4K monitors

[Gary Wood]

I’m looking at upgrading my monitor. I’m currently using a 23-inch full HD panel, but would like more detail and perhaps a little more screen space, so I’m considering a 27-inch 4K model.



I’ve always had NEC monitors and found them to be excellent, but it’s only 4K model (EA271U) only has 85% Adobe RGB coverage. So, I’m considering two alternatives: Dell UP2720Q and ViewSonic VP2785-4K.



Anyone have any experience with either of those screens, or any other suggestions?

 

[Austinian]

I’m looking at upgrading my monitor. I’m currently using a 23-inch full HD panel, but would like more detail and perhaps a little more screen space, so I’m considering a 27-inch 4K model.

I’ve always had NEC monitors and found them to be excellent, but it’s only 4K model (EA271U) only has 85% Adobe RGB coverage. So, I’m considering two alternatives: Dell UP2720Q and ViewSonic VP2785-4K.

Anyone have any experience with either of those screens, or any other suggestions?

LG makes some 27" 4K monitors that might be suitable.

 

[Ken60]

Gary there is only one question you need to answer ......... how much will you spend at the top end ? The UP2720Q that you mention is around £1300 here in the UK. I was looking at it but found out that to calibrate the LUT you need to purchase Calman software at around £700 . This makes the total purchase price of the UP2720Q more like £2000 !

If you are determined to have a 4K 27" screen with great quality and excellent calibration software thrown in with the screen, look no further than the CS2740 Eizo monitor at £1300 all in ! Watch a few Youtube videos on the Eizo ColorNavigator 7 software and understand how well it works.

Your other more budget option is the BenQ SW271 at £950, it is about to be superseded by the BenQ SW271c , with the addition of a USB c connection and other as yet unstated upgrades. Though they list it a price is not available as yet, and Covid delays in factories might be to blame.

I don't know the mix of your usage, and can presume the choice of 4K is for Video usage , but having spent two weeks test driving a 32" 4K , I have to say that I feel it is overkill for stills alone, and made the personal decision to go 2k! The scaling at 27" with 4k is crazy ( around 200%) and Photoshops tool boxes can be an issue. 2K at 27" is lovely with almost no need for scaling and a detailed image . So add to your choices of screens to consider the Rolls Royce Eizo CG2730 at £1300 , or the budget BenQ SW270c 27" 2k for £676 with hood and calibration software.

I think the Eizo options will give you the better screen evenness of lighting , and the nicer calibration software , but the BenQ 27" 2K , with hood and Pallet Master calibration for £675 to your door from WEX is crazy money.

Oh, one final thought, if you are lucky to have a reasonable budget, go for the Eizo CS2740 and run it at either 2k or 4k if you need it . The screen has a pixel size of .155 as against the .233 of many of the 2k screens. Oh and as you are a youngster ( im a wrinkly) remember the Eizo's have a 5 year warranty and should last for years.

--
Gear ... what I need to get the job done , after all you don't see mechanics listing their brand of spanner as a qualification .

 

[strawbale]

Gary there is only one question you need to answer ......... how much will you spend at the top end ? The UP2720Q that you mention is around £1300 here in the UK. I was looking at it but found out that to calibrate the LUT you need to purchase Calman software at around £700 . This makes the total purchase price of the UP2720Q more like £2000 !

It's U2720Q (not UP2720Q) and it's £575: https://www.scan.co.uk/products/27-...hz-displayhdr-400-13001-350cd-m-hdmi-dp-usb-c

If you are determined to have a 4K 27" screen with great quality and excellent calibration software thrown in with the screen, look no further than the CS2740 Eizo monitor at £1300 all in ! Watch a few Youtube videos on the Eizo ColorNavigator 7 software and understand how well it works.

Your other more budget option is the BenQ SW271 at £950, it is about to be superseded by the BenQ SW271c , with the addition of a USB c connection and other as yet unstated upgrades. Though they list it a price is not available as yet, and Covid delays in factories might be to blame.

