# Need Best Monitor for Photo Edits



## beckstoy (Nov 7, 2014)

I'm building a new desktop just to handle my photo editing. I'm putting all the good stuff into it (SSD's, i7, etc. etc.). However, there are so many good monitors out there.

What's best? What do you all use and love? Whatever I use will be calibrated - I just want suggestions for specific models. I'm guessing ISP, right?

Can you all help?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## LJ3Jim (Nov 7, 2014)

My wife and I each have an HP 2311xi. The monitors are a couple of years old, but they have served us well. They calibrate nicely, but you do need to control the lighting conditions for future work. In other words, always try to do your work under the same lighting conditions as when the monitor was calibrated.

That said, the IPS monitor I use the most now is the one built into my Lenovo laptop (i7, SSD, 1920x1080). It also calibrates well, and I find myself doing 90% of my Lightroom work on it. I still plug into the HP monitor for the remaining work.

People at our camera club tend to favor Dell, but I don't know the model numbers.

Regards, Jim


----------



## tolusina (Nov 7, 2014)

Here's what I use......
http://www.necdisplay.com/p/desktop-monitors/pa242w-bk-sv
Wide gamut, DisplayPort input, integrated (and device specific) calibration, get the hood too.

Eizo is another high line brand with an excellent reputation. 
I think Dell has some less pricey wide gamut monitors too.

If you expect to print, step up to a printer profiler, profile each printer/paper/ink combination you'll use, soft proof in Lightroom using the intended printer profile while viewing on your calibrated monitor, prints come out pretty much identical to what you viewed/edited on the monitor.


----------



## Omni Images (Nov 7, 2014)

Eizo
This is an Australian web site and prices, but this is the top of the line model
http://www.kayellaustralia.com.au/eizo-coloredge-cg277w-27in-monitor-p-3499.html


----------



## dcm (Nov 7, 2014)

You might want to consider monitors with 10 bit color used by movie studios and animation houses - such as the HP Dreamcolor monitors. Other companies make them as well.


----------



## Vigood (Nov 8, 2014)

Have you considered the new iMac Retina Display?


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 8, 2014)

Canon DP-V3010 4K Reference Display, it more orientated towards video and the price is probably a little more than you were thinking


----------



## Halfrack (Nov 8, 2014)

Vigood said:


> Have you considered the new iMac Retina Display?


+100

Why put this all together and then be dealing with the clutter. iMac Retina and done (upgraded video card & SSD only, do RAM aftermarket). Otherwise, the Dell Ultrasharp models are a descent option.


----------



## GaryJ (Nov 8, 2014)

Anything Eizo...


----------



## JonB8305 (Nov 8, 2014)

Edited:

I have the 27" HP z27x Dreamcolor , probably the best price/performance wrt color monitors on the market, there are nice cheaper NEC's on the market but they don't support all of the color profiles of the HP. I wouldn't go with the Eizo's due to price constraints. , I'd go Dreamcolor or NEC if I were in the market again. If I were strictly doing photo's, NEC would be a great choice, but if you were into 4k video I'd go with the HP z27X, due to it's 4k input support, and supported color profiles. 

Like others have stated, in order to get 10 bit support, all points in the chain have to support it. Graphics Card-Monitor-OS-Software all have to support 10 bit color. If you're on a mac like I am, it's basically useless to have 10-bit support at the moment. As long as their own monitors don't support it, I can't imagine they will ever support it. Really disappointing.


----------



## Tabor Warren Photography (Nov 8, 2014)

We only use 27inch iMacs, and I've got to say, I love everything about them!

Cheers,
-Tabor


----------



## wopbv4 (Nov 8, 2014)

Hi,

I have done colormangement for a significant amount of time and in my opinion, NEC and Eizo are by far the best. I know that they are more expensive, but they last long, have internal self calibration, a matt screen etc.

