Rate your LCD monitor for photo editing. 1-10

Tamron SP AF 17-35mm f/2.8-4 Di LD Aspherical IF for Nikon

04/03/2005 05:16:53 PM · #1

I have been surprised while watching the poll on the use of monitors and how close the poll is.

We have been considering an LCD for some time but have resisted temptation because of the ability of LCD to accurately display photos for editing purposes.

It appears that LCD's have improved and started to come down to a reasonable price.

What LCD (Not lap top) do you use for photo editing, what is good, what would you like improved and how would you rate it 1 poor to 10 best.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

04/03/2005 05:24:23 PM · #2

I could be wrong, but it was my assumption that the very large number of LCD responses in the poll is indicative of how many people actually work from laptops now. I wish we had a way of knwoing how many of those LCD screens are standalones on desktop systems...

Robt.

SteveJ

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM

04/03/2005 05:58:50 PM · #3

I use a Samsung 181T.

Steve

Apple iPhone

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX Aspherical DF for Nikon

04/03/2005 05:59:13 PM · #4

ok, I have LCD screens. One of which is my laptop, two are on my photo computer, and two are on two other computers I use. All have been hardware callibrated and all seem to have good color, brightness and contrast. On my photocomputer, I have the same brand and model.

Originally posted by bear_music:

04/03/2005 06:04:14 PM · #5

Youâ��re going to stir up quite a bit of argument here on this issue (again). It is almost like the film vs. digital argument of a few years back. That argument still exists but is slowly dying.

The fact of life is that CRTâ��s are a dying breed. Some manufactures have already stopped producing them. LCDâ��s have come a long way and if you are willing to spend a few bucks more you can get one that rivals a CRT. Some would even argue that in ways it is better.

Below is one experts opinion (Tim Grey) in response to a question in his newsletter (I have posted here before).

I'm using a not so good Syvania 17" right now. I would rate it a 5-6. I'm saving to buy the $1,500 Sony PremierPro 23" mentioned below.

I need to buy a new monitor and you have mentioned that CRTs will soon be a thing of the past. What would you suggest for a professional photographer using photoshop?

==========

CRT monitors will indeed be a thing of the past very soon. Many manufacturers have already stopped making CRT monitors, and more will stop by the end of the year. That means replacing your monitor with an LCD display when the time comes, and there are no shortage of excellent displays.

My favorite LCD monitor right now is the Sony PremierPro 23". It is a gorgeous display with excellent dynamic range and rich colors. I love using it. I also still like the Professional series monitors from ViewSonic, and I've been happy with the displays from Mitsubishi, and am impressed with the higher-end Samsung SyncMaster displays. Of course, the challenge is being able to evaluate LCD displays based on written specs, and I just don't consider that to be a viable solution. Instead, I strongly recommend that you evaluate the monitors in person by viewing photographic images on them. There are a variety of stores that have a relatively large number of LCD monitors on display for you to evaluate so you can get a better sense of what you're getting before you buy.

Message edited by author 2005-04-03 18:12:23.

zeuszen

Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II

04/03/2005 06:07:19 PM · #6

Apple Cinema Display 20": 10.

Message edited by author 2005-04-03 18:07:49.

Node

Tamron SP AF 17-35mm f/2.8-4 Di LD Aspherical IF for Nikon

04/03/2005 06:18:56 PM · #7

Originally posted by jbsmithana:

Youâ��re going to stir up quite a bit of argument here on this issue (again).

Don't want to do that, its been done to death. I would like to see what people use and how they rate the current unit.

Maybe even their wish list for a new LCD Monitor.

From what I have seen the Eizo L768 and L568 have the cost effectiveness and the quality/performance that I can live with.

jonder

Canon EOS-7D

Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 APO DG Macro HSM for Canon

04/03/2005 06:28:45 PM · #8

I am using a ViewSonic 19" which is hardware calibrated and rate it a 10. I was using a 19" ViewSonic CRT before and can't tell any real difference. My prints and my monitor images are just alike.

Dr.Confuser

Nikon D800

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

04/03/2005 06:32:12 PM · #9

Twin Viewsonic VP20Is monitors. Which collectively I rate a 20 (2x10).

krazyivan

Canon EOS-5D Mark IV

Canon EF 50mm f1.2L

04/03/2005 06:36:44 PM · #10

I'm using a Samsung 213T. 9. Color accuracy is excellent. Can't give it a 10, because nothing is perfect.:-P

Wish I could get one of those new Apple 23" Cinema HD displays. That is a 10

doctornick

Apple iPhone 13 Pro

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

04/03/2005 06:42:52 PM · #11

Originally posted by zeuszen:

Apple Cinema Display 20": 10.

Ditto

nico_blue

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

04/03/2005 06:52:51 PM · #12

LCD screen on my 4 year old dell laptop. Umm i think i'll give it a 5, over the years I've mastering tilting the screen at just the right angle so the images appear almost like they would on a crt.

My biggest problems are with color profiles - abode rgb vs the sRGB, especially with colors the red to yellow range. I think my lcd tends to 'slightly' desaturate the colors so I am sometimes in quite a shock when i look at my photos on a crt.

DanSig

04/03/2005 07:12:43 PM · #13

I have the 23" Apple HD cinema display and I rate it 9.5 out of 10 for photoediting.
I have the 19" Sony SDM-HS93 and rate it 7.5 out of 10
I have a 12" apple powerbook anr rate that only 5.5 due to itÂ´s small size.

I used to have the SONY E500 21" Trinitron CRT monitor and rate that 9 of 10 possible.

Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO M.Zuiko

04/03/2005 07:44:36 PM · #14

Originally posted by doctornick:

Originally posted by zeuszen:
Apple Cinema Display 20": 10.

Ditto

Same here. I also have a 12" Apple iBook that I'd rate a 6 due to viewing angle issues.

Message edited by author 2005-04-03 19:45:55.

Brad

Olympus OM-D E-M1

04/03/2005 08:00:06 PM · #15

Seeing as I have done all the editing on my Ribbon-winning entries on my 15" KDS LCD, I have to say a 10.
Guess I could have a better monitor, but does everything I need and want it to do right now.

nsbca7

Mattel Barbie Photo Designer Digital Camera

04/03/2005 08:03:01 PM · #16

Apple Cinema Display 23": 10
Apple Cinema Display 20": 10

Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO M.Zuiko

04/03/2005 09:06:56 PM · #17

Originally posted by BradP:

Seeing as I have done all the editing on my Ribbon-winning entries on my 15" KDS LCD, I have to say a 10.

N/A. You ribbon in SPITE of your equipment, not because of it.

Brad

Olympus OM-D E-M1

04/03/2005 09:47:26 PM · #18

Originally posted by scalvert:

N/A. You ribbon in SPITE of your equipment, not because of it.

Was meant in respect to it's accuracy of what I see on the screen being accurate and clear.
Luck filled the other part of the equation.

Message edited by author 2005-04-03 21:47:40.

04/03/2005 10:13:51 PM · #19

Originally posted by BradP:

Was meant in respect to its accuracy of what I see on the screen being accurate and clear.

I've received high scores for shots I edited on the iBook, but that doesn't mean it's a good monitor for the task. KDS is NOT known for high quality monitors. Your intuition (or luck) is probably compensating for the monitor's deficiencies, just as you've overcome the limitations of your camera. I've noticed that some of your shots have a contrasty, slightly oversaturated quality that might just be a result of you overcompensating for a bad display. One of the Ben & Jerry's founders was rumored to have overcompensated for weak taste buds when creating ice cream flavors.

04/03/2005 10:16:08 PM · #20

Originally posted by Digital Quixote:

Twin Viewsonic VP20Is monitors. Which collectively I rate a 20 (2x10).

I think I remember you saying you are running these at 1600x1200. If so, how is it for reading? I currently run a 17" at 1280x1074 and it is hard to read most print. That is why I was thinking of jumping to a 23". I want to run 1600x1200 and still be able to read small print.

If I thought 1600x1200 on a 20" would work I could save some bucks!

04/03/2005 11:34:01 PM · #21

Sorry Gurilla, I think I killed your thread.

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS

04/03/2005 11:37:40 PM · #22

Originally posted by jbsmithana:

...you are running these at 1600x1200. If so, how is it for reading?

My 20" runs at 1680 x 1050, and it's FAR more legible than a CRT at standard resolutions. The sharpness, higher contrast and lack of flicker on an LCD make a big difference.

awpollard

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

04/03/2005 11:48:33 PM · #23

Originally posted by jbsmithana:

Originally posted by Digital Quixote:
Twin Viewsonic VP20Is monitors. Which collectively I rate a 20 (2x10).

I think I remember you saying you are running these at 1600x1200. If so, how is it for reading? I currently run a 17" at 1280x1074 and it is hard to read most print. That is why I was thinking of jumping to a 23". I want to run 1600x1200 and still be able to read small print.

If I thought 1600x1200 on a 20" would work I could save some bucks!

Using Windows?

Right Click on a blank space on your desktop > choose Properties
Click the Appearance tab
Font size drop down choose Large or Extra Large

Makes the Menus and Text big and readable (Extra Large can be ugly though).

megryan

Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED

04/03/2005 11:48:49 PM · #24

I've never owned an LCD and debating if I should get one. For photo editing purposes I'm hearing that the CRT's are better .....If I was to stick with CRT I'd update to an 19". BUT, I'm tempted by LCD's because of space saving on my desk , and like scalvert mentioned, lack of flicker, sharpness and contrast.....help !