I don't know the mix of your usage, and can presume the choice of 4K is for Video usage , but having spent two weeks test driving a 32" 4K , I have to say that I feel it is overkill for stills alone, and made the personal decision to go 2k! The scaling at 27" with 4k is crazy ( around 200%) and Photoshops tool boxes can be an issue. 2K at 27" is lovely with almost no need for scaling and a detailed image . So add to your choices of screens to consider the Rolls Royce Eizo CG2730 at £1300 , or the budget BenQ SW270c 27" 2k for £676 with hood and calibration software.

I think the Eizo options will give you the better screen evenness of lighting , and the nicer calibration software , but the BenQ 27" 2K , with hood and Pallet Master calibration for £675 to your door from WEX is crazy money.

Oh, one final thought, if you are lucky to have a reasonable budget, go for the Eizo CS2740 and run it at either 2k or 4k if you need it . The screen has a pixel size of .155 as against the .233 of many of the 2k screens. Oh and as you are a youngster ( im a wrinkly) remember the Eizo's have a 5 year warranty and should last for years.

 

[strawbale]

I’m looking at upgrading my monitor. I’m currently using a 23-inch full HD panel, but would like more detail and perhaps a little more screen space, so I’m considering a 27-inch 4K model.

I’ve always had NEC monitors and found them to be excellent, but it’s only 4K model (EA271U) only has 85% Adobe RGB coverage.

What do you need/intend 100% Adobe RGB coverage for?

So, I’m considering two alternatives: Dell UP2720Q

There's a U2720Q and a UP2718Q, but not a UP2720Q

and ViewSonic VP2785-4K.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1357701-REG/viewsonic_vp2785_4k_27_4k_adobe_rgb.html/reviews

Anyone have any experience with either of those screens, or any other suggestions?

 

[bmoag]

I have been using a non Ultrasharp version of the Dell 4k for a while. It is very color stable. Although I calibrate on a non-fixed schedule minimal adjustments are ever required.

The only reason to buy an Ultrasharp is to use the LUTs and an automated calibration system, which does not have to be the xRite (but I would recommend that device and software). As I also use a non-ultrasharp calibrated to the same brightness and other parameters for color managed printing I fail to see any real world advantage to "factory calibration" and LUTs despite marketing hype and theoretical advantages.

It would not be the first time I was wrong but I don't see any differences in results.

Those who denigrate 4k monitors (which need to be 27 inches or larger at usual nose to monitor distances) have never used one for extended periods. 1080 will see grainy to you in short order.

If you shoot and process in large color space raw and understand how to use and convert/preview color spaces there is much to be said for full RGB monitors.

I have learned the hard way that a monitor warranty is important. Dell has been very good to me but it has been a couple of years since I last contacted them.

 

[Ken60]

Gary there is only one question you need to answer ......... how much will you spend at the top end ? The UP2720Q that you mention is around £1300 here in the UK. I was looking at it but found out that to calibrate the LUT you need to purchase Calman software at around £700 . This makes the total purchase price of the UP2720Q more like £2000 !

It's U2720Q (not UP2720Q) and it's £575: https://www.scan.co.uk/products/27-...hz-displayhdr-400-13001-350cd-m-hdmi-dp-usb-c

It pays to look before you jump !

PC Accessories and Peripherals

PC accessories at Dell: Keyboard, wireless mouse, headset, webcam, docking station & more. Dell's Biggest Sale of the Year is here - Buy now & Pay Later!

www.dell.com

 

[Ken60]

Each of us must do our own reading and come to our own compromises re colour accuracy. However you may find that the transfer of calibrated data between the graphics card and the monitor is truncated to 8 bit data , quite a quality drop from a 16 bit 3D LUT in the monitor. Mostly noticeable with banding in gradients etc.

