What is the Best LCD Under $1000

[Rasterman]

What is the best LCD you buy for under $1000? With color accuracy, gamut, contrast, and black levels being most important.

What is the best LCD at any price level right now?

 

[jw0ollard]

HP LP2475w

Review: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/hp_lp2475w.htm

Now this is only costing $549.99 so far, but I'm not aware if you already have a calibrator. The calibrator that gave that site the "best results they've ever had" in a monitor was the LaCie Blue Eye Pro which is $369.99.

So those two together would be $919.98. Of course, you can find the calibrator for slightly less elsewhere...

I would imagine though that depending on your needs such an expensive calibrator may not be worth it. You can get extremely good results from much cheaper calibrators, but if you look through the TFT Central site at the calibrator reviews, you'll see that they're all still way behind the Blue Eye Pro in terms of accuracy. And most of them don't have the proper reporting tools to let you know exactly how "off" the calibration ends up being.

Also, since you're not giving much info to work with, depending on your needs you may want to just get two of them for $1099. And skip getting the calibrator altogether, or just spend $86 on a Huey Pro which will at least give you a better calibration than the out-of-the-box settings.

 

[shangshang]

Sounds to me like you want a professional non-gaming monitor. Any of the "professional" from NEC will fit the need here.

24" NEC LCD2490W2
http://www.necdisplay.com/Prod...429a-89a0-9af4c4de3fe5

24" NEC LCD2490WUXi2
http://www.necdisplay.com/Prod...4177-b12e-5bde0b8eeaae

(the difference between the two 24" is slight, but it looks like the 2nd one is geared toward the medical and still photography world, while the 1st one can be used for gaming if need be).

30" NEC MultiSync LCD3090WQXi
http://www.necdisplay.com/Prod...4429-8d73-74c35a363b57


The 24" HP LP2475w is also a very nice one for its price! best band for bux for an IPS! But I would not wanna spend $369 for a $549 monitor though. I'd rather get the NEC instead

 

[Rasterman]

Thanks for the suggestions, I want a monitor that will at least be an equal to my current CRT (22" Mitsubishi Diamond Pro II). It will be used mainly for programming and photo editing, but also a little for video editing and gaming. What I find ridiculous is that even the highest end desktop displays only have a contrast ratio of 1000:1 and a small color gamut, where there are 42" and 60" panels that have a 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio and extended color gamut.

 

[jw0ollard]

@shangshang

I would have recommended either of those 24" NECs but I don't think you can find them anywhere for under $1000. I believe $1099 is the absolute cheapest I've seen.

Also, you have to consider that both of those NECs COME with a calibrator and software, and if you consider they have similar value to the LaCie Blue Eye Pro, you have $700 monitors plus the calibrator. So I don't think there's really much difference if you're paying $549 + $369, because the NEC displays aren't $150 dollars better necessarily (they are in some ways), and paying $369 on a calibrator for a $700 monitor is equally ludicrous.

But what I get from the HP is a deeper calibrated black point (0.17 vs 0.19), which in turn provides a better contrast ratio. They calibrate almost the exact same, and notice, the only way TFT Central got BETTER results with the NEC was if using the LaCie Blue Eye pro, and NOT the packaged calibrator and software. See: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/nec_2490wuxi.htm

You'll see that in the "LaCie Blue Eye Pro software with LUT Profiling" section that they get 0.2/0.5, and the HP calibrated with the LaCie achieves 0.3/0.5. Now if calibrating the NEC with the packaged tools, they got either 0.3/1.2 or 0.4/1.2, which isn't nearly as good a result. (Though still far better than out-of-the-box, and as close as you'd really ever NEED to get accuracy-wise)

So Rasterman, if you want to go $100 over budget, I would recommend at least considering the NEC but I don't know if it's worth the extra money. Esp if you can eek out slightly better contrast ratios from the HP, and with that deeper black points.

Edit:

To the NEC's credit, it does feature an A-TW polarizer whereas the HP does not. I don't really care about this feature as I don't view my monitors at EXTREME viewing angles.

 

[Rasterman]

Based on the reviews I would go with the HP, after further thinking about my usage I guess my order of importance is:

contrast/black level - most important
color gamut
refresh rate
delay
color accuracy - least important

Its annoying how long its taking LCDs to catch up with CRTs. We went 10 years backwards in time in pretty much every performance category by moving to LCDs 5 years ago, all for a thin display which I could care less about.

 

[Corporate Thug]

costco has the dell 3007wfp for $999

 

[kyotousa]

Originally posted by: Rasterman
Thanks for the suggestions, I want a monitor that will at least be an equal to my current CRT (22" Mitsubishi Diamond Pro II). It will be used mainly for programming and photo editing, but also a little for video editing and gaming. What I find ridiculous is that even the highest end desktop displays only have a contrast ratio of 1000:1 and a small color gamut, where there are 42" and 60" panels that have a 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio and extended color gamut.

If you are not satisfied with the NEC due to color accuracy issue, then maybe you have to shell out more and get the Eizo CG series. However, I suggest you take a look at Apple Cinema 30" you might be happy with their LED back panel besides it's a 30".

 

[kyotousa]

Originally posted by: Rasterman
Based on the reviews I would go with the HP, after further thinking about my usage I guess my order of importance is:

contrast/black level - most important
color gamut
refresh rate
delay
color accuracy - least important

Its annoying how long its taking LCDs to catch up with CRTs. We went 10 years backwards in time in pretty much every performance category by moving to LCDs 5 years ago, all for a thin display which I could care less about.