I do not like any monitor with a glossy screen such as the imacs, especially the retinas. I am disturbed by the reflections. Furthermore, all the MACs are still only at 8bit/color channel (24 bit total) and that is because that is what the operating system OSX Supports.

It is crazy, our camera, photoshop, NEC and Eizo monitors all support at least 10 bit/color channel, but MAC has refused to support it, much to the grief of XRite and Eizo.

Eizo goes as far as 
QUOTE:
we do not recommend update to Yosemite which, in its current form, can not be used for colour management applications.
UNQUOTE


----------



## RGF (Nov 8, 2014)

I am running a 27" NEC spectra view and I found that I get much better colors out of it than any other monitor I have used. HIGHLY HIGHLY recommended.


----------



## can0nfan2379 (Nov 8, 2014)

+1 NEC Spectraview

I just bought a PA272 SVII and finally the colors I'm looking at on screen are getting pretty darn close to the printed photo.


----------



## Rofflesaurrr (Nov 8, 2014)

I used to own a NEC PA241W which was a very accurate wide gamut monitor. I have since upgraded to the new HP Z24x DreamColor display, which uses an LED backlight. CCFL backlit monitors like the NEC take time to warm up and stabilize. They also require more frequent calibration. So, I highly recommend a display with an LED backlight. Keep in mind that if you want to use a 10-bit display, you are going to need a NVIDIA Quadro or AMD FirePro graphics card. Many people think they have a 10-bit workflow through a cheaper GeForce or Radeon card, but they only support 10-bit through DirectX. Adobe Photoshop and all other professional graphics software use OpenGL. Only Quadro and FirePro cards offer full OpenGL support. 10-bit displays mostly benefit you if the majority of your work is going to be printed. If you're going to be publishing digitally, then 8-bit is all you need, as that is the standard for the internet and 99% of the devices that people will be using.

Recommended 10-bit 27" Displays:

HP Z27x DreamColor
NEC PA272W 
ASUS PA279Q

Recommended 8-bit 27" Displays:

HP Z27i
Dell U2713HM
NEC EA274WMI

Recommended 10-bit 24" Displays

HP Z24x DreamColor
ASUS PA249Q
Dell U2413
NEC PA242W

Recommended 8-Bit 24" Displays

Dell U2412M 
NEC EA244WMI
HP Z24i

All of these are popular LED backlit IPS or PLS displays that receive good feedback from the photography community.


----------



## Eldar (Nov 8, 2014)

I use the 27" Eizo CG276 self calibrating monitor. There are some newer monitors out there now, which I have not tried, but I am very happy with this one. A bit more expensive and a bit larger, than some of the others, but well worth it.

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/eizo-coloredge-cg276-27--monitor-review-22796


----------



## Runner (Nov 8, 2014)

The Dell U2713HM cannot be recommended.
It's their "cheap" version, and it's poor luck if you get a good one. Too many flaws. Colors and brightness change etc.
The U2713H is the good version, but it also costs more.

I have the Dell U2414Q which is 4K with excellent colors, but it's a pain to get above 30 Hz update, even though it's supposed to support 60 Hz. In fact, I haven't succeeded :-(


----------



## Maui5150 (Nov 8, 2014)

If you want the best, NEC or Eizo

Next level down, I really like the Asus ART series. 1+ billion colors, will run 2550x1600 or what ever the exact resolution is and has great viewing little glare, and one of the few monitors that really goes through decent calibration out of the factory and gives you a report with your monitor of its results.

Cannot recommend Dell or HP. 

I have owned or worked with a dozen of each in their better monitors and with Dells ran into a TON of dead pixels over time, and with HP just some washiness with their image

I went through no less than 4 of the Dell U2410s like 6 years ago and after a month or two dead pixels would develop. I go so sick and tired resolving with techs over India as well as by the 2nd replacement, they were sending Refurbs, not new, and that really pissed me off. If I have something die in warranty, I do not want a cheaper refurb. 