Again if the card can send out its native signal and have the translation done in monitor, du7aal screen setups become more manageable.

https://www.eizoglobal.com/library/basics/maximum_display_colors/

Factory calibration seems to vary amongst manufacturers, BenQ say that the presets are there for those wanting an idea of what the image will look like in varied gamuts. They allow 3 user calibrations for you to adjust as often a you see fit. Other higher end manufacturers seem to advocate the process where the recalibration of the "native" color space also has updating abilities on the presets. You might need to consider this with each make. There are settings in Photroshop for example to dither 8 bit images, thus masking the banding effects. With a LUT and several choices of user cal settings it is possible to use these to calibrate onet varied gamma other than the standard 2.2 , and possibly a brightness to suit for printing .

Spend an evening watching a few youtube videos on the subjects, Eizo do a few good ones.

--
Gear ... what I need to get the job done , after all you don't see mechanics listing their brand of spanner as a qualification .

 

[Gary Wood]

Many thanks, @Ken60. Lots of options for me to consider there, which is very helpful. I'll do some more investigating, and come back when I have more questions!

 

[Gary Wood]

It's U2720Q (not UP2720Q) and it's £575: https://www.scan.co.uk/products/27-...hz-displayhdr-400-13001-350cd-m-hdmi-dp-usb-c

There is a UP2820Q, too: see here.

 

[Gary Wood]

Actually, @Ken60 - I have an immediate question! What do you mean by LUT?

Looking at the Dell website, I saw that the monitor and its hardware caliabration is compatible with calibration software, but I didn't understand it to mean that software was essential. Is your reading different?

 

[Gary Wood]

What do you need/intend 100% Adobe RGB coverage for?

Photography work, but also because I do print design occasionally, and Adobe RGB is close to CMYK.

 

[Gary Wood]

Those who denigrate 4k monitors (which need to be 27 inches or larger at usual nose to monitor distances) have never used one for extended periods. 1080 will see grainy to you in short order.

What I'm reading -- here and elsewhere -- is that many people seem to prefer 2K at 100% scaling over 4K at 150-200%. I'm not totally sure what that is, but perhaps some of you will enlighten me. Part of my driver to want higher PPI is not only for photo and design work, but because I also use the monitor for work using office applications. My current fulll HD screen has pixellated text in comparison to my MacBook Pro retina display, Running Windows on my MacBook, thorugh Parallels virtualisation, gives a beautiful, smooth display, even with 200% scaling.

 

[Austinian]

Those who denigrate 4k monitors (which need to be 27 inches or larger at usual nose to monitor distances) have never used one for extended periods. 1080 will see grainy to you in short order.

What I'm reading -- here and elsewhere -- is that many people seem to prefer 2K at 100% scaling over 4K at 150-200%. I'm not totally sure what that is, but perhaps some of you will enlighten me. Part of my driver to want higher PPI is not only for photo and design work, but because I also use the monitor for work using office applications. My current fulll HD screen has pixellated text in comparison to my MacBook Pro retina display, Running Windows on my MacBook, thorugh Parallels virtualisation, gives a beautiful, smooth display, even with 200% scaling.

One thing to consider when reading different opinions is that different users sit at various distances from their monitors and vary in visual acuity.

I personally want 4K at 27" and larger, and have no problems with scaling on any application I have.

Small text in particular is much more readable on higher-res monitors; even larger text characters are better formed IMO.

 

[Ken60]

Gary , a look up table is at its most simple a numeric listing where the changes required to achieve the correct colour on screen are set. The more detailed this table in terms of bit depth, the more accurate the changes and colour. Read the link I set for bmoag that is from the EIzo site.

