Help Another new monitor thread

[old.user4556]

Hi All,

I've finally got round to looking at replacing my monitor which is a 7 year old 17" Hitachi.

Now, my dad bought one of these last year:

HP LP2475w 24" Widescreen LCD Monitor [KD911AT#ABU] 24" LCD

It's an excellent monitor, it's one of those H-IPS wide gamut affairs and the viewing angles are truly fantastic with excellent colour representation. However, it's the thick end of £500 and I really don't want to spend that just to say "ooooh, I can view things off angle". It will be used for a mix of general Windows use, about 40% gaming and 60% photographic work. Good refresh and black levels are quite important to me.

My question is, should I really wait and push the boat out for an H-IPS Dell or HP monitor, or get something cheaper that's going to be pretty much just as good? I will be able to calibrate it properly (my dad has a proper tool I can borrow).

I noticed Embattle's thread here, so something like this could be the inexpensive ticket?

 

[Moriath]

24 inch samsung BW2443 and i love it

was 250 quid from novatech.co.uk

dont need to spend 500 quid for 24 inch these days unless its a rent boi

 

[old.user4556]

Oh, something else I should add. One thing about my dad's monitor being wide gamut is the amount of jibber jabber on the web about oversaturated colours. Indeed, my dad's monitor looks mega saturated unless he's working in photoshop with a calibrated colour space. Now, he just uses it purely for photoshop and photo editing and has his photo printers all setup nicely to match.

I really can't be arsed pissing around with wide gamuts and colour profiling since my photos don't need to be absolutely spot on colour wise. I'd rather have rapid response times and good blacks. So, should I save myself a fortune and ignore IPS panels?

so until that happens on the OS level, as far as i'm concerned, wide gamut monitors, are built for photoshop only, which, imo, is bull. I'd rather have a TN panel then an IPS or VA thats gonna be oversaturated in 98percent of the programs I run.

Win7 - Wide Gamut - Oversaturation? Still an issue? - [H]ard|Forum

 

[Moriath]

so go for the one i said above

 

[inactionman]

I've heard from a lot of people online that oversaturisation is a problem in normal apps.

I was looking at getting the Dell which uses the same panel, until I heard about the HP ZR24W, which is not wide gamut. I'd suggest waiting a few weeks, and seeing how it goes. List price is around $425, so it should be a lot more affordable that the wide gamut version. At the very least it may drop prices on the 2475.

 

[Ch3tan]

The only thing against the benq which embattle posted is that it is only 1080, having a monitor that does 1920*1200 just fits right at 24", you will notice those extra 120 pixels.

 

[Embattle]

That HP is indeed a good monitor with the advantage of being some £200-£300 cheaper than the same type from Eizo. Ch3tan is right about 1920x1200 being more of a natural resolution for a 24" monitor although that doesn't affect me much personally any way.

 

[TdC]

hmm I've been staring at a Dell ultrasharp for years and imo it's awesome.

 

[Ch3tan]

hmm I've been staring at a Dell ultrasharp for years and imo it's awesome.

High five!

All these late 24" converts, pffft.

 

[TdC]

yeah man too right. I'm going to friggin cry if it ever breaks, on general principals

 

[Ch3tan]

yeah man too right. I'm going to friggin cry if it ever breaks, on general principals

I think mine is on the way out tbh

It's getting very susceptible to screen burn recently, with images starting to burn in and ghosting becoming more apparent.

 

[MYstIC G]

General principals being you're gh3y yes?

 

[old.user4556]

hmm I've been staring at a Dell ultrasharp for years and imo it's awesome.

model number?

 

[Ch3tan]

I think teedles has the same as me, the original and the best. the 2405fpw

 

[old.user4556]

What's it like for black levels and lag levels? I'm used to 16ms which was lightning fast back in the day.

 

[Ch3tan]

Well I think it's lovely, although it's 6 years old now, and they don't make the same model anymore.

The new generation of lcd screens will be better, I've never had any complaints though. I think monitors is the only thing dell have ever got right.

