Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Best Monitor for Mac Pro?
- Thread starter Turnpike
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
But Sony is exiting OLEDs.
Sold plant that made smaller OLED panels.
Demo'ed inorganic LEDs at CES
http://www.digitalversus.com/tv-television/ces-2012-sony-shuns-oled-crystal-led-n22899.html
They may continue with the very high priced "pro" monitors for a while, but if this different approach pans out may need to drop the "O". Just LEDs as pixels technology.
There are a lot of nice displays out there. I still use my trusty aluminum 23" Cinema displays. They're not LED, but still do the job nicely.
My only suggestion is to NOT use a TV as a display. They're really tuned for full screen video, and not a computer display. They tend to hide their faults this way. They make sure the backlighting faults are minimized for widescreen movies with evenly lit scenes, but running them as a computer display can expose color or backlighting faults. This is especially true of edge lit LED tvs (and most LED tvs are edge lit.)
My only suggestion is to NOT use a TV as a display. They're really tuned for full screen video, and not a computer display. They tend to hide their faults this way. They make sure the backlighting faults are minimized for widescreen movies with evenly lit scenes, but running them as a computer display can expose color or backlighting faults. This is especially true of edge lit LED tvs (and most LED tvs are edge lit.)
I don't like LED very much. Usually they have a very green cast to them. CCFL all the way, nice and warm and still the closest to CRT. LED power savings are the only reason to go that route. OLED on paper looks to be a quantum leap. I read something recently that mentioned LG going OLED. That would be very welcome.
No question they CAN make decent stuff. I was and am referring only to the brand new PLS tech (they only have 2 panels with this tech). The very first examples had quality issues at a few review sites. Once 3 or more comment on it I stay clear. Seems to be a big enough sampling at that point. The Eizo you mentioned was probably PVA not PLS. PLS is the new IPS rival. 178º, >5ms, 1000:1+ Static Contrast, and the very best part, semi-glossy. Not dirty matte and not too reflective glass. Closer to something like the NEC 20WMGX I cherish. The NEC is getting long in the tooth. The backlight will blow up any day nowYou'd blow up too if rated at over 450cd/m2, damn. I set it 34 out of 100. It can give you a suntan.
Ahh that is funny. I think mine are around 90 cd/m2 post calibration. They're a decent print match at that level, but more importantly I can see details really really well. The Eizo was a PVA version. I mentioned it because Samsung carries a very negative connotation on this board, but they are capable of making some decent tech. PVA did historically having issues with viewing angles, but I've seen a few in the past couple years that are really good. The NEC models without LG panels lacked the "dirty" matte coating, but they seem to have gone up in price since they're hard to find now.
CCFL is still considered superior in terms of color. That's why you see brands stick LED on cheaper models and retain CCFL on the more expensive ones, including new designs. I think Apple used it for two reasons. One was the ability to make the display thinner. The other was marketing. They wanted to change something that would sound cool to consumers. Apparently it also had to be over simplified as Apple has never included the settings you can access in others via on screen display. This is simply part of how Apple operates. In terms of selling displays to prepress houses, ad agencies, video editors, etc, they lost the majority (noted in case of anecdotes) of that market segment long ago. RGB LED backlighting has been used on a couple very expensive displays in the past, but that is just completely different. The wider gamut displays can get that green thing too. They need to be calibrated or set to an sRGB mode assuming they have a good one out of the box.
Last edited:
LED vs. CCFL is a mixed bag and really comes down to taste. CCFL can do a bright image. But LED can do deeper blacks and deeper colors. I prefer the look of LED because of the black levels. My LCDs on my Mac Pro look nice, but they can't at all do the same black levels of my LED displays I have around.
I just actually switched from a CCFL TV to an LED TV. I have my complaints about the TV, but the black and color levels are not one of them. It's certainly less bright though.
I just actually switched from a CCFL TV to an LED TV. I have my complaints about the TV, but the black and color levels are not one of them. It's certainly less bright though.
Its the thunderbolt that didn't work with my 09 Mac pro. I found out the hard way and ended up with both thunderbolt and cinema. So now I use the cinema and so far I like it.
Edgelit displays like a thunderbolt display "do not" have better colors. Deeper blacks are subjective. If you were color grading something, insane contrast levels can actually make it more difficult. The perception of deeper colors from LED seems to have come more from the RGB LED thing rather than the typical edge lit design where it's just a basic led backlight design replacing the use of ccfl. In fact all of the wider gamut computer displays on the market use ccfl aside from the couple that have implemented RGB LED in the past. You must not confuse these things by referencing your television
.Edgelit displays like a thunderbolt display "do not" have better colors. Deeper blacks are subjective. If you were color grading something, insane contrast levels can actually make it more difficult. The perception of deeper colors from LED seems to have come more from the RGB LED thing rather than the typical edge lit design where it's just a basic led backlight design replacing the use of ccfl. In fact all of the wider gamut computer displays on the market use ccfl aside from the couple that have implemented RGB LED in the past. You must not confuse these things by referencing your television
I didn't say better. I said deeper. LEDs certainly aren't as good on brighter colors, especially edge lit displays. And yes, this can hurt you in some use cases. But LEDs are better at producing darker colors. Darker reds, blacks, blues, etc. I've had several CCFL displays, and I'm typing to you on one right now. They're great displays, but unlike an LED they're totally awful at reproducing black. CCFL's get a lot brighter, but at the cost of reproducing black. I've got a top notch CCFL panel in my bedroom TV, and while I love that panel as well, it sucks at reproducing black.
