Monitor Notes - MF Photographers must go 32 inch Pro IPS 4K

It has been a while since we have had a good monitor discussion. As Medium Format shooters, having a new, big 32 inch 4K IPS high color gamut latest-tech studio monitor is very important in terms of editing and enjoying our MF shots (in my opinion).

I am not a monitor expert, and know far less about the technology than many of the guys on the forum, but I do follow the market and always read about the latest in PC and Apple monitors that are 27 inches and bigger.

I just received my copy of the April Maximum PC last night. It is the Gamers and PC Builder's Bible. It has an amazing article this month that talks about the state of PC monitors in 2020. It is full of fascinating information that is very important to MF photographers who want to have the best information about what is available and why. With apologies to Max PC, I would like to jot down for you some bullets about what the article covered. The article is entitled "2020 Vision." It is about the state of PC screen tech in 2020.

Some of you guys need new monitors, and if you don't have at least a 32 inch 4K IPS professional (meaning not gaming) monitor, then you are not getting what you can out of enjoying your MF output (in my opinion). Here is what the article said:

- Screens today offer more innovation, wider choice and far better value than ever before. But, by some metrics (mainly DPI), PC displays are disappointing in 2020.

- The big innovations are mainly for gamers, like extremely high refresh rates and adaptive sync. Support for HDR is becoming more widespread too, but HDR progress has been slow, extremely confusing and disappointing.

- USB Type-C connectivity has made single-cable hookup easier and better than ever.

- Pixel density: It has not moved forward much at all in PC screen tech. Outright screen resolution has been stuck and rarely moves beyond 4K. Pixel density progress has been a huge disappointment. A decade ago, it seemed obvious that high-DPI displays would be the norm in PC screens by now but it has not happened. There has been little to no change from 10 years ago in terms of dpi.

- It is disappointing that LCD technology remains dominant. Five years ago, we all thought OLED would take over but it has not with PC screens. Except for some small laptop PCs, it is virtually non-existent.

- Example: Take the new HP Z38c - a 38 inch ultra-wide 4K 2K monitor at 3840x1600. Do the pixel density math - 109 PPI, which is worse than a bargain basement 20-inch 1080P monitor that can be had for 75 bucks. Compared to our phones, that pixel density is pathetic. Even cheap phones have over 300 dpi.

- But phone and PC screens are not at all comparable because of size and viewing distance. Apple's "Retina" display standard provides a useful metric. The idea behind it is the human eye's ability to resolve individual pixels, the point at which adding further pixels does nothing to improve sharpness and detail. You can achieve the "Retina" point by moving the screen further away or adding pixels. Apple puts that point at about 300 dpi for phones and 200 for desktop and laptop displays. Those distances and suggested DPI levels can be debated, but it is an instructive example. But the point is that the 109 DPI of many high-end 4K screens for the desktop is not even close. Very few PC screens offer any kind of high-DPI experience. Even a small 24 inch 4K display only gets you 184 DPI. The move to 5K with LG's 5K3K monitor, the ultrawide 34WK95u is a 34 inch display gets you 163 DPI. But LG's 27-inch 5K model finally gets you to 218 DPI.

- Apple's 6000 dollar 32 inch Pro Display XDR is 6K at 6018x3384 and gets you 218 DPI. Dell's new 32 inch 8K monitor (UP3218k - 7680x4320) gets you 275 DPI at 3,500 dollars.

- The best way to get high DPI is with laptops and tablets. Many have 4K at well over 200 DPI, but you will be editing images on a 13 or 15 inch screen.

- There is little prospect of things improving. LCD panels are made by only a very small number of companies (like LG and Samsung) and monitor makers can't do much if they are not making high DPI screens. For 2020 and 2021, there are no signs that high-DPI monitors will be brought into the mainstream as we all predicted just a few years ago.

- Bottom line - you have to have way more than 4K to get high-DPI on larger screens. 2010 and 2021 will not be the year for 5K, 6K or 8K. Nor will it be the years that OLED makes the jump from TV to PC screens.

- OLED? Zero availability for PC monitors, contrary to all predictions. OLED for Laptops? Yes. PCs? No. In fact, it is likely OLED will never be available for PC monitors. PCs will likely skip OLED and jump straight to microLED. OLED just has too many problems for PCs, burn-in and degradation being the biggest. MicroLED is brighter and more stable than OLED with far less burn-in and little degradation. It will be the standard some day, but right now it costs a fortune to produce.

