I’m in the market for a quality photo editing monitor for my Windows-based system, a Lenovo S740 15IRH laptop. Ideally, I'd like a 27" 4K IPS with 100% sRGB and Abode RGB, and built-in calibration capability. I’ve read that BenQ and Eizo make some of the best monitors for this purpose, but they’re quite expensive. Is spending a couple of thousand on a monitor really necessary or are there more affordable options available that would give equivalent results? I’m not a pro photographer, just a dedicated and enthusiastic amateur. Any suggestions based on your personal experience would be much appreciated.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Preferred photo editing monitor
- Thread starter Abinoone
- Start date
- Messages
- 15,230
- Solutions
- 17
- Reaction score
- 7,705
If you really need 4K, near-100% of AdobeRGB coverage, and built-in calibration, that combination is likely to be fairly expensive; it's not something the mass-market generally requires, but some photographers insist on those features.
I personally haven't seen the need for that; I've been happy so far with a ~$500 32" 4K IPS monitor with an external colorimeter and this gamut:
No doubt you'll see a wide variety of DPR members' opinions as to what you should buy; we all have different requirements.
You presumably didn't mention these deliberately, but just in case:If you really need 4K, near-100% of AdobeRGB coverage, and built-in calibration, that combination is likely to be fairly expensive; it's not something the mass-market generally requires, but some photographers insist on those features.
I personally haven't seen the need for that; I've been happy so far with a ~$500 32" 4K IPS monitor with an external colorimeter and this gamut:
No doubt you'll see a wide variety of DPR members' opinions as to what you should buy; we all have different requirements.
What monitor? (I see that you mentioned an LG 27UP600 at some time.)
Which colorimeter? (Datacolor or X-Rite/Calibrite?)
- Messages
- 15,230
- Solutions
- 17
- Reaction score
- 7,705
Yes, it was entirely deliberate as it's usually not my preference to suggest specific models when I don't really know the user's needs--if they're serious about wanting near-100% Adobe RGB and built-in calibration (since they're mentioning Eizo/Benq high-end), what I'm using isn't suitable.You presumably didn't mention these deliberately, but just in case:If you really need 4K, near-100% of AdobeRGB coverage, and built-in calibration, that combination is likely to be fairly expensive; it's not something the mass-market generally requires, but some photographers insist on those features.
I personally haven't seen the need for that; I've been happy so far with a ~$500 32" 4K IPS monitor with an external colorimeter and this gamut:
No doubt you'll see a wide variety of DPR members' opinions as to what you should buy; we all have different requirements.
I'm just showing them what a less expensive option is capable of, in case they don't really require the high-priced stuff; IMO, many of us don't but some do.
I used to have an LG 27UL600, but not the later P model. It was adequate for my needs, but the 32" is more immersive for gaming.
Since you ask, that gamut data is from an LG 32UN650 and a Colormunki Display with DisplayCAL. Despite a degree of GAS lust for the upcoming Dell U3224KB,
I really can't complain about this setup; it's served me well.I understand your motives for not mentioning the monitor.(snip)
Since you ask, that gamut data is from an LG 32UN650 and a Colormunki Display with DisplayCAL. Despite a degree of GAS lust for the upcoming Dell U3224KB,
One possible point: some of the excellent monitors sold by Dell use LG panels. It might do to compare specs, as LG models may be similar at a lower price.
Ah, the Dell U3224KB.
Supposed to compete with the Apple Pro Display XDR. That lists for $5 or $6kUS, plus $1k for the stand (or $160 for the VESA mount adapter).
I'd hope that the Dell will be much cheaper, but maybe not, due to limited competition. I doubt that I'd but one, even if it was a mere $3k.
Thank you! Yes, you are correct, I don’t need 100% RGB compatibility, nor internal calibration, but I would like something reasonably close to 100%, and some means to calibrate the monitor periodically. I’m not a professional photographer, just a dedicated enthusiast with OCD tendencies. 
You mentioned that you don’t like recommending specific models, which I understand, but perhaps you’d be kind enough to say what you use, and if you’re satisfied with it.
Thanks again.
You mentioned that you don’t like recommending specific models, which I understand, but perhaps you’d be kind enough to say what you use, and if you’re satisfied with it.
Thanks again.
He did, after I asked. LG 32UN650 . (Now $434 at Amazon.)Thank you! Yes, you are correct, I don’t need 100% RGB compatibility, nor internal calibration, but I would like something reasonably close to 100%, and some means to calibrate the monitor periodically. I’m not a professional photographer, just a dedicated enthusiast with OCD tendencies.
You mentioned that you don’t like recommending specific models, which I understand, but perhaps you’d be kind enough to say what you use, and if you’re satisfied with it.
Thanks again.
Profiled with an X-Rite Colormunki Display.
The least expensive descendant of that, available new, is the Calibrite Colorchecker Display . ($169.) Calibrite is the new source of the latest versions of the former X-Rite software.
Software, DisplayCal . DisplayCal hasn't been updated since late 2019, but it still appears to run well under the latest version of Windows 11. I use it.
- Messages
- 15,230
- Solutions
- 17
- Reaction score
- 7,705
Most definitely! LG Display sells panels to many other companies, and AFAIK there's nothing unique about LG's own monitors.I understand your motives for not mentioning the monitor.(snip)
Since you ask, that gamut data is from an LG 32UN650 and a Colormunki Display with DisplayCAL. Despite a degree of GAS lust for the upcoming Dell U3224KB,
One possible point: some of the excellent monitors sold by Dell use LG panels. It might do to compare specs, as LG models may be similar at a lower price.
I have reservations about the Dell for my own use; for one thing, its horizontal resolution exceeds that of my mFT Panasonic; I'm not sure how I feel about that. :-( I've gotten fond of the little Panny; for various ergonomic reasons, it's extremely fun to use.
I'll wait and see what tech reviews have to say about the Dell after it comes out.
- Messages
- 15,230
- Solutions
- 17
- Reaction score
- 7,705
I see that BobKnDP has answered that, and yes, I'm quite satisfied with what I have. Though as I mentioned, I have a degree of newThank you! Yes, you are correct, I don’t need 100% RGB compatibility, nor internal calibration, but I would like something reasonably close to 100%, and some means to calibrate the monitor periodