Current Best Under US$500 22"-24" IPS or PVA Monitor

Started Jul 11, 2009 | Discussions
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
SantaFeBill Senior Member • Posts: 2,419
Current Best Under US$500 22"-24" IPS or PVA Monitor

Assuming there is such a thing ... . Now that the Dell 2209WA is history, at least for the moment, what's the next best one at a (semi-) reasonable price? ($xxxx.xx monitors are not an option for me.)

I went to the U.S. LG site and looked there, because a post I saw somewhere said some of theirs used IPS panels.

If that is so, I wasn't able to tell from the specs they publish - in fact, nothing about panel type at all.

P.S. - If it were a 4:3 aspect ratio rather than 16:9, I'd certainly consider a 19" or 20", again, if there is such a thing.

Howard Moftich Veteran Member • Posts: 7,994
Re: Current Best Under US$500 22"-24" IPS or PVA Monitor

dell 2408wfp

Adam2 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,904
Yes, the Dell 2408wfp (nt)

$449 at the moment + tax.

SantaFeBill OP Senior Member • Posts: 2,419
Re: Current Best Under US$500 22"-24" IPS or PVA Monitor

Thanks to you both for the recommendation. Do you know the panel type? Neither the U.S. nor Canadian Dell sites gives this info in the monitor's specs.

Midnighter Senior Member • Posts: 1,727
Re: Current Best Under US$500 22

Not a fanboy of any brand but I am looking at buying similar quality/price to you.. by the looks of it anyway, found this so far in my search:

HP L2445w

(edit: woops... wrong monitor... its the L2475w I was looking at)

I love this Dell laptop I am typing on right now but sadly Dell does a lot of very heavy regionalisation... in fact some Dell monitors with identical model numbers have different feature sets here in Australia compared to overseas.

bubblzzz Regular Member • Posts: 459
Re: Current Best Under US$500 22"-24" IPS or PVA Monitor

SantaFeBill wrote:

Thanks to you both for the recommendation. Do you know the panel type? Neither the U.S. nor Canadian Dell sites gives this info in the monitor's specs.

According to flatpanelshd.com it's an S-PVA panel.

DazeMae Regular Member • Posts: 240
Re: Current Best Under US$500 22"-24" IPS or PVA Monitor

Any idea what's happened to the Dell 2209WA? As I recall, they weren't going to be delivered until some time in early August.

Howard Moftich Veteran Member • Posts: 7,994
Re: Current Best Under US$500 22"-24" IPS or PVA Monitor

thats what Dell is saying, that they are suspending sales/pre-sales until inventory of the 2209WA can be replenished in mid-late August.

I think that's weird. They should simply say '4+ week leadtime' and let people pre-order it.

Mark Devine Senior Member • Posts: 1,757
Another vote for Dell 2408FWP

I profile the monitor and printers with colormunki, and am very pleased with the result.
--
Best Regards,
Mark Devine

NewsyL
NewsyL Veteran Member • Posts: 5,691
HP LP2275w

22" S-PVA wide gamut

Much discussed in the PC Talk forum.

&nbsp
Also, you may find the following for under $500USD; Dell was selling them.

NEC P221 S-PVA 10Bit Internal LUT, 96% AdobeRGB gamut

&nbsp
Prad.de did not like the P221 as much as the 2209WA or the 2275w.

http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/reviews.html

-- hide signature --
Adam2 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,904
Re: HP LP2275w

If I'm not mistaken the LP2275 is roughly 92% of CIE, compared to the larger gamut of the Dell, no?

NewsyL
NewsyL Veteran Member • Posts: 5,691
Re: HP LP2275w

Without looking it up, I'd say you are about right. The 2275w is a wider gamut than the Dell 2209WA but not as wide as the Dell 2408.

Now, wide gamut is appealing to some and not at all to others. Thought it was worth mentioning just because of that.

Oh heck... I had to peek at the PRAD.de reviews.
http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/reviews.html

&nbsp
HP LP2275w
95% of sRGB
91% of AdobeRGB
83% of ECI-RGB 2.0

&nbsp
Dell 2209WA
99.5% of sRGB

"We only use a comparison with AdobeRGB and ECI-RGB 2.0 for models which have an extended colour space. This is not the case for the Dell 2209WA."

&nbsp
Dell 2408WFP
99% of sRGB
98% of AdobeRGB
93% of ECI-RGB 2.0

.

-- hide signature --
Joseph S Wisniewski Forum Pro • Posts: 34,124
92% of CIE, beyond state-of-art...

Adam2 wrote:

If I'm not mistaken the LP2275 is roughly 92% of CIE, compared to the larger gamut of the Dell, no?

No.