 

[old.user4556]

Ok cheers chet, I can see the following models:

Dell ST2410 24" Widescreen LCD Monitor [] 24" LCD

and:

Dell UltraSharp U2410 24" Widescreen LCD Monitor [860-10089] 24" LCD

The former being a non-IPS model and not 1200 pixels high, the latter being muchos pricey however wide gamut and 1200 pixels high.

It looks like the "replacement" is:

DELL Dell G2410 - LCD display - TFT - 24" - widescreen - 1920 x 1080 / 60 Hz - 250 cd/m2 - 1000:1 - 1000000:1 (dynamic) - 5 ms - 0.277 mm - DVI-D, VGA - black : Computer Components | Dell United Kingdom

It seems to be aimed at full HD / blu-ray / entertainment users rather than 1920 x 1200 which is probably more reserved for the graphics people?

 

[old.user4556]

PS - the 'G' is also LED backlit which shouts "good blacks".

 

[TdC]

aye, 2405 all the way. tbh I notice nothing of lag or in fact anything negative about it at all. only point of complaint I might have if pressed is that running games at 1920x1200 with everything maxed out is a chore for lesser gfx cards.

actually, according to windows 7, my ATI 4870 is the lowest scoring thing in my system on the epeenometer.

 

[Bodhi]

We use LG Monitors at work, and they are pretty sexy, especially the 22-24" versions. OTOH I have a Sony monitor, and it owns everything. Ever.

 

[old.user4556]

OTOH I have a Sony monitor, and it owns everything. Ever.

model number?

 

[MYstIC G]

model number?

Stop trying to get womens phone numbers, we'll have no more relationship threads around here!

 

[Jupitus]

aye, 2405 all the way. tbh I notice nothing of lag or in fact anything negative about it at all. only point of complaint I might have if pressed is that running games at 1920x1200 with everything maxed out is a chore for lesser gfx cards.

actually, according to windows 7, my ATI 4870 is the lowest scoring thing in my system on the epeenometer.

You still on that mobo combo the same as mine, or did you upgrade?

 

[Rubber Bullets]

I also have a Dell 2405, I'm pretty sure it was on Chet's recommendation. as I recall the bare figures for refresh rate etc. didn't sound the best on paper, but the panel is just fantastic.

I've also never had a graphics card capable of getting the best out of it, my current 7900GTO has only ever been able to run some older games at native, with a lot of what I play having to run at 1600x900! fortunately it scales very well. Hopefully this week when I get my PC bits back I'll finally have a system that can get the best out of it, with an i5 CPU and ATI 5850.

I've just bought Sharon an LG 22" screen and that is pretty good too, though darkens a bit when viewed even slightly off straight. Nice picture though.

RB

 

[Embattle]

model number?

I would be careful with Bodhi and Sony, it is just his personal Apple complex.

 

[TdC]

You still on that mobo combo the same as mine, or did you upgrade?

erm, i7 920 at 3GHz on an asus p6t se?

 

[Bodhi]

model number?

SDM-HX93. Tis only a 19" 4:3 and is about 4 years old, but it pwns.

 

[DaGaffer]

The only thing against the benq which embattle posted is that it is only 1080, having a monitor that does 1920*1200 just fits right at 24", you will notice those extra 120 pixels.

Get used to it; most vendors are moving to 16:9 instead of 16:10 for monitors now, because it matches TV resolution for movies. My BenQ (E2400HD) is 16:9 and its absolutely fine resolution-wise.

 

[TdC]

bwa? but both blueray and other HD sources don't match the rez of my HD telly? so why are the monitor makers going to a rez that still won't fit it if not to save 228k pixels for the same price?

is this going to be like a disk fabber's megabyte versus a real megabyte thing?

 

[old.user4556]

Get used to it; most vendors are moving to 16:9 instead of 16:10 for monitors now, because it matches TV resolution for movies. My BenQ (E2400HD) is 16:9 and its absolutely fine resolution-wise.

Makes perfect sense to me.

Don't think I'll get too hung up on the vertical res since I'm coming from a 17" 1280 x 1024 affair.