I started really watching my serial numbers because I was convinced I was going to get one of my old monitors back. I finally got a refund, but had to pursue it as a claim with AmericanExpress and charge protection

Your mileage may vary


----------



## symmar22 (Nov 8, 2014)

You cannot go wrong with high end NEC monitors (I use a PA271w), but if you want to save, DELL offers IMO more for the money. I have an old DELL 2709W (PVA panel) that gives me a slightly better RGB and Adobe RGB coverage than the NEC (my calibration device says so). That is 100% sRGB for the DELL vs 98% for the NEC that is twice the price. Both are "old" CCFL backlit; nowadays you want to go for LED. But all high end monitors will do, providing they have an IPS (or equivalent) panel. I had an Eizo 24" as well, excellent screen, but not offering much considering it's very high price.

HP also has a good reputation for monitors, but I think DELL has the best price / value ratio. If I would buy a screen now, I would likely go for the DELL U3014 (IMHO the 16/10 ratio is more useful for photography) plus I like the large working space of the 30".

Never had a dead pixel on either DELL, or NEC, but a couple on the EIZO.


----------



## DominoDude (Nov 8, 2014)

I have no problem recommending the DELL monitors - U2713H or U2713HM. Warranties are good in case "the fit will hit the shan". I can notice a slight vignetting in the far corners on mine, but it haven't made me return my monitor. No dead pixels, nor any other odd deviations in colour and such.

Eizo and NEC, for those that can afford them, has always been a good and reliable way to go.

Don't be afraid buying the most expensive one that fits your need - a good screen should last more years than any decent computer, and you will be staring at it all the time. Make it worth it.


----------



## Jon_D (Nov 8, 2014)

if you want the best you sure don´t want a dell 27 inch. they are consumer grade monitors.

i have the 2713HM and it´s a good consumer monitor but no competition to my Eizo 27 inch.
so for the best get an Eizo CG line monitor.

when you can´t afford them the NEC PA and the EIZO CX lines are first choice around 1000-1400$ for photography editing.


----------



## wtlloyd (Nov 8, 2014)

NEC Spectraview series.
Sold my PA271 and looking to upgrade to the PA322 - this is a 4K monitor, with SpectraView calibration, available any day now.

I recommend a look at Lloyd Chambers "Mac Performance Guide" regarding the new iMac.
http://macperformanceguide.com/blog/2014/20141103_2226-iMac-goes-back.html

He is reviewing 4K monitors, should have the LG up for review soon.

http://diglloyd.com/blog/2014/20141102_1056-LG-4K-display.html

Lastly, here is a interesting article regarding true monitor calibration:

http://diglloyd.com/articles/Recommended/display-calibration.html


----------



## Jon_D (Nov 8, 2014)

Runner said:


> The Dell U2713HM cannot be recommended.
> It's their "cheap" version, and it's poor luck if you get a good one. Too many flaws. Colors and brightness change etc.
> The U2713H is the good version, but it also costs more.



unfortunately that is not really the case as i noticed.
it cost more but it´s tested worse then the HM version on PRAD.DE.
i noticed the monitor has many small issues and a few big ones.

i bought both of them to tested them side by side. the H was going back.

dell is like playing lottery and the H looked inferior compared to the HM.
not in color gamut thought, but bleeding, homogenity was worse.
yes i would have bigger color gamut but with the issues the H had the HM was the better and cheaper choice.

so yes the H looks better on paper but the differences in real life are way more important than the paper specs. dell seems to have a lousy QA department.


both dells have pixels errors. the H had 3 dead ones the HM has one stuck red pixel.
the H also had a bright spot (over a few pixels where the backround light was not dimmed).
noticable especially on gray and white. not an LCD matrix issue but an isuse with the backlight.
i guess a small hole in the diffusion foil.

i am using the HM as second monitor, my primary is a CG277.

anyway they are no comeptition to a Eizo CG or CX.
the topic starter asked for the best.... so dell is no choice.