You are indeed mistaken. Sharp has a monitor in the prototype stage based on a 5 color filter system that can exceed 90% of CIE. The most you can manage with a three filter system, even if the light source is three near monochromatic LED colors, is about 70% of CIE (I don't have the exact number on hand).

Many monitors manage a decent percentage of sRGB or ARGB, but those are only about 60-70% of CIE. (the "easy" 60-70%).

-- hide signature --

Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 Joseph S Wisniewski's gear list:Joseph S Wisniewski's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Nikon D90 Nikon D2X Nikon D3 Nikon D100 +43 more
Scott Weierich Senior Member • Posts: 2,100
Re: HP LP2275w

And the Dell 2408WFP is not as wide as the HP LP2475w. Among this and several other reasons I chose this HP display. According to this same site here are the color gamut ratings:

HP LP2475w
100% of sRGB
100% of AdobeRGB
95% of ECI-RGB 2.0

NewsyL wrote:

Without looking it up, I'd say you are about right. The 2275w is a wider gamut than the Dell 2209WA but not as wide as the Dell 2408.

Now, wide gamut is appealing to some and not at all to others. Thought it was worth mentioning just because of that.

Oh heck... I had to peek at the PRAD.de reviews.
http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/reviews.html

HP LP2275w
95% of sRGB
91% of AdobeRGB
83% of ECI-RGB 2.0

Dell 2209WA
99.5% of sRGB

"We only use a comparison with AdobeRGB and ECI-RGB 2.0 for models which have an extended colour space. This is not the case for the Dell 2209WA."

Dell 2408WFP
99% of sRGB
98% of AdobeRGB
93% of ECI-RGB 2.0

.

-- hide signature --
-- hide signature --

Scott

Adam2 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,904
Re: 92% of CIE, beyond state-of-art...

Joseph S Wisniewski wrote:

No.

You are indeed mistaken. Sharp has a monitor in the prototype stage based on a 5 color filter system that can exceed 90% of CIE. The most you can manage with a three filter system, even if the light source is three near monochromatic LED colors, is about 70% of CIE (I don't have the exact number on hand).

Many monitors manage a decent percentage of sRGB or ARGB, but those are only about 60-70% of CIE. (the "easy" 60-70%).

Please do educate because Dell claims that the 2408wfp is 110% of CIE 1976 whereas the HP is around 92%.

JortS29 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,781
Re: 92% of CIE, beyond state-of-art...

Joseph S Wisniewski wrote:

You are indeed mistaken. Sharp has a monitor in the prototype stage based on a 5 color filter system that can exceed 90% of CIE. The most you can manage with a three filter system, even if the light source is three near monochromatic LED colors, is about 70% of CIE (I don't have the exact number on hand).

Many monitors manage a decent percentage of sRGB or ARGB, but those are only about 60-70% of CIE. (the "easy" 60-70%).

The Samsung XL30 (or XL24) comes to mind, with 123% NTSC.

Joseph S Wisniewski Forum Pro • Posts: 34,124
Color spaces 101...

Adam2 wrote:

Joseph S Wisniewski wrote:

No.

You are indeed mistaken. Sharp has a monitor in the prototype stage based on a 5 color filter system that can exceed 90% of CIE. The most you can manage with a three filter system, even if the light source is three near monochromatic LED colors, is about 70% of CIE (I don't have the exact number on hand).

Many monitors manage a decent percentage of sRGB or ARGB, but those are only about 60-70% of CIE. (the "easy" 60-70%).

Please do educate because Dell claims that the 2408wfp is 110% of CIE 1976 whereas the HP is around 92%.

OK.

First, I believe you've misunderstood the numbers on the Dell site. No monitor maker quotes a percentage of CIE. The numbers would be too low. You're probably looking at an ICE number, an entirely different organization. Same three letters, different order. That's "television" space, even smaller than computer monitor space.

The CIE's numbers all go back to experiments to determine the entire range of colors that a human can see. This color space is plotted on something called the CIE chromaticity diagram, with which you're probably familiar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromaticity

This picture may not link, you may have to click on it...

There are a number of different ways to mathematically translate that human visual space, CIE L*A*B, CIExyz, etc. but they all can be converted from one to another with no loss of information. The diagram forms a tongue shape. Any color that the eye can see can be plotted on that diagram (ignoring its lightness).

Do you see those numbers along the border of the tongue, ranging from 380 to 700? Those are pure spectral colors, monochromatic, like a laser. An LED is almost monochromatic, its colors end up very close to the edge of the diagram.

A single light source has a color represented by a point on that diagram. If you add a second light source, you've now got two points. Add those two colors in different ratios, and you move on a line between the two points.

