New monitor... LCD vs. CRT - DPChallenge Forums

08/18/2005 04:25:12 PM · #26

Before plunking down even a small amount of money on an LCD monitor, make sure you know what the technology of the LCD panel is. This makes a huge difference.

For photograpy, you really need an S-IPS based panel. All current 17" and smaller (and now even some 19") LCDs are TN+Film based panels which are horrible for photo editing.

See my post in this thread for more information.

I've stressed the importance of LCD technology in another thread as well (including tips on how you can identify an LCD's technologoy if you can view the monitor in person), but I can't find that thread since the forum search is disabled (and google can't keep up with DPC's forum activity)...

As the saying goes... caveat emptor!

Message edited by author 2005-08-18 16:46:23.

DanSig

08/18/2005 04:53:39 PM · #27

most expencive LCD displays are top quality, like eizo, Apple, Lacie and Dell.

a good CRT that equals the 23" Apple Cinema display in image quality and color is more expencive than the LCD.

but the perfect screen for image processing is the new 21" Wacom Cintiq, only $2500 :)

I'm saving up for one now :)

th3ph17

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

08/18/2005 05:33:31 PM · #28

anyone here use a Cintiq? I've tried them out at various tradeshows, digital photo workshops, etc...And i just don't like them at all.

i feel like it isn't as precise. a good wacom intous tablet and dual LCD's for less.

08/18/2005 06:34:00 PM · #29

A friend of mine just got this dell for his mac. He says it beats the electrons out of the Mac cinema displays for quality. I'm thinking on either getting one of these or two of the 19 inchers. The more screen real estate, the better!

08/18/2005 07:02:03 PM · #30

Beware that the 2405 is not an S-IPS panel.

You'd be much better off getting the 2005 or the 2001, which are S-IPS based panels.

08/18/2005 07:38:45 PM · #31

Originally posted by EddyG:

Beware that the 2405 is not an S-IPS panel.

You'd be much better off getting the 2005 or the 2001, which are S-IPS based panels.

Thanks for pointing that out!

Edit:

Alright, I went over the specs for the 2405 and the 2001 and I wasn't able to ID I-IPS or TN. How deep do we have to go to find this info, or am I just a lamer who didn't rtfm enough?

Message edited by author 2005-08-18 19:46:01.

08/18/2005 08:07:13 PM · #32

Originally posted by alfresco:

Alright, I went over the specs for the 2405 and the 2001 and I wasn't able to ID I-IPS or TN. How deep do we have to go to find this info, or am I just a lamer who didn't rtfm enough?

You're not a lamer; it is difficult (but very important!) information to track down. The best thing to do is google for technical reviews by model number, try to ascertain the manufactuer and model number of the actual panel used in the display, and then search again from there. For example, here is a review of the Dell 2005FPW vs. the Apple 20" Cinema Display -- both of which use the same LG.Philips LM201W01 S-IPS LCD panel.

Don't get me wrong -- the 2405FPW is a great display, especially with the built-in memory card slots! Since I have one, that means one less thing I need on my desk now. I use the 2405FPW as my primary display -- for graphic design, coding, email, web surfing, etc. It is crystal-clear and a joy to work with. But I also have a 2001FP, and am sure to do all my critical photo editing on that display. And yes, there is quite a noticeable difference when you drag an image from one display to the other since the 2405FPW uses a PVA-type panel. Having a desktop that is 3520x1200 is sweet... plenty of room to "stretch out" with lots of open windows, space for palettes, etc. (FWIW, the main reason I went with the 2001FP is because the vertical resolution was 1200 pixels, just like the 2405FPW. The 2005FPW is only 1050.)

BTW, found the other thread I was referring to. It is this one, which has some more info on the Dell LCD's.

Message edited by author 2005-08-18 20:48:42.

08/18/2005 09:03:23 PM · #33

Originally posted by EddyG:

... lots of good things ...

Thanks for the info Eddy, you've certainly helped me narrow down my monitor search; I owe you one.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

08/19/2005 04:47:48 PM · #34

No problem. Glad you found the information useful.

wee_ag

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

08/23/2005 10:40:18 AM · #35

Thanks for all the replies... Looks like I'm going to get approval for the dell 20" (UltraSharp 2001FP) & the 17" (UltraSharp 1704FPV) I was pushing for two 20", but a little out of my budget.

I've read that the 20" is an S-IPS, not sure on the 17". I'll let you all know how they work.

Message edited by author 2005-08-23 10:42:26.

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

08/23/2005 10:49:38 AM · #36

Holy Toledo!!! New Dell 19" UltraSharp FP came in. No WONDER some of the comments on my photos! Unbelievable difference between my Dell 19" CRT and the new flat panel.

Now I'm TOTALLY confused what is correct and what isn't for final post-processing. :-( Guess I'm going to have to shell out some bucks for monitor calibration software to know I'm setup correctly.

The new PC is smoking...and THAT's cool! ;^)

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Will do...it's part of a larger plan. He-he. New PC on the way - Hooray! Now if it would only get here...like a kid at Christmas. ;^)

Originally posted by Telehubbie:

Originally posted by glad2badad:
I hope LCD works! I just took the plunge with this one.

DELL UltraSharp 1905FP 19-inch Flat Panel Monitor

I was looking at that one too. There were some coupons somebody posted a couple weeks ago that brought it down to around $300. Looks nice, let us know what you think of it.

08/23/2005 11:52:32 AM · #37

Originally posted by wee_ag:

I've read that the 20" is an S-IPS, not sure on the 17". I'll let you all know how they work.

