What is the best large monitor for photography work for $600-$800?

October 5, 2005 2:57 AM

It's time for a new large monitor, and accurate photography prints are a must.

I'm currently using a 21" Dell P1110 which I am now in need of replacing (it has finally reached the point in its life where it is incapable of rendering blacks right). I need a monitor that can be callibrated as accurately as possible (with the aid of a Spyder2 Pro) for my photography, and have enough space for me to easily work with very high res images (I've become accustomed to working with 1600x1200 on a 21")

My budget for this should really be no more than $600-$800. As far monitors I can afford go, I have mostly been looking at Viewsonic, specifically the G220fB, and honestly don't know if there is something better and more accurate out there. As much as I'd love an LCD of some sort (a 70lb monitor takes up quite a bit of desk real estate) I'm fairly sure that none exist in my price range that approach the level of quality that I need.

Does anyone here have experience with the Viewsonic G220fB? Or, even better, does anyone here know of higher quality alternatives that I can afford? Extra points if you point me towards a magical LCD that will do what I need, not break the bank, and make me breakfast.

posted by Stunt to technology (16 comments total)

You would best be helped by registering and asking the question over at the Rob Galbraith forums. The people there are probably the most knowledgeable pros that could offer you great suggestions.
posted by JJ86 at 3:41 AM on October 5, 2005

There's certainly nothing magical about that viewsonic. It's a trinitron tube in a different box. I recently bought a Samsung 204t (20" 1600x1200) LCD that's got great specs and looks great (and should work with the Spyder). Amazon is selling them for $584.
posted by doctor_negative at 5:41 AM on October 5, 2005

It was my understanding that LCDs in this price range are still not up to par with CRTs for color gamut for photography purposes. I think there's a debate about this on the Fred Miranda forums and the consensus is that for photography, unless you are willing to spend mucho bucks, your best investment is still CRT.
posted by spicynuts at 6:51 AM on October 5, 2005

It was my understanding that LCDs in this price range are still not up to par with CRTs for color gamut for photography purposes.

As you say, a point that is contested. I do a lot of photography and print work on an LCD and I believe it to be superior to the CRT triniton I used to use, particularly for colour, though small text can be a crapshoot.

However, I have one of the few true 24-bit LCDs. Many are 18-bit that simulate 24-bit. I suspect that colour accuracy is not up to par in these models.
posted by juiceCake at 7:24 AM on October 5, 2005

However, I have one of the few true 24-bit LCDs. Many are 18-bit that simulate 24-bit. I suspect that colour accuracy is not up to par in these models.

I'm curious as to how you know you have one - is there a list somewhere? I notice no banding whatsoever on my Dell 2001FP, and I've got a good eye for such things.
posted by Ryvar at 7:43 AM on October 5, 2005

However, I have one of the few true 24-bit LCDs

Hi, Juicecake. What is the price range for a true 24-bit LCD? Are you talking about something in the realm of the Eizos that are exorbitantly priced?
posted by spicynuts at 7:45 AM on October 5, 2005

Previously, previously.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 10:33 AM on October 5, 2005

Ah, thank you for the links, Civil_Disobedient...my searching turned up the second one but not the first one. The NEC FP2141SB-BK linked there seems to be good...more research is needed still.

I've been searching as much as possible and turning up very limited results. I knew that there had to be something better than that viewsonic, but so far I couldn't track one down. I was becoming a tad frustrated, hence the ask.mefi question finally.

Soooo....this discussion of LCDs....assuming there IS one that does what I need, I can afford it? What specific monitors are we talking about here?

Thanks for the forum links, I'll take the search to them and see what I can turn up.
posted by Stunt at 1:18 PM on October 5, 2005

Oh, and another reason I came to you ever-so-useful mefites...While my searching turned up previous discussions of this, most were at least several months old, if not more. I know that newer monitors have been released, and so the possibility of a much better canidate existed (especially in the LCD range).
posted by Stunt at 1:20 PM on October 5, 2005

The NEC FP2141SB-BK linked there seems to be good...more research is needed still.

