Flat Screen Monitors

[Struan Gray]

A recurring thread, but I hope not a redundant one.

My Mitsubishi Diamondtron screen is starting to flicker and wave, and it's time to get something new. Here in Sweden the secondhand market is restricted and expensive, so the advice in previous threads to look for a reconditioned CRT isn't really practical and I am certain that my next monitor will be a LCD, and I will almost certainly have to buy it mail order. I would therefore love to garner opinions from a bunch of fellow photographers rather than rely on generic web and print reviews.

Naturally I have gazed with lust upon the Eizo Coloredge and Radiography screens, but that is just too much money.

The Apple 20" Cinema display is attractive, has a fairly good reputation and is priced at a level I can justify. However, other marques offer more the money: more screen, tilting/rotating for portrait images, more and more varied inputs. Also, I prefer squareish aspect ratios so the widescreen benefits are lost on me.

The local market offers LaCie, Sony, Eizo Flexscan and Philips models at around the same price as the Apple, with LaCie and Eizo specifically targeted at graphics arts and photography usage. There are also cheaper screens with similar specs from Dell and Samsung, but those who rave about them on the net don't go into specifics about the image quality and suitability for digital photography.

At present I am leaning towards the Eizo Flexscan L797. It's a bit more than the others, but Eizo's warranty is much better, their policy on defective pixels is much more rigorous, and they generally talk a language that implies they are used to selling to those who care about image quality as LF photographers understand it.

Specific Questions: Is the Eizo L797 as good as its specs and Eizo's general reputation would suggest?

Are there any current standouts for price/performance among the other models?

Any makes I should definitely avoid, and if so, why?

I am grateful for any and all responses, even ones that don't make sense (.-).

[Joe Forks]

Are you sure it is your monitor going out and not your video card?

I'm using a LACIE 321, and very happy with it. I can't comment on the other's you mentioned.

Best
Joe

[Howard Slavitt]

I would get the Apple Cinema 20". I faced a similar choice like you about 3 months ago, and ended up with the Apple. Although it has fewer controls, I read a very good review of color accuracy that rated it higher than almost any other screen -- including the very expensive Eizo's. The main drawback of the Apple Cinema 20" is that it can only accurately be calibrated to 6500K, not 5000K or 6500K. For me that's not a big deal because I always calibrate to 6500K. I no longer have the review, sorry . . .

[Dean Cookson]

I don't know if it's available where you are, but I've got the Dell 2005FPW on my desk at work and I'm pretty happy with it (although my day job has nothing to do with image manipulation). The LCD is the same unit that's in the Apple display but the case has the ability to rotate the screen 90deg and it has electronics in it to take VGA as well as DVI input. It's also cheaper.

[Ted Harris]

I faced a similar decision some 8-9 months ago. I got tied of reading reviews and decided to buy only after i had made some real world comparisons. I made a DVD which contained several very high resoluton files (all 300 MB to 1 GB) of 4x5, 5x7 and 8x10 transparencies. I then started a round of dealers actually looking at these images on one screen after another, when possible doing side-by-side comparisons. I, like you, was originally focused nt he Apple 20" Cinema Display and its brethern.

Unfortunately for my pocketbooks, time after time what I saw on the Apple 23" Cinema Display was so superiuor to any of the 20" offerings that I broke down and spent the additional money. I was doing one-to-one comparisons, looking at the same image, same size, same resolution, signalcoming from the same CPU hooked upo to two monitors ...did this several different times at several different showrooms ... and always came away with the 23" display a clear winner. I live in a rural area and it took me many months to do this on my infrequent trips to urban areas where I could actually see displays at work, but it was well worth it. Had I not done this I would have ended up with the 20" display and, I believe, never been fully satisfied.

Finally, there are other options out there that may works as well but I urge you to take the time and make the effort, even if it means a wait, to go look and do your looking at your images, not those provided by the retailer.

Pleae don't blame me if this exercise costs you money <smile>.

[medform-norm]

Struan,
it sounds the fly back transformer of your monitor is weak - if you're a handy person you can replace it for $35 - but it's not an easy job and requires preparation. My very old iMac is having the same problem, but if it dies, I won't bother to repair it but replace the whole set for something more modern.

I can recommend Eizo flatscreens. We have a smallish model from several years back (L365?)and it's fantastic in use. If I have to buy another one, I'd go for a bigger Eizo - and prices are falling on the second hard market. Lots of Eizos are used in offices around the world and chances are you can get a fairly young one that is getting dumped for an 'upgrade'.

As regards other brands, I have no experience whatsoever, only that I had a LaCie CRT for a week and traded it in for a Sony as fast as I could. Never regretted that.