You won't find any S-IPS panels under 20". The 17" will with 100% certainty be TN+Film, which is the worst LCD technology out there for photo editing (but the cheapest). PVA/MVA panels are pretty common in 19" models (as well as a lot of 20" and larger models), but TN+Film is moving to take-over 19" panels too because of the cost savings. PVA/MVA panels aren't all that great for photo editing either (in my experience, they noticeably exagerate colors, brightness, etc. which is great for a lot of stuff -- like web-surfing -- but not for trying to match the screen to a print, even when calibrated.) PVA/MVA is indeed a step up from TN+Film panels (some of which are only 6 bit displays, including the 17" Dell UltraSharp!! See my posts here and here for details) but strongly consider an S-IPS based panel if you really care about color.

(All of Apple's highly-touted Cinema Displays are S-IPS panels.)

Message edited by author 2005-08-23 12:04:20.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

08/23/2005 07:38:20 PM · #38

Originally posted by EddyG:

No problem. Glad you found the information useful.

Well, I made the plunge and got the 2001.

I plugged it in 10 minutes ago and know I have made the right choice. This is one great monitor!!!! Thanks to you Eddy for showing me the light!

wee_ag

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

09/04/2005 02:43:18 PM · #39

Ok gang, got the 20" and 17" installed... and they are great! Not disappointed at all at this point. I am trying to hunt down some free monitor/printer calibration tutorials so I can see how close they do match up to each other. But for now, they are very nice to view - good color and image quality which I was worried about.

Thanks for the input... I'll post again once I get them calibrated and let you know the final result.

riot

Canon EOS-1D Mark IV

Helios 40-1 85mm f/1.5

09/04/2005 07:43:31 PM · #40

Originally posted by Bobster:

Formac have been going years!

mostly in the Mac community tho'

Holy crap, so THAT'S whose logo that is! I have an ancient 21" crt here with that on it :)

Brent_Ward

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L USM

09/04/2005 08:59:38 PM · #41

So how would a Lacie CRT match up to an Apple LCD? I'm looking at both right now. I still here that CRT is the way to go for Photo editing.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

09/04/2005 09:53:42 PM · #42

Originally posted by MeThoS:

So how would a Lacie CRT match up to an Apple LCD? I'm looking at both right now. I still here that CRT is the way to go for Photo editing.

About 45 pounds heavier ... : )
I still prefer CRT for photo work as well.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

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

09/04/2005 10:16:55 PM · #43

For what it's worth, the CRT (I have the Electron Blue 22 inch) seems to be easier to match to printer output. My neighbor/partner has a high end LCD and it's much more difficult to predict printer values when I edit onj that one. But it sure does LOOK nice and sharp :-)

R.

Leok

Pentax K10D

Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 EX DG for Pentax

09/04/2005 10:52:13 PM · #44

What ever you do don't buy a no name monitor, LCD or CRT, not worth it, the colour rendition is awful.

I think the 5 year life of a CRT is reasonable - the picture tubes themselves actually wear out. In the early days you can fix it by adjusting brightness & contrast, but a screen which has had regular use will be pretty ordinary by 5 years of age. Again, cheap screens often have to be turned way up even when new to get a good result, good quality screeens look good at fairly low settings when new meaning you have room to move once there is some wear. Just look around any office for evidence....

Does anyone know what sort of life you can expect from LCD?

jbsmithana

Nikon D300

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 12-24mm f/4.0G IF-ED

09/05/2005 11:18:22 PM · #45

Ok - the current challenge is the last straw! I'm getting comments about artifact that shows from processing along the edges of my subject. I can't see them on my screen at all! I have been having trouble with blacks and dark greys merging together. So .....

I just upgraded from an old Sylvania 17" to the Dell 2001 FP Ultrasharp!

Hoping for improved processing to come!

mocabela

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6

09/05/2005 11:39:35 PM · #46

Dell UltraSharps are awesome. That's what I have, and I LOVE it. It is way more "on" as far as all calibration goes than any CRT I've ever had, and besides my eyes simply cannot take CRT flickers. LCD is totally the way to go if you ask me.

jbsmithana

Nikon D300

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 12-24mm f/4.0G IF-ED

09/05/2005 11:44:06 PM · #47

Boy I hope so. Your top three b/w's have so much more tonal range than my shots do. I'm hoping that being able to see those tones helps.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

09/06/2005 12:04:55 AM · #48

Originally posted by Leok:

Does anyone know what sort of life you can expect from LCD?

I thought it was in the hundreds/low thousands of hours; way shorter than CRTs.

09/06/2005 08:26:20 AM · #49

Originally posted by mocabela:

Dell UltraSharps are awesome.

Just remember that not all UltraSharps are created equal. Only the 2001FP and 2005FPW have S-IPS panels suitable for good-color-accuracy photographic use. The 17" UltraSharp is TN+Film (the worst LCD technology out there for color). The 19" model uses a PVA or MVA panel (depending on when you bought it)... and is likely to get a TN+Film panel down the road as a cost-saving measure.

Originally posted by GeneralE:

I thought it was in the hundreds/low thousands of hours; way shorter than CRTs.

I thought it was much higher than that. According to this link, it is 25,000 - 30,000 hours -- the time it takes the backlight to be able to only output 50% of its original brightness. Theoretically, you could replace the backlight and be back to "good as new".

FWIW, I do not have any CRT's connected to any of the PCs in the house any more.

Message edited by author 2005-09-06 08:31:44.

labuds

Nikon D800