There is Always a need to calibrate a monitor , this is don by setting the correct usage settings and then using special software to project specific colours onto the screen. A Puck ( like the i1 Display Pro ) reads these colours and considers the difference between the numeric value sent and the colour read. This is done with many colours of all shades , and so a pattern of adaptations required to see the exact shade sent , is made and stored. This forms a LUT ( look up table ) think like changing from degrees F to degrees C. In most systems this is stored in the computer and when windows sends a signal to the screen, it is translated using this correction table. For the best accuracy and greatest bit depth in this table, an alternate method was arrived at where the LUT is stored in the monitor, and adapts the signal from the computer. Great professional colour screens are now using 3D ,16 bit LUTs to give the best colour available and the smoothest gradients.

LUT is also used in Video..... where a RAW video from a Red Weapon is edited using a specific LUT to both control the contrast and give the footage a certain look. So you might get a LUT that is to emulate some great old film camera.

If you are at the beginning of this quest , also look at the evenness of the backlight in a screen, and the ability to work with easily usable but adaptable profiling and calibration software. As for your query about the Dell UP2720Q , I am 100% sure , I could not believe they would make this screen need Calman and add £700 to the price, so I spent ages trying to get a Dell tech that could confirm this .... AND IT IS TRUE. So the CS2740 EIZO is £1300 with all the software included , only the hood is an extra.

 

[Jon555]

I’m looking at upgrading my monitor. I’m currently using a 23-inch full HD panel, but would like more detail and perhaps a little more screen space, so I’m considering a 27-inch 4K model.

I’ve always had NEC monitors and found them to be excellent, but it’s only 4K model (EA271U) only has 85% Adobe RGB coverage. So, I’m considering two alternatives: Dell UP2720Q and ViewSonic VP2785-4K.

Anyone have any experience with either of those screens, or any other suggestions?

It's tricky without knowing your budget, as that is a big factor. Also if you're not buying a really expensive one read what reviews say on screen uniformity and buy from somewhere you can exchange it.

I have a LG-27UK850 (99% sRGB), which has been discontinued recently, so some may be going cheap. I generally like it but the two lower corners are a little brighter than the rest of the screen. It is only really noticeable on a fully black screen and doesn't worry me enough to want anything else, but isn't ideal. I believe it's a viewing-angle effect, as if you put your head directly in front of those areas then they aren't lighter. Optimising the screen height is the best you can do (and it's not that obvious an effect). Unfortunately the optimum height (where the effect is nearly invisible) is with the screen centre lined up with my eyes, and I prefer it lower.

I couldn't find a review for a competing product which wasn't full of complaints on screen uniformity. (I did get a replacement, but that had a third iffy area, which looked like a build defect, so I sent that back and kept the original. I think the two areas I have are just what you get for the monitor height I prefer.)

Note the 850 comes hardware calibrated, there's a cheaper 650 version without the calibration option (or a USB port for video input from devices like Macs which support that). There seems to be a 670 version now, to replace the 650.

Review (of the 650):
https://www.monitornerds.com/lg-27uk650-review/

Oh and monitor prices seem like the Oil and Gold prices, so keep an eye out for deals for whatever you choose.

 

[Ernie Misner]

Those who denigrate 4k monitors (which need to be 27 inches or larger at usual nose to monitor distances) have never used one for extended periods. 1080 will see grainy to you in short order.

What I'm reading -- here and elsewhere -- is that many people seem to prefer 2K at 100% scaling over 4K at 150-200%. I'm not totally sure what that is, but perhaps some of you will enlighten me. Part of my driver to want higher PPI is not only for photo and design work, but because I also use the monitor for work using office applications. My current fulll HD screen has pixellated text in comparison to my MacBook Pro retina display, Running Windows on my MacBook, thorugh Parallels virtualisation, gives a beautiful, smooth display, even with 200% scaling.

One thing to consider when reading different opinions is that different users sit at various distances from their monitors and vary in visual acuity.

I personally want 4K at 27" and larger, and have no problems with scaling on any application I have.

Small text in particular is much more readable on higher-res monitors; even larger text characters are better formed IMO.

What about fine detail in photos and ease of viewing for sharpening, etc.? My eyes are not getting any younger and I wonder about that. My current 27" NEC PA 27W is 2560 x 1440. Is that 3K?