[steve_782]

I have the Flexscan L997, and would recommend the Eizo monitors. Make sure it includes the monitor control software that allows 6 color setup as that is the only way you'll get accurate color temperature using a color calibration system. You'll find that the backlight needs to be set much lower than it comes from the factory (mine's at 78%) - which affects the color temperature.

If you use the color temperature software sliders or pushbutton monitor controls, and set the monitor at 6500K, and then actually measure it, you'll find that the color temperature is much lower. For example, my screen's color temperature was about 5200K when set at 6500K using the slider. Through the 6 color setup and some trial and measurement, I have the screen at a measured 6493K.

Finally, the L997 is specified as having an sRGB colorspace. When the monitor profile is examined in X-Rite Gamutworks, the actual colorspace is larger than Adobe 1998!

[Capocheny]

Struan,

I'm with Ted on his choice of monitors... mine is also the 23" and I love it.

GREAT monitor!

Cheers

[robc]

just a thought but if your monitor is less than 3 years old then it is still in warranty.

My mitsubishi monitor started playing up last autumn and was still just in warranty. I contacted them and they sent a refurbished replacement straight away and picked up the old monitor after I had time to check that it was OK. No cost involved to me and the replacement was like new.
I was more than impressed with their service.

[Michael Chmilar]

Apple's support discussion board has a long thread:

http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=1106174&#1106174

regarding color consistency problems with the 23" Cinema Display (with the aluminum case). Complaints are a generally pink cast and vertical stripes of yellow or bluish color cast, which are a couple of inches wide, usually at the sides. The problem may be due to anti-reflection coating applied to the screen.

The 20" and 30" displays do not seem to suffer from this problem.

[Jeffrey Sipress]

I'm running a laCie 321 next to an Apple 23 CD. The 321 came with it's own calibation system, and the Apple is calibrated as best as one can do with it. I have no problems with the Apple CD, and slightly tweaked it to better match the 321, whose calibration I trust. The side by side comparison is good. I use the 321 for the image window, and the CD for PS menus and Bridge. I often drag the image to the CD when I'm creating a jpeg, for comparison. Both are excellent, but the 321 has a slight edge on sharpness and color accuracy.

[paulr]

I'm in the minority that isn't a big fan of the apple monitors. For the record i've been called an apple zealot, and i have stock in the company, but the cinema displays don't impress me for photography. I'm not sure if what I'm seeing is dot pitch or some other characteristic, but to my eyes, the individual pixels all look outlined, which gives an unaturally hard edge to everything. The eizo monitors look much smoother to me, including the cheaper line. The high end La Cies also look better. eizo also seems to do a better job of even ilumination of the whole screen than anyone else. I haven't done any real work in front of these others--just checked them out at stores and at a trade show. I've spent many hours in front of other people's cinema displays.

Another issue is consistent contrast when you move your head around. the apple displays have gotten better, but this still makes me crazy. the eizo seemed much more consistent. Not sure about the la cie.

the apples do seem better than anything else in the low to medium price range that i've seen, but none of these are monitors i'd consider for photography. at home i have a la cie crt that i was lucky enough to pick up barely used. the only lcd i've seen that i'd trade it for is the top end eizo (not that anyone's offering ;)

[Marko]

I am generally a fence-straddler - I use both PC and Mac with both Apple and non-Apple monitors, as of last year all exclusively LCDs. My business is web design, an activity that is reliant on graphics but not as demanding as photography. Photoshop is still one of the main tools, though, and graphics quality matters. So here's my $0.02:

1. You get what you pay for. This is especially true for your video system - both your monitor and your graphics card.

2. There are generally three brands of LCD monitors that are accepted in the graphics industry - Apple, Eizo, LaCie. Based on my experience, there's a good reason for it. These three are the only ones that can be trully reliably calibrated.

3. There are plenty of cheap(er) LCDs out there, and lot of them will give you a very nice and pleasing image, some for much less money. But keep in mind that "pleasing" is not the same as "accurate". These are great choices for any non-critical work, some times even much better choices, especially for office work.

4. As far as aspect ratio is concerned: although wide aspect ratio is most often associated with video, I have actually found it very comfortable for Photoshop use as it gives an extra space on the right for all the pallletes.

All being said, I believe you will be pleased with either of those three, just make sure your video card is equally good. Nothing will make Photoshop fly as good graphics system and lots of memory, both video and system one. And I do mean LOTS of it. Next most important thing is disk space, specifically scrap (swap) memory, and especially on a PC.

Regards,

[Ed Richards]

I am having very good luck with the Samsung 213T, which I have on two computers, but I am a black and white photographer so I do not worry a lot about color. I do keep both calibrated. It seems to work on the few color shots I do.

> just make sure your video card is equally good. Nothing will make Photoshop fly as good graphics system and lots of memory, both video and system one.

The Real World Photoshop guys point out that a good graphics system for Photoshop is pretty minimal, just enough memory to handle the images. Beyond that, you do not get any gain because the limits on rewrite are CPU related. (I.e., do not spend a grand on a gamer's high speed system.) OTOH, up the memory on the Mac with all your spare change, and max out PCs at 2 gigs for 16 bit and at least 4 for 64 bit.

[Saulius]

An article regarding lcd vs crt A Tale of Two LCDs (http://westcoastimaging.blogspot.com/)

[Mark_3632]

Check out the reconditioned portion of the Apple web site. This makes the cinema display even more justifyable.

I bought a ViewSonic 19inch with a flat screen, brand new with shipping waved for under 300. It is big but nice picture

[Struan Gray]

Thanks for all the answers - I wasn't expecting so much data so soon. Keep them rolling in as I am sure I am not the only one trying to make this choice.

A few points.

- No Apple refurbs in Sweden. I'll try the UK store when it opens on Wednesday.

- Medform_norm: Swedish repairs are expensive, but we plan to keep the Diamondtron for the kids' games so I'll look into it.

- It's really frustrating having to buy something so visual without seeing it beforehand. I will try and track down actual models to play with.

- I still want one of these (http://radiforce.com/en/products/monitor.php?monitor_id=10&panel=N).

[medform-norm]

"Medform_norm: Swedish repairs are expensive, but we plan to keep the Diamondtron for the kids' games so I'll look into it."

Uhm, I was thinking more in the lines of a DIY project...with a $35 spare part and several hours of you sweating and praying you'r doing it right and hoping you didn't cut the wrong cable :-).

[Brian Ellis]

I have a Dell LCD, I don't see a model number on it and don't remember the number but I paid about $400 for it on sale from about a $500 normal price about a year ago. It works very well for me. I calibrate it periodically with Spyder and I think I get a good match between the monitor and the print. However, I don't do commercial work so I don't have to get a 100% perfect match between a product and a print. I think that a lower priced LCD such as this one would work fine for almost anyone who doesn't have clients that demand perfection and who can themselves tolerate about 95% of perfection for maybe 25% of what 100% perfection would cost.

[Brian Ellis]

Monitors are about the most boring part of digital photography for me, my eyes glaze over around the second or third sentence of every monitor review I've ever tried to read. So my approach to buying a monitor was the opposite of Ted's. I saw an ad for a Dell 19" monitor that normally sells for about $500 on sale for $350 and I ordered it on the spot without knowing anything about it except the size of the screen and the cost.

Despite this low-tech approach I've been very happy with the Dell (sorry but I don't see a model number on it and I can't find the manual). I calibrate it periodically with Spyder and I think I get a good - not great but good - match between the monitor and the print. However, I don't do commercial work so I don't have clients looking over my shoulder and demanding perfection . The 95% or so of perfection that I get with the inexpensive Dell is fine for me, especially considering that it came at about 20% of what perfection would cost.

[George Stewart]

For those with hefty bank accounts, may I suggest: IBM's (Lenovo's) T221 or NEC's MultiSync LCD2180WGLEDBKSV.

[Dominique Labrosse]

Struan,

I just did a bunch of research for a new work monitor. We were hours away from ordering the Apple 23" then switched to the 24" wide screen Eizo flexscan. This was mostly for QA and warranty issues.

There is a great VRML tool on the Eizo website that lets you compare the gamut of different monitors. You can find it here:

http://www.eizo.com/microsite/profilvergleich/fs_vergleich.html

I used the tool to compare my Mitsubishi Diamontron profile created with my Eye One Display against the Eizo flexscan profile provided in the downloads section of the Eizo web site. The flexscan measured out wider on the sides of the 3D model but shorter on the tops and bottoms. Which means that the CRT would show better shadow detail than the LCD. But the LCD showed greater range in the saturated colours. That said the ColourEdge gamut was huge and put either one to shame. Word on the street is that the 24" Flexscan will be converted to a ColourEdge model in the next couple of months at a similar price point (about $1700 US or so). If you can hold on it might be worth the wait. The ColourEdge series have the ability to calibrate using hte 14 bit look-up table.

Hope this helps...

[Paul Coppin]

If you like the Mitsubishi, it'll likely be worthwhile to get it fixed - that problem is due to a few things (including card and cable connectors). I'm not a fan of LCDs for photography, but love them for general computer work. Compare the resolution of your current monitor to the pixel density of the LCD - you might not like how your stuff looks on LCD. The phospors on a conventional CRT monitor tend give a closer feel to continuous tone, expecially if the screen mask is fine, and more closely resemble the print image whether digital or conventional..