It just depends on where on the color reproduction spectrum you want to be.
Edge lit on larger displays (like my 55" LED) can cause some nasty artifacts like flash lighting and light bleed. On a 24" or 27" display? Not as huge an issue. I don't think I've ever even seen flash lighting on an LED in that class. Certainly never seen it on my Macbook Pro.
It's all your individual preference. I do mobile applications, so for me I want something that's color accurate for mobile device displays. That usually means LED these days. If I'm working on a CCFL I get totally different colors than I get on my phone.
Again, not saying CCFL is bad. But it's not as simple as CCFL=good and LED=bad.
Get The Dell 27" Ultrasharp. Its not Glossy, and has superb Picture. Almost Half the Price of the Apple displays and same Resolution... check it out!
Don't forget to add a MiniDisplayPort zo Display Port Cable / Adapter, you need it. Or use DVI. It hast both + Analog, Component and USB Hub.
Don't forget to add a MiniDisplayPort zo Display Port Cable / Adapter, you need it. Or use DVI. It hast both + Analog, Component and USB Hub.
I think HDMI too
If its the U2711 its a great multi-input display. We use it for old analog decks, ps3 (hd file player and BD tester) and mac/pc.
I think HDMI too
If it has the standard AG coating you may be bummed as it is THICK and obvious and gave me a headache. Want a U2311H? New. Not going to be used.
Im using the U2711, does that the AG coating?
No thanks my next monitor will be 27" and up.
+1 ^
I have the LCD2690WUXI2-BK. Now replaced by PA271W-BK. Calibrated with Spyder3 Pro. I do a lot of photo work. Awesome monitor!
I was looking for a LCD without AG (my HP LP3065 gives me a headache sometimes) or glossy coating and came across this:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1215866/...z-achieva-shimian-qh270-and-catleap-q270/3190
Ended up getting 2 since it was really cheap and has been quite happy with it. YMMV though since the sellers are S Korean and if you need warranty service you may be SoL.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1215866/...z-achieva-shimian-qh270-and-catleap-q270/3190
Ended up getting 2 since it was really cheap and has been quite happy with it. YMMV though since the sellers are S Korean and if you need warranty service you may be SoL.
Not a bad shout but if you go for the SV271W-BK (these come in silver too if you want it to match) you get the calibration software and a hood. Also all the screens are measured and the top 5% get used for SV rather than PA. then you don't need a Spyder. Which by the way has been replaced with version 4.
Edit: I should mention I do like NEC. I just wanted to note the differences as they're (oddly) not identical worldwide. The PA series has also been reviewed better than their older (80s and 90s series)ones.
That's true with NEC in the UK and I think Europe. They use different software here. The PA displays aren't panel locked, but the spectraview versions also aren't the hand picked type. QC seems to have improved over the past few years. I can't find the link, but there was a test that suggested the oemed colorimeters with custom firmware were getting closer results on the NECs. In the UK it basically uses rebranded basicolor unless that changed. Here they use a seemingly proprietary program. I've never been a fan of Spyder.
Here is one set of tests. I've got an i1 display pro. It does help with the neutral values on a wide gamut display. Prior to that I just had to accept it would look just a bit too green, as manual adjustment was way too annoying. Getting it just right and preserving shadow detail is still somewhat annoying on a CG243W. The build quality on the i1displaypro isn't as robust as the old DTP-94s but they don't work as well with a lot of newer displays. They were really designed for crts.
I do like NEC. They'd be my second choice after Eizo, then probably an HP dreamcolor or a Quato (although their matrix profile setup is quite different), and Apple would be pretty far down the list
. The uniformity on them seems pretty good. That's the main thing I like with the Apple displays, but I haven't really tested them in a darkened room dimmed down (and I work that way, so yes it would be a valid test).
Anyone got any experience of the Philips 27" Quad HD - model number 272C4QPJKAB/00? I stumbled upon this but never heard of it so assume it must be quite new.
Specification does look good on paper and the built-in web cam is nice for Facetime and messages - assuming of course that OS X can even recognise it with the built-in generic drivers and you don't need to mess around with any other software ....
Specification does look good on paper and the built-in web cam is nice for Facetime and messages - assuming of course that OS X can even recognise it with the built-in generic drivers and you don't need to mess around with any other software ....
Eizo.
I can't recommend them enough these days. I upgraded to their flagship CG276w a while ago and haven't looked back. If I think really hard, I can't come up with a single fault for the unit. It is absolutely phenomenal in every sense of the word.
The display is absolutely amazing, but the built-in colour management is crazy. IMHO that technology alone puts the Eizo displays into a whole 'nother league from the NEC and HP DreamColour units. I have zero regrets buying my CG276, and if you can spare the cash there is literally no better monitor out there at the moment.
-SC