----------



## JMZawodny (Nov 8, 2014)

I'm curious to hear reports from folks owning and using the new 5K Retina iMac. You can almost fit images on it at 100% photo resolution. Also, what, if anything, are you doing for calibration in your workflow?


----------



## gecko (Nov 8, 2014)

Everyone seems to have mentioned the obvious choices (but, IMHO, I wouldn't bother with a Mac or a Dell).

But there is another new option in the colour accurate field- BenQ - if you need to consider some thing less expensive than a NEC or Eizo.

There is only a 24" version at the moment, but apparently a full line-up is coming.


----------



## Jon_D (Nov 8, 2014)

JMZawodny said:


> I'm curious to hear reports from folks owning and using the new 5K Retina iMac. You can almost fit images on it at 100% photo resolution. Also, what, if anything, are you doing for calibration in your workflow?



no 10 bit support for mac.

i have a nvidia quadro gpu so i can make use of 10 bit.

many people think only the monitor has to support 10 bit and all is fine.
but nearly all consumer graphic cards will not support 10 bit. 
and of course the OS has to support it.


----------



## Jon_D (Nov 8, 2014)

wopbv4 said:


> It is crazy, our camera, photoshop, NEC and Eizo monitors all support at least 10 bit/color channel, but MAC has refused to support it, much to the grief of XRite and Eizo.



you need a quadro or fireGL to make use of 10 bit.

a consumer nvidia or ATI card driver will not support 10bit in windows.

and photoshop you need at least CS6... versions before CS6 do NOT really reliably support 10 bit output.

so you need:

OS win7 or newer.
grafic card that supports 10 bit in hardware and DRIVERS.
10 bit monitor (10 bit most of the time only via display port).
photoshop CS6 or newer.


----------



## Maui5150 (Nov 8, 2014)

JMZawodny said:


> I'm curious to hear reports from folks owning and using the new 5K Retina iMac. You can almost fit images on it at 100% photo resolution. Also, what, if anything, are you doing for calibration in your workflow?



Yeah but you throw away 80% of the color. The 5K Retina is an sRGB monitor. 

Which image would your prefer to work on... 

a 4K image with 1.07 Billion colors so you can see the actual pixels you shot.

a 5K image with 27 Million colors and a replacement pallete that hides 80% of your shading and toning in the images.

Meh. What is a little over a BILLION color difference. 

For me, I am running Windows 7, 64-bit, with an AMD FirePro V5900 which I picked up for like $140 bucks, and a ASUS ProArt Wide Gamut HD monitor

Sometime down the road, there may even be 12-bit color monitors and cards, and when they come out, I will simply swap the card, replace the monitor and VOILA!


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 8, 2014)

dilbert said:


> HP Z27x
> 4k ready and partial support for rec 2020 (only 1 other monitor is currently capable of that)
> 
> Review:
> ...



A few mistakes they made, they said that the "gamma is perfect in the sRGB, Adobe RGB, and DCI modes.

We calculate gamma deviation by simply expressing the difference from 2.2 as a percentage."

Only sRGB is NOT gamma 2.2, that is totally wrong, so until they put an sRGB TRC mode in it it will give the wrong tone response for sRGB.

Also, going by their white field uniformity measurements, I almost wonder if they didn't turn on the max grid programmable uniformity compensation mode for the Dell UP2414Q (one of the screens they compared this one too).

Mostly it sounds pretty awesome BUT it is not actually 4k/UHD even though it can accept those signals, it is only 3.6MP vs 8MP (or the 14MP of the 27" Dell and Apple, the 27" Apple display though has a vastly smaller gamut).

If this screen were only UHD capable then wow, this would be the screen of screens.

As it is, I would never, ever give up UHD, not even for this world beating gamut size and everything else so good (other than for the lack of a proper sRGB tone curve option).


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 8, 2014)

beckstoy said:


> I'm building a new desktop just to handle my photo editing. I'm putting all the good stuff into it (SSD's, i7, etc. etc.). However, there are so many good monitors out there.
> 
> What's best? What do you all use and love? Whatever I use will be calibrated - I just want suggestions for specific models. I'm guessing ISP, right?
> 
> ...



Dell UP2414Q has UHD, programmable screen uniformity compensation, programmable internal high bit LUT, very wide gamut, IPS, uses advanced variable direct current driven backlight powering of the LEDs and does not use PWM (pulse width modulation to flicker the backlight in order to change the intensity as many screens do), very good price for UHD now.

Dell is coming out with a 27" 14MP beyond UHD monitor very soon. I imagine it will be similar to the above model otherwise. The price is steep though and might take a year to come down.

I personally upgraded from a NEC PA241W to the Dell UP2414Q. The Dell calibrates (much more slowly and more of a pain, I used a mix of the built-in software for calibration and then Argyl for profiling) fully as precisely and accurately as the NEC did and it has the newer, less grainy panel type. The PA NEC do have unlimited profiles while the Dell forces you to use internal storage for profiles only and they give you just a few bytes of storage (crazy in this day and age) so you can only store profiles for miniDP connector and two more for the DP connector for a total of four. However the only UHD Nec monitors out now are EA series and they only let you program the native gamut mode, you can't reprogram the sRGB simulation at all so it ends up giving a far less accurate tone curve than the Dell does for sRGB + sRGB TRC or sRGB + Gamma 2.2.

The UHD is astonishing. I can't stress enough how much better UHD/4k looks than the lower res 2560x or HD monitors do.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 8, 2014)

Halfrack said:


> Vigood said:
> 
> 
> > Have you considered the new iMac Retina Display?
> ...



The problem with the Apple is the display is the computer and it lacks wide gamut and internal calibration and screen uniformity control. The 14MP is pretty astonishing though so it's certainly very good all the same.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 8, 2014)

Runner said:


> I have the Dell U2414Q which is 4K with excellent colors, but it's a pain to get above 30 Hz update, even though it's supposed to support 60 Hz. In fact, I haven't succeeded :-(



You need to connect it by DisplayPort connector to get 60Hz and you need to go into the control panel and make sure you have DisplayPort 1.2 enabled set to true.

What are you trying to drive it with? Some Macs are locked to drive 4k/UHD at only 30Hz or even not at all (like my old MAC Mini, a hack gets it to drive UHD at 30Hz with no problem though, not sure why Apple locks things that their hardware supports just fine, I guess they want you to have to buy a new machine!!!!). It's trivial to drive it at 60Hz with my main Windows box.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 8, 2014)

Maui5150 said:


> If you want the best, NEC or Eizo
> 
> Next level down, I really like the Asus ART series. 1+ billion colors, will run 2550x1600 or what ever the exact resolution is and has great viewing little glare, and one of the few monitors that really goes through decent calibration out of the factory and gives you a report with your monitor of its results.
> 
> ...



The Premiere Color Dells now like UP2414Q perform great.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 8, 2014)

DominoDude said:


> Don't be afraid buying the most expensive one that fits your need - a good screen should last more years than any decent computer, and you will be staring at it all the time. Make it worth it.



+1

It's crazy that people will spend thousands and tens of thousands on camera gear and then want to limit the monitor budget to like $250. Some spend $1200 just to get a slightly higher res lens or this or that and then get the cheapest monitor they can. So you get all these technically perfect images but then don't have anything to see them on in good fashion.