Add a third colored light, and you've now got three points, in a triangle. These are referred to as "additive primaries". By mixing those lights in different ratios, you can make any color inside, or on the border of, a triangle that is inside the tongue.

Here's the sRGB color space.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SRGB_color_space

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CIExy1931_sRGB.svg

It's a three primary color space, where the three primaries were chosen to be representative of an average computer monitor from the 1980s. It can represent any color those monitors can produce, and nothing more.

Note that I had the numbers wrong, earlier. That tiny sRGB triangle only encompasses about 30% of CIE, all the colors that the eye can see. It's primaries, to use the technical term, "suck". They come nowhere near the edges of the tongue.

Adobe RGB covers 50.6% of CIE. It uses three primaries, but they're "better" than the sRGB primaries. Blue is very important in the printing industry, so Adobe RGB uses a "perfect" blue, on the tongue itself. The red and green primaries are "closer to the tongue" (that was not a song by "Rush").

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_RGB_color_space

And here's a confusing article, with a diagram I really like.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_space

It shows the triangles of three color spaces, sRGB, Adobe RGB, and ProPhoto. It also shows a real printer space, an Epson 2200 on matte paper. You will notice that the real printer gamut is a strange, melted, blobby triangle that actually exceeds both the sRGB and Adobe RGB triangles.

The biggest triangle is ProPhoto, an interesting color space, literally obsolete the day it was created, and quite problematic. In an attempt to push the three primary model to its limit, ProPhoto "cheats": it uses two "imaginary" primaries. The ProPhoto red can actually be made with an LED or a laser, but the green and blue involve negative quantities of light. This means that simple color transforms in ProPhoto space, like a hue adjustment, can lead to colors that are not valid CIE colors and cannot be viewed or printed by any known device. The worse problem is that once translated to an illegal color, any tool that uses CIE colors internally for its math can't deal with the illegal ProPhoto colors and falls apart.

The very best you can do, positioning three real, pure (laser or LED) primaries on the tongue is a triangle within the tongue, and therefore, some real colors are outside the triangle. That's why we're just beginning to see a movement towards displays with four or more primaries. Place four, five, or six points on (or even very near) the tongue, and you get a larger gamut than ProPhoto, but it stays "real", so you don't have to worry about having colors go "unreal" or "impossible" on you.

wizfaq

-- hide signature --

Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 Joseph S Wisniewski's gear list:Joseph S Wisniewski's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Nikon D90 Nikon D2X Nikon D3 Nikon D100 +43 more
SantaFeBill OP Senior Member • Posts: 2,419
Re: Color spaces 101...

Please do educate because Dell claims that the 2408wfp is 110% of CIE 1976 whereas the HP is around 92%.

First, I believe you've misunderstood the numbers on the Dell site. No monitor maker quotes a percentage of CIE.

From the 2408WFP specs on the Dell U.S. site:

"2408WFP Color Gamut (Typical) is based on CIE1976 (110%) and CIE1931 (102%)."

Mark McCormick Senior Member • Posts: 1,004
Re: Color spaces 101...

SantaFeBill wrote:

"2408WFP Color Gamut (Typical) is based on CIE1976 (110%) and CIE1931 (102%)."

Yikes, it's marketing misspeak or some clever new way of comparing transmissive color potential to CIELAB reflective color. The CIELAB color model refers to human colors that can be observed in reflected light situations. Since monitors are transmissive devices, some license is taken to correlate monitor "whitepoint" to 100% reflection off a neutral white reflective object (i.e. a perfectly reflecting white surface) and set this value to RGB = 255,255,255. Now, if the display panel were so bright that one could drive the liquid crystal filters to say 50% transmission yet still have a monitor that looks "white" at say, RGB 128,128,128 then you'd have headroom for self-luminous colors that go beyond LAB reflected colorspace. But you'd need a whole new RGB display standard to encompass self-luminous objects in a scene, and a score over 100% on such a scale would still not guarantee that you aren't missing color gamut for some reflected light colors. All in all, it really doesn't make much sense to promote such a standard at this time in digital imaging, so my guess is that the marketing guys misquoted the engineers. The engineers were probably referring to comparison of monitor color gamut to NTSC colorspace, or sRGB, aRGB, etc. but not CIEXYZ or CIELAB models.
--
Mark McCormick
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

NewsyL
NewsyL Veteran Member • Posts: 5,691
Re: Color spaces 101...

Thanks Joseph!

I had assumed the CIE and ICE had been a dyslexic error as I often see with S-IPS and S-ISP monitor panel inquiries.

You've provided a very lucent explanation. That is indeed a great diagram. Bookmarked.

-- hide signature --
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads