30 PM
There are diff panel technologies which I forget. LCD under wikipedia provides an overview I think.

Generally the cheaper ones are faster response speed and more vivid like for games. The photog ones are more $$. One that people tend to like around the world is the Dell Ultrasharp series.

Others include Eizo and Lacie. HP is also quite good they have some pro photog models. Generally I would think 24" wide screen cost $900 or abouts. You will be wanting color accurateness and wider color gamut.

Also don't forget your monitor calibrator device.

Blam
16-01-2009, 09:34 PM
You can check which panel a certain screen has here:
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/panelsearch.htm

TN: Cheapest, narrow viewing angles and colour reproduction, low image processing lag. Apparently best for fast paced gaming, worst for image editing and professsional work where colour accuracy is important. TN panels can only display 262k colours natively and use dithering to display 16.7m.

*VA (MVA, PVA, S-PVA): Middle of the road, better viewing angles and colour reproduction, typically high image processing lag (can be as high as 64ms on some models!). Typically best black levels and contrast. Can display 16.7m colours but unfortunately (or fortunately if you're a design professional) most newer panels of this type are wide gamut, meaning sRGB images are oversaturated in non colour managed applications. Can suffer from slight horizontal contrast shift (like TN's vertical contrast shift, but not as obvious)

IPS (S-IPS, H-IPS): Most expensive technology, viewing angles and colour reproduction almost as good as (or even better than) that of a CRT, medium image processing (between 20-40ms). Almost all are wide gamut (which is a disadvantage, or an advantage depending on how you look at it). No contrast shift.

All panel types have similar response times so ghosting is not really a problem anymore. Although some panels use overdrive, so you get a 'negative' ghosting effect, depending on the background eg on the TN (viewsonic 22") I'm using now, there is a slight ghosting trail, which isn't noticable on my IPS screen. So in this instance, TN has worse ghosting than IPS, even though the TN has a "quicker" documented (5ms for TN, 6ms for IPS) response time.

stevie_boy
16-01-2009, 10:33 PM
In the past I have found the reviews on tftcentral.co.uk (http://www.tftcentral.co.uk) to be very good, rather than just relying on their panel search which blam6 pointed you to.

You haven't mentioned if you were looking at the 20" or 24" model of the iMac so I will assume that it was the 24". Since you are a photographer you will want a monitor with an IPS based panel for the better colour accuracy with a matte finish. Unfortunately, there are very few monitors available (at least in the consumer/semi-affordable market) that fit this profile.

Your best bet is probably the HP LP2475W. The TFTCentral review can be found here (http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/hp_lp2475w.htm). They even provide calibrated settings for Brightness, Contrast and RGB values so that it provides the best colour accuracy of any of the brand-name monitors they have tested. You haven't given a budget, so hopefully this (http://www.pricespy.co.nz/search.php?q=lp2475w) doesn't break the bank. If I was you, I would avoid the cheaper "open box" price from AquilaTech at the top of that results page as this might be a returned monitor with minor panel defects (eg. dead pixels) that doesn't normally meet the dead/stuck pixel return policy. Then again there may be nothing wrong with it.

Some other PressF1 users have the HP monitor and have shared their experiences with it in this (http://forums.pcworld.co.nz/showthread.php?t=93339) thread. You can always PM utopian201 (http://forums.pcworld.co.nz/member.php?u=18976) to see if they would still recommend it.

HTH

supergran
17-01-2009, 09:05 PM
I have a samsung :3000-1 or something similar, 22" and the colour seems pretty close to my camera.

Misty
18-01-2009, 10:56 AM
Would it be too extreme to check closeness of what you intend to buy with the images which would be produced by the outfit where you get your prints done ! (that is - unless you do your own prints).
Misty :)

PS - hope the way I have expressed this makes sense.