----------



## Maui5150 (Nov 8, 2014)

GraFax said:


> Unfortunately the lack of 30 bit support in Mac OS puts that out of my reach. I don't mind Windows 7, I have both a Mac and a PC hooked up to my NEC PA271w, but I can't say I've ever wanted to migrate my photo editing to that platform.
> 
> My understanding is that even in Windows 7 running in 30 bit requires a lot of compromises in the OS. I've considered putting a 30 bit card in the PC and switching back and forth to see if there is a considerable difference but why torture myself. In any event, I generally find that the seemingly superior image quality of any new display wears off in about a week or two as my brain adjusts to the new normal. Just like a new TV or stereo speakers.
> 
> Apple, despite their many flaws and indifference to the needs of their professional users, still works best for me. It can be a bit of love/hate relationship but divorce is out of the question.



What compromise?

Not all programs will use it, but I have yet to have an issue with having to make a change to my system running 30-bit and some software I run is 10+ years old.


----------



## Maui5150 (Nov 8, 2014)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> DominoDude said:
> 
> 
> > Don't be afraid buying the most expensive one that fits your need - a good screen should last more years than any decent computer, and you will be staring at it all the time. Make it worth it.
> ...



It is not crazy at all. Most people are extremely foolish in this regard. 

I used to see it in the home stereo world where they would have all their money in Amps and components but nothing in speakers. In the car stereo world, they would have great head unit and speakers, decent amps but lousy cabling and power. 

$3000 suit, $150 Johnson Murphy shoes...


----------



## PFerrara (Nov 8, 2014)

I like my Viewsonic VP2770-LED. But I don't really have any other monitors I can compare it to. It was a big upgrade from a 4:3 ratio Viewsonic I used to use (now in the kid's room). Never had a problem with the old Viewsonic which is why I stuck with the brand.

http://www1.viewsonic.com/products/vp2770led.htm


----------



## retina (Nov 8, 2014)

+1 for NEC & EIZO


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 10, 2014)

dilbert said:


> Word of warning.
> 
> The industry making screens and panels jumped the gun and has been producing screens that are not capable of displaying the full 4K/UHDTV gamut. Avoid paying a premium for anything that is "4K" unless it is also "Rec 2020 compliant."
> 
> That aside, any monitor that has inbuilt calibration (e.g. NEC Spectraview) is a "best fit" for photo edits.



nothing is fully rec. 2020 compliant though at the moment

If you wait for that you probably wait for a number of years and lose out on incredible 4k+ for all that time.


----------



## RGF (Nov 11, 2014)

wtlloyd said:


> NEC Spectraview series.
> Sold my PA271 and looking to upgrade to the PA322 - this is a 4K monitor, with SpectraView calibration, available any day now.
> 
> I recommend a look at Lloyd Chambers "Mac Performance Guide" regarding the new iMac.
> ...



Thanks. Very interesting. One thing I have is that I need to keep my monitor brightness turned down, else the monitor is too bright and the print is too dark. I know a lot of people who have work around for this (apply a curve, adjust levels x points, ...) but in the end, just dim your monitor. It is much simpler.


----------



## harryjackson442 (Jan 15, 2015)

Yes IPS panel monitors are the best for photo editing.And if you are looking for specific models,here are top products that have been tried and tested over time: Dell U2412M, Asus PB278Q, Dell U2711, Samsung S27B970D, Nec PA301W, Apple Thunderbolt MC 914 LL/B, Eizo CG246, and a few others. If you wish to see more including info that shows what makes them the best for photo editing, see this page


----------



## Bishop80 (Jan 15, 2015)

beckstoy said:


> ...What's best? What do you all use and love? Whatever I use will be calibrated - I just want suggestions for specific models. I'm guessing ISP, right?
> 
> Can you all help?
> Thanks in advance.



As if you didn't have enough suggestions already  I have been using the HP DreamColor LP2480zx 24" IPS display for several years now and have been pleased. It has RGB LED backlighting and covers 100% of sRBG and Adobe RGB and then some. I drive it with an ATI FirePro V3800 10-bit card over DisplayPort (this card has 10-bit support in Photoshop).

FYI: the Dreamcolor Calibration Solution device is required to calibrate the monitor.


----------