--
Ernie Misner
http://www.flickr.com/photos/erniemisner/
The first digital image was made in the late '60's for NASA, as a way to record images of Mars. Each "square" was represented by three numbers, corresponding to the red, green, and blue hue on a scale of 0 to 255. This eliminated the need to ship film back to Earth.

 

[Austinian]

Those who denigrate 4k monitors (which need to be 27 inches or larger at usual nose to monitor distances) have never used one for extended periods. 1080 will see grainy to you in short order.

What I'm reading -- here and elsewhere -- is that many people seem to prefer 2K at 100% scaling over 4K at 150-200%. I'm not totally sure what that is, but perhaps some of you will enlighten me. Part of my driver to want higher PPI is not only for photo and design work, but because I also use the monitor for work using office applications. My current fulll HD screen has pixellated text in comparison to my MacBook Pro retina display, Running Windows on my MacBook, thorugh Parallels virtualisation, gives a beautiful, smooth display, even with 200% scaling.

One thing to consider when reading different opinions is that different users sit at various distances from their monitors and vary in visual acuity.

I personally want 4K at 27" and larger, and have no problems with scaling on any application I have.

Small text in particular is much more readable on higher-res monitors; even larger text characters are better formed IMO.

What about fine detail in photos and ease of viewing for sharpening, etc.?

No problems here. I do sit pretty close to the monitor.

My eyes are not getting any younger and I wonder about that.

My eyes got a lot younger after cataract surgery.

Do you have single-vision eyeglasses optimized for your monitor viewing distance? Highly recommended!

My current 27" NEC PA 27W is 2560 x 1440. Is that 3K?

I don't know. I'd rather refer to specific resolutions rather than generalizations like 2K, 3K, 4K, especially since we have different aspect ratios, but I bow to what's become common practice.

 

[Ken60]

This detail view is something I am also interested in , and so started looking at the pixel pitch of the monitors. The pitch can alter between .28 and .155 mm for various screens. |The finer pitches seem to coincide with the max resolution of the screen, so 4K will be more likely to be lower. With 27" screens where 4k will bring the need for 200% scaling , there is always the option to buy a 4k and q have that there for the odd video usage, but run it at 2k for general Photoshop and other daily uses.

 

[Ernie Misner]

Those who denigrate 4k monitors (which need to be 27 inches or larger at usual nose to monitor distances) have never used one for extended periods. 1080 will see grainy to you in short order.

What I'm reading -- here and elsewhere -- is that many people seem to prefer 2K at 100% scaling over 4K at 150-200%. I'm not totally sure what that is, but perhaps some of you will enlighten me. Part of my driver to want higher PPI is not only for photo and design work, but because I also use the monitor for work using office applications. My current fulll HD screen has pixellated text in comparison to my MacBook Pro retina display, Running Windows on my MacBook, thorugh Parallels virtualisation, gives a beautiful, smooth display, even with 200% scaling.

One thing to consider when reading different opinions is that different users sit at various distances from their monitors and vary in visual acuity.

I personally want 4K at 27" and larger, and have no problems with scaling on any application I have.

Small text in particular is much more readable on higher-res monitors; even larger text characters are better formed IMO.

What about fine detail in photos and ease of viewing for sharpening, etc.?

No problems here. I do sit pretty close to the monitor.

My eyes are not getting any younger and I wonder about that.

My eyes got a lot younger after cataract surgery.

Do you have single-vision eyeglasses optimized for your monitor viewing distance? Highly recommended!

I do and they are incredible. Don't know why I didn't get "computer glasses" a long time ago. Mine are set for 3 feet, and are progressive down to reading distance though. Thank you for your comments.

My current 27" NEC PA 27W is 2560 x 1440. Is that 3K?

I don't know. I'd rather refer to specific resolutions rather than generalizations like 2K, 3K, 4K, especially since we have different aspect ratios, but I bow to what's become common practice.