- The big gains in monitor tech now is refresh rates and that is mostly just great for gamers. The article talked a lot about refresh rates and syncing those higher rates with the output (refresh rates of 240 and 360Hz, and the latest G-Sync & Free-Sync to sync it) and the monster GPU cards to drive it all, but I won't cover it here because it is not of serious interest to photographers who want a good and large 4K pro display. (360 sounds ridiculous for a refresh rate because few can see the improvement from 240, but tests have shown that top pro gamers gain a quick trigger-pull advantage at 360. 60 is fine for photographers.)

- Another area of monitor improvement in 2020 is pixel response. In 2019 we had IPS monitors for the first time with 1ms response time. But that was on very high-end displays. It will trickle down in 2020 to more main-stream displays.

So for MF photographers in 2020? (This is me - not the article.) The Pro 32 inch 4K IPS monitor is where it is at. We all need them. And the new ones will hook up to your PC with one little cable that provides everything - display signal, data and charging power. IPS is improving faster than TN. If you don't have one and have spent 15 grand on MF camera equipment, spend another grand and get one now!

I’d rather see pixels 1:1 at a reasonable size for evaluation. And I make prints, so monitor “beauty” isn’t high on my list! :-O

In case you have not been told, and especially for us medium format photographers, “IT ISN’T A PHOTOGRAPH UNLESS YOU CAN HOLD IT IN YOUR HAND!” ;-)

Oh, and I bought a Dell XPS 15 w/ a wide gamut, 4K screen and I love the computer and hate the screen.

Rand

Rand,

You are so old school!

I know you print big man, but with a nice 4K 32 inch IPS Pro monitor you can instantly view all of your images and enjoy them. Plus, it helps you produce better prints, right?

Man, I love my little Dell XPX 13 4K screen. How can you not live a 15 inch 4K Dell screen?

Can you believe I edited over 5000 Q2 and GFX 100 files on the road for 10 weeks just lately? I am amazed my 18-month-old Dell 13 inch little thing actually handles GFX 100 files! Everyone was afraid their computers would struggle with these big 100MP raw files. But they don't. Especially the new ones.

I have a monster gaming PC that I built 30 months ago. It was an absolute cutting-edge beast at the time and cost me 6 grand just for the parts. Now it is obsolete (almost), mainly because of the CPU and the Motherboard that holds it, which Intel and AMD have improved incredibly in the last 30 months when it comes to cores and even base speed. (Thanks for waking up Intel AMD!)

And the new 10th gen Ice Lake chips coming out right now for 13 and 15 inch laptops? Forget it. Huge jump. Amazing tech!

But even my old 8th gen chips in my PC and laptop handle GFX 100 files just fine, especially if you are running everything on a M.2 PCIe SSD.

Greg,

I’ve tried Dell’s profiling software, and X-Rite’s (both using i1 Display Pro hockey puck) and cannot “tame” the wild contrast and oversaturated appearance of images on the XPS 4K screen. Maybe that’s what you like about it, it’s very vivid... but for evaluating how a print will print, it is terrible! I ended up buying a little BenQ 24” wide gamut screen to take w/ me to a workshop for just this reason.

Rand

Rand 47 said:

Greg,

I’ve tried Dell’s profiling software, and X-Rite’s (both using i1 Display Pro hockey puck) and cannot “tame” the wild contrast and oversaturated appearance of images on the XPS 4K screen. Maybe that’s what you like about it, it’s very vivid... but for evaluating how a print will print, it is terrible! I ended up buying a little BenQ 24” wide gamut screen to take w/ me to a workshop for just this reason.

Rand

Click to expand...

That's a good point. When I get home to my calibrated pro monitor the edits I did on the road of course look different and I wasn't suggesting that you prepare to print from a Dell laptop. That is a job for your calibrated pro 4K 32 inch IPS monitor!

Greg7579 said:

Rand 47 said:

Greg,

I’ve tried Dell’s profiling software, and X-Rite’s (both using i1 Display Pro hockey puck) and cannot “tame” the wild contrast and oversaturated appearance of images on the XPS 4K screen. Maybe that’s what you like about it, it’s very vivid... but for evaluating how a print will print, it is terrible! I ended up buying a little BenQ 24” wide gamut screen to take w/ me to a workshop for just this reason.

Rand

Click to expand...

That's a good point. When I get home to my calibrated pro monitor the edits I did on the road of course look different and I wasn't suggesting that you prepare to print from a Dell laptop. That is a job for your calibrated pro 4K 32 inch IPS monitor!

Click to expand...

LOL . . .

Rand

Great read, Gregg and useful information.

I currently have a direct refurbished BenQ SW271 27" 4K monitor (acting as a secondary) which is connected to my 27' late 2019 iMac i9/64GB ram/2TB ssd/Pro Vega 48 GPU (I got this power house iMac at ridiculous price of $2550 (no tax at the time) from BH because of a dent in the stand, which wasn't that bad and I added the 64gb ram for another $200 myself) Current price from apple with tax around $5K - no thank you.

I have been considering a 32 IPS 4k for awhile. I really love the 5K iMac screen, which is the primary reason I went with iMac, I am 90% windows User for business and for creativity: Mac.

I also have the Dell XPS 15 9560 4K,(passed it on to my wife - I still love it) and had the newer Dell XPS 15 with OLED but sent it back because on burn-in issues and brought the iMac instead, along with the latest 12.9 iPad Pro for my mobility needs.

Thanks for the useful post.

Kind Regards.

J-

For photo editing, I think the ppi of the monitor is not particularly important.

What's important to me is:

• Calibration in the monitor, preferably automatic every night. Using an external spectrophotometer is acceptable, if the calibration table are in the monitor.
• Fast warm up to stable colors (10 min to <1 Delta-E from asymptote)
• Low color variation with viewing angle.
• Wide gamut. Adobe RGB is not enough for a good printer and F-surface paper.
• Low color variation across the screen. (My present monitor was tested at the factory at max Error 1.4 Delta-E across the entire screen from the center, max Delta-u'v' 0.0016 across entire screen from center.)
• Low luminance variation across the screen.

Jim

--
https://blog.kasson.com

JimKasson said:

For photo editing, I think the ppi of the monitor is not particularly important.

What's important to me is:

• Calibration in the monitor, preferably automatic every night. Using an external spectrophotometer is acceptable, if the calibration table are in the monitor.
• Fast warm up to stable colors (10 min to <1 Delta-E from asymptote)
• Low color variation with viewing angle.
• Wide gamut. Adobe RGB is not enough for a good printer and F-surface paper.
• Low color variation across the screen. (My present monitor was tested at the factory at max Error 1.4 Delta-E across the entire screen from the center, max Delta-u'v' 0.0016 across entire screen from center.)
• Low luminance variation across the screen.

Jim

Click to expand...

I agree with your points above. It is what is needed for the best viewing and editing of our high-res FF and MF files. Of course, I'm sure you wouldn't mind having 8K and the accompanying DPI also.

Jim, I recall from previous monitor discussions that you like BenQ panels, as expensive as they are. This same Max PC issue has a review of the new BenQ DesignVue PD322OU. It is 1200 dollars (low for Ben Q) and it is a 32 inch, 4K, IPS monitor. They gave it a very good review. MaxPC called it Oscar Worthy and said it was a fabulous desktop for content professionals like pro photographers. It is of course 100% sRGB color space and has a type of signal processing that allows for colors to be seen 100% correctly. It can also be used for HDR content creation. The viewing angles and color accuracy are the best there is (they say).

But they called it too expensive. My whole point was that high-end Professional (non-gaming) 60 Hz 32 inch 4K IPS monitors that used to be so expensive are coming way down in price. Many really good ones are 600 bucks and when I bought mine they were a couple of grand. So it is time for most photographers to have one.

At 4K you really need 32 inch for what we do, It is the perfect compromise between tight pixel pitch and usability at 100% scaling. 32 inch - not 27. Not anymore.

--
Greg Johnson, San Antonio, Texas
https://www.flickr.com/photos/139148982@N02/albums

JimKasson said:

For photo editing, I think the ppi of the monitor is not particularly important.

What's important to me is:

• Calibration in the monitor, preferably automatic every night. Using an external spectrophotometer is acceptable, if the calibration table are in the monitor.
• Fast warm up to stable colors (10 min to <1 Delta-E from asymptote)
• Low color variation with viewing angle.
• Wide gamut. Adobe RGB is not enough for a good printer and F-surface paper.
• Low color variation across the screen. (My present monitor was tested at the factory at max Error 1.4 Delta-E across the entire screen from the center, max Delta-u'v' 0.0016 across entire screen from center.)
• Low luminance variation across the screen.

Jim

Click to expand...

Hi Jim,

Are you using a monitor that exceeds the Adobe RGB gamut? If so, which one? I have an NEC PA 302w that I like a lot. Profiles well and is very stable from run to run. But typical of the current state of the art that I'm aware of, it is only 99.X% of Adobe RGB. I often see colors in ColorThink Pro, that I can print when I view the color gamut of the paper/printer ICC profile along with the image file's gamut, that exceed Adobe RGB. I'd love to have an even wider gamut monitor - even though I've rarely encountered problems with my current set up.

Rand

Greg7579 said:

JimKasson said:

For photo editing, I think the ppi of the monitor is not particularly important.

What's important to me is:

• Calibration in the monitor, preferably automatic every night. Using an external spectrophotometer is acceptable, if the calibration table are in the monitor.
• Fast warm up to stable colors (10 min to <1 Delta-E from asymptote)
• Low color variation with viewing angle.
• Wide gamut. Adobe RGB is not enough for a good printer and F-surface paper.
• Low color variation across the screen. (My present monitor was tested at the factory at max Error 1.4 Delta-E across the entire screen from the center, max Delta-u'v' 0.0016 across entire screen from center.)
• Low luminance variation across the screen.

Jim

Click to expand...

I agree with your points above. It is what is needed for the best viewing and editing of our high-res FF and MF files. Of course, I'm sure you wouldn't mind having 8K and the accompanying DPI also.

Click to expand...

It's not that I mind the extra pixels at all, it's just that I don't think after about 3K across, they help the editing process much. They certainly don't hurt it.

Greg7579 said:

Jim, I recall from previous monitor discussions that you like BenQ panels, as expensive as they are.

Click to expand...

That's some other Jim. I've never used a BenQ panel, only NEC and Eizo. My current main workstation panel is a CG319X 4096x2160 pixel one. It looks like it was designed for video editing as least as much as still photo editing, and has some features that I don't need. One advantage that it shares with some of my old NEC monitors is that you can have several different presets, such as a brighter one for general purpose work, a 80-100 cd/m2 one for soft proofing, and a D50 simulator.

Rand 47 said:

JimKasson said:

For photo editing, I think the ppi of the monitor is not particularly important.

What's important to me is:

• Calibration in the monitor, preferably automatic every night. Using an external spectrophotometer is acceptable, if the calibration table are in the monitor.
• Fast warm up to stable colors (10 min to <1 Delta-E from asymptote)
• Low color variation with viewing angle.
• Wide gamut. Adobe RGB is not enough for a good printer and F-surface paper.
• Low color variation across the screen. (My present monitor was tested at the factory at max Error 1.4 Delta-E across the entire screen from the center, max Delta-u'v' 0.0016 across entire screen from center.)
• Low luminance variation across the screen.

Jim

Click to expand...

Hi Jim,

Are you using a monitor that exceeds the Adobe RGB gamut?

Click to expand...

Not by much. I'm hoping that Rec 2020 monitors are coming.

Rand 47 said:

If so, which one?

Click to expand...

I'm using a Eizo CG319X.

Rand 47 said:

I have an NEC PA 302w that I like a lot.

Click to expand...

I have one of those, but don't use it much anymore.

Rand 47 said:

Profiles well and is very stable from run to run. But typical of the current state of the art that I'm aware of, it is only 99.X% of Adobe RGB. I often see colors in ColorThink Pro, that I can print when I view the color gamut of the paper/printer ICC profile along with the image file's gamut, that exceed Adobe RGB.

Click to expand...

Deep blues and greens, right?

Rand 47 said:

I'd love to have an even wider gamut monitor - even though I've rarely encountered problems with my current set up.

Click to expand...

Jim

JimKasson said:

Rand 47 said:

JimKasson said:

For photo editing, I think the ppi of the monitor is not particularly important.

What's important to me is:

• Calibration in the monitor, preferably automatic every night. Using an external spectrophotometer is acceptable, if the calibration table are in the monitor.
• Fast warm up to stable colors (10 min to <1 Delta-E from asymptote)
• Low color variation with viewing angle.
• Wide gamut. Adobe RGB is not enough for a good printer and F-surface paper.
• Low color variation across the screen. (My present monitor was tested at the factory at max Error 1.4 Delta-E across the entire screen from the center, max Delta-u'v' 0.0016 across entire screen from center.)
• Low luminance variation across the screen.

Jim

Click to expand...

Hi Jim,

Are you using a monitor that exceeds the Adobe RGB gamut?

Click to expand...

Not by much. I'm hoping that Rec 2020 monitors are coming.

JimKasson said:

If so, which one?

Click to expand...

I'm using a Eizo CG319X.

JimKasson said:

I have an NEC PA 302w that I like a lot.

Click to expand...

I have one of those, but don't use it much anymore.

JimKasson said:

Profiles well and is very stable from run to run. But typical of the current state of the art that I'm aware of, it is only 99.X% of Adobe RGB. I often see colors in ColorThink Pro, that I can print when I view the color gamut of the paper/printer ICC profile along with the image file's gamut, that exceed Adobe RGB.

Click to expand...

Deep blues and greens, right?

JimKasson said:

I'd love to have an even wider gamut monitor - even though I've rarely encountered problems with my current set up.

Click to expand...

Jim

Click to expand...

Jim,

Yup... deep blues and greens! Very slightly some orange in a "mega" fall foliage photo or two.

Rand

Rand 47 said:

JimKasson said:

Rand 47 said:

Profiles well and is very stable from run to run. But typical of the current state of the art that I'm aware of, it is only 99.X% of Adobe RGB. I often see colors in ColorThink Pro, that I can print when I view the color gamut of the paper/printer ICC profile along with the image file's gamut, that exceed Adobe RGB.

Click to expand...

Deep blues and greens, right?

Rand 47 said:

I'd love to have an even wider gamut monitor - even though I've rarely encountered problems with my current set up.

Click to expand...

Jim

Click to expand...

Jim,

Yup... deep blues and greens! Very slightly some orange in a "mega" fall foliage photo or two.

Rand

Click to expand...

Just using SoftProf on LR I would agree, vegetation of fits within gamut of glossy paper but outside Adobe RGB.

I guess that Rec 2020 will take a while.

Best regards

Erik

Rand and Jim - I know you guys know that I don't print. You guys are pro print artists. So I do not speak with authority on this monitor stuff because I am not experienced in one of the most important aspects - printing.

I was just sharing some general knowledge because I thought it was outlined well in the article.

DPR has posted a lot of good stuff on monitors and tons of reviews of course.... But that MaxPC article was a real overview for the masses on kind of where we are in 2020. It assumed some knowledge but was a good dummies or normal guy overview. Of course they are geared for gamers and gamers are after something different than us when it comes to monitors. Gamers want as high a refresh rate as they can get at whatever their GPU card can drive. It is funny - gamers are still having trouble gaming at 4K even with all of these incredible new GPUs and high-end rigs. The fastest cards in the world have trouble driving 4K at 144 Hz.

So why would a gamer want to go from 240 to 360Hz (and pay a fortune) when most say that it is beyond human eye capacity or need?

Well, MaxPC did tests with top professional big-money earning gamers. It was discovered that the best pro gamers got off slightly quicker trigger pulls at fleeting targets that could be hit at 360 Hz (monitors at 360 will be introduced in 2020) but would not be seen or have time to pull the trigger at lesser rates. 360 is ridiculous. Photographers don't need past the 60 Hz that is common on the pro monitors now. Most good gamers now are playing at 144 Hz and at 1080P. Still - years later … trouble at 4K for gamers.

--
Greg Johnson, San Antonio, Texas
https://www.flickr.com/photos/139148982@N02/albums

Erik Kaffehr said:

Rand 47 said:

JimKasson said:

Rand 47 said:

Profiles well and is very stable from run to run. But typical of the current state of the art that I'm aware of, it is only 99.X% of Adobe RGB. I often see colors in ColorThink Pro, that I can print when I view the color gamut of the paper/printer ICC profile along with the image file's gamut, that exceed Adobe RGB.

Click to expand...

Deep blues and greens, right?

Erik Kaffehr said:

I'd love to have an even wider gamut monitor - even though I've rarely encountered problems with my current set up.

Click to expand...

Jim

Click to expand...

Jim,

Yup... deep blues and greens! Very slightly some orange in a "mega" fall foliage photo or two.

Rand

Click to expand...

Just using SoftProf on LR I would agree, vegetation of fits within gamut of glossy paper but outside Adobe RGB.

I guess that Rec 2020 will take a while.

Best regards

Erik

Click to expand...

Erik - you know more about monitors than me. And you print! I was waiting for you to pipe in. I still think you need to go for a 4K 32 inch IPS now. You can do it for 600 bucks! But … these are hard times. Maybe it is not best to be buying right now with the virus stoppage. But hey … we need to support the world economy!

JimKasson said:

For photo editing, I think the ppi of the monitor is not particularly important.

What's important to me is:

• Calibration in the monitor, preferably automatic every night. Using an external spectrophotometer is acceptable, if the calibration table are in the monitor.
• Fast warm up to stable colors (10 min to <1 Delta-E from asymptote)
• Low color variation with viewing angle.
• Wide gamut. Adobe RGB is not enough for a good printer and F-surface paper.
• Low color variation across the screen. (My present monitor was tested at the factory at max Error 1.4 Delta-E across the entire screen from the center, max Delta-u'v' 0.0016 across entire screen from center.)
• Low luminance variation across the screen.

Jim

Click to expand...

I agree with this list but I would add DPI to my list. I am only looking at NEC or Eizo because those brands will get closer to the specs in this list than other models. However, I don't see these two brands moving to 5k or 6k because there aren't many professional applications for this DPI. I think an 8k 38-40 inch screen would be fine with me.

Greg7579 said:

Erik Kaffehr said:

Rand 47 said:

JimKasson said:

Rand 47 said:

Profiles well and is very stable from run to run. But typical of the current state of the art that I'm aware of, it is only 99.X% of Adobe RGB. I often see colors in ColorThink Pro, that I can print when I view the color gamut of the paper/printer ICC profile along with the image file's gamut, that exceed Adobe RGB.

Click to expand...

Deep blues and greens, right?

Greg7579 said:

I'd love to have an even wider gamut monitor - even though I've rarely encountered problems with my current set up.

Click to expand...

Jim

Click to expand...

Jim,

Yup... deep blues and greens! Very slightly some orange in a "mega" fall foliage photo or two.

Rand

Click to expand...

Just using SoftProf on LR I would agree, vegetation of fits within gamut of glossy paper but outside Adobe RGB.

I guess that Rec 2020 will take a while.

Best regards

Erik

Click to expand...

Erik - you know more about monitors than me. And you print! I was waiting for you to pipe in. I still think you need to go for a 4K 32 inch IPS now. You can do it for 600 bucks! But … these are hard times. Maybe it is not best to be buying right now with the virus stoppage. But hey … we need to support the world economy!

Click to expand...

Hi Greg,

A 32" monitor at 4K may make sense.

It will still just show 8 MP of data.

I view my images on an 80" projector screen in 4K and my 6MP pictures from 2006 are still holding up well.

I think that Jim is right that other parameters may be more important than resolution and size, but that also depends on intended use.

I don't have the same requirements as Jim, but I can see that a high quality screen that calibrates it self makes a lot of sense.

It is quite frequent that colors don't fit in Adobe RGB, that means that we work with colors that we cannot really see.




Just this simple image has a lot of colors outside Adobe RGB.




Red marks out of gamut color, seems to be some dark greens.




Colors from that image plotted in ColorSync vs AdobeRGB.

Best regards
Erik



Best regards
Erik

Best regards
Erik

--
Erik Kaffehr
Website: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net
Magic uses to disappear in controlled experiments…
Gallery: http://echophoto.smugmug.com
Articles: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles

I know my monitors are outdated back to 2009 but for my work my old Hp Dreamcolor monitors do a respectable job displaying over 1 billion color combos on a 30 bit panel. I still to this day see excellent blank renditions and detail that is very accurate and when I switched to MF it really popped out even more. #LP2480zx.

carylee2002 said:

I know my monitors are outdated back to 2009 but for my work my old Hp Dreamcolor monitors do a respectable job displaying over 1 billion color combos on a 30 bit panel. I still to this day see excellent blank renditions and detail that is very accurate and when I switched to MF it really popped out even more. #LP2480zx.

Click to expand...

Hi,

The small point I made was that many colors fall outside the color gamut of present day displays, so we edit those colors in the blind.

That has nothing to do with either the size of the sensor or the size of the monitor.

It doesn't matter a lot to me, but I can see that photographers caring for accurate rendition of color would appreciate displays that incorporate a larger part of the available colors.

Best regards

Erik