I use the NEC FP2141 for my photographic work. I have absolutely no complaints, and will not be switching to another monitor until this one is dead. That's about as good a recommendation that I can give for anything I own: I have no desire for something else.

My desktop resolution is 1792x1344, 32 bit. Color rendition is perfect; I use the built-in SpectraView color calibration (if you don't already own a calibration tool, this extra bit of hardware is quite nice and integrates seemlessly). The Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 2070 is the same monitor, as is the LaCie ElectronBlue IV (but that one comes in a pretty blue box).

The next step up in CRT technology would cost more than 5 times the price. A similarly-featured LCD will probably be at least twice as much, but you still must deal with inherit LCD problems (off-axis color rendition, native resolutions, etc.) Also note: if desk space is at a premium, or if you have a bad back, you won't like CRTs.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 4:45 PM on October 5, 2005

I've got the Dell 2001FP as well. I quote"

"The screen itself is a very nice LG.Philips LCD LM201U04. This is perhaps the first true 16ms 24-bit LCD panel commercially produced and doesn't rely on over-inflated contrast ratio and brightness numbers to draw attention to itself. We will go into more detail about the panel later on."

From this review.

It is also the same display panel family that Apple uses in some of their models.
posted by juiceCake at 8:38 PM on October 5, 2005

Specific page about colour here.
posted by juiceCake at 8:39 PM on October 5, 2005

Wow, thank you very much everyone. I really was floundering on my own there.

Amazingly, I managed to get a rather good deal on a LaCie ElectronBlue 22", so a replacement monitor is on the way. As much as some of those LCDs appealed to me, I couldn't find one as good as I needed (well, not that I could afford.) Woo, ask.mefi to the rescue.
posted by Stunt at 3:04 PM on October 6, 2005

I've got the Dell 2001FP as well. I quote"

"The screen itself is a very nice LG.Philips LCD LM201U04. This is perhaps the first true 16ms 24-bit LCD panel commercially produced and doesn't rely on over-inflated contrast ratio and brightness numbers to draw attention to itself. We will go into more detail about the panel later on."

That's a relief. I also have a 2001FP.
posted by Ryvar at 7:26 AM on October 8, 2005

Well, apparently I will NOT be getting the LaCie. Due to an inventory mix up, there were none to ship me. Also, the rest of the internet can't seem to find a single one. Having similar issues with the other two monitors that are the same as it.

Time to rethink things here.
posted by Stunt at 10:58 PM on October 10, 2005

Well, after TONS of problems and a dire need to replace my monitor I had to settle. What I ended up with is not ideal for prints but it certainly gets the job done.

What I went with is the Dell 2405FPW 24" widescreen LCD. From what I understand, the panel is the same as in the Apple cinema displays (however with a much brighter backlight. problematic). It was very much on sale and within my price range and is a huge upgrade in most ways (well, in every way over my dying monitor).

Something that I hadn't taken into account was that I use this machine for entertainment purposes as well, as well as gaming occasionally. I'm not certain, but I believe that response rates on the professional (and for me, unaffordable) LCDs are too slow for gaming and movies without ghosting. If I COULD afford a LaCie or Eizo LCD I certainly couldn't afford a second display to use just for other activities. This Dell handles those things wonderfully, so it's quite an upgrade.

In regards to the photography the Dell is great but not perfect. The brightness is a bit of an issue, but not too bad. Color isn't flawless, the viewing angle isn't anywhere as good as an Eizo or something, and numerous other things I could probably mention. What it comes down to though is that I go the best of both worlds; this is a monitor that does what I need for all applications and is good enough that I just have to do a bit of mental compensation to get gorgeous prints. It will certainly last me until I can afford something better, and in the meantime I am enjoying a bigger, wider, rotatable display. Woot.

Thanks guys; the help really was invaluable in making the decision with what to get. AskMe to the rescue!
posted by Stunt at 9:05 PM on December 30, 2005