Didn't see that....I guess Apple is your best bet. If you are not satisfied then I bet you have to shell out more than 3k to get the monitor you want hahaha.

I don't understand why would one care so much for the contrast/black level unless you watch movies with your monitor....Besides, you only do a little gaming anyway. If it's me I would just buy the Dell 30" and be done with it or maybe spend more and get the S-IPS or H-IPS panel. But there's no reason to get the NEC or Eizo since you don't care about color accuracy anyway. Which is quite odd, since photo editing is one of your main purpose. But, to each their own. GOod luck

 

[jw0ollard]

I'm getting the feeling that the OP isn't very knowledgeable about actual contrast ratio. LCD monitors usually have more realistically advertised contrast ratios than LCD TVs. That's just the way the business works. If you really think the LCD TVs TRULY have 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio, then you're going to be sorely disappointed. Some may have VERY good contrast ratios if they use LED lighting with localized dimming, but even then it is in the nature of LCDs to have poor contrast, and not much can fix it.

You will be more than pleased with 800:1, I'm not sure why you're focusing so much on numbers that companies create with somewhat-shady testing practices.

As for any Dell 2408wfp or 3007/3008wfp suggestions, I couldn't disagree more. I've been through several 240Xwfp monitors and I'm done with Dell for good. The 3007wfp-hc MAY be worth getting, but like said above it seems the only way to get it for sub-$1000 is through Costco. Otherwise it's a little too costly. I would just stay way away from any of the XX08 models due to their insane input lag and response times.

And as for the OP's preference of Color Gamut over Color Accuracy... Well I'm a little confused by this choice. An expanded color gamut is actually a BAD thing, because without calibration you're going to have sRGB images on web pages burning out your retinas due to over saturation. Even with calibration it tends to be bad. And if you're not in a profession that needs a wide-gamut monitor there's no real reason in getting one. (Though of course I would still get the HP LP2475w no matter what I needed it for) Just because you may like the over saturation doesn't justify it either. If you're going to be doing photo editing, then you at the very least want to spend $90 on a Huey Pro which is the cheapest calibrator I would recommend purchasing. Then for ~$200 you should get the X-Rite EODIS2, and if money really isn't a concern just get the aforementioned LaCie Blue Eye Pro.

It just seems like you're fixated on a few of the things that the LCD makers have deemed "trendy" like "Wide Gamut" and "Contrast Ratio" rather than actually looking at your needs.

 

[shangshang]

ummm Rasterman, looks like you've switched 180 degrees on your order of importance. lol

Personally I would go with the HP only because it's the CHEAPEST 24" IPS-based monitor on the market right now.

 

[jw0ollard]

@OP

I'm also concerned that you've never really sat down and compared a good LCD with your current CRT... Black levels might not be near as perfect, but how can you stand looking that close at anything with an aperture grille or shadow mask? Most LCDs are abominable too, but H-IPS LCDs are so much more pleasing to the eye, not to mention how incredibly bad the CRT-style refresh rate is for your eyes. I can only remember years and years of eye strain and migraines, even on good screens.

I can certainly agree that LCD isn't a perfect technology... I look forward to the day it's replaced with a much better tech. It sort of sounds though that you may just be happier staying with your CRT...

 

[kyotousa]

you can't even use Huey pro for wide color gamut monitor....The cheapest calibrator you have to buy is Spyder3 pro or EODIS2.

Correct me if I am wrong, wide color gamut monitor without 10 or 12bit LUT is absolutely worthless under WinXP because WinXP only display 8bits. I am not sure if there's an improvement with Vista64 or Win7. I got my fingers crossed because I got the Dell 2408wfp anyway since it was cheap @ 420 shipped.

 

[jw0ollard]

Oops, yes I just wasn't thinking about wide gamut when thinking about calibrators... I would never buy a Huey Pro anyway. I actually wouldn't buy a Spyder3 Pro either as the hardware isn't as good as the EODIS2, at least from everything I've seen. The Elite maybe (better software), but I still think I prefer the "egg" that the EODIS2 and LaCie Blue Eye Pro use.

$420 shipped is at least acceptable, even though I would still be ultimately disappointed. It'd have to be an "I absolutely don't have $150 extra to spend on the HP LP2475w" kind of situation. But right now it's going for $479, and the factor in tax and it's just NOT worth it compared to the slightly more expensive HP, consider the Dell's input lag/response time problems, and the fact that the HP's H-IPS screen is just way better. And again, this is after having years worth of different WFP-series Dell monitors. There's just no way I'm going back...

So again, the gist is... OP: Get an LP2475w and spend ~$200 on an EODIS2 or a Spyder3 Elite! You really won't regret the money on the calibrator if you do serious work with your monitors.

 

[kyotousa]

^^^^
Yah maybe...depends on how great the H-IPS screen really is...I never seen people complain about 2408's image quality after they successfully calibrate the system.
Most people complain about the over-saturated pic quality due to the wide color gamut. Besides they both have 33ms input lag, so if I get a good quality 2408 (which is unlikely lol) it might be well worth it.

On the side note, the image will def. look better if the monitor is wide gamut and has built in LUT, because they are utilitzing the full 10 or 12bit color spectrum and correctly place them into the 8bit windows.
But if you are not into color accuracy...it'd be such as waste to spend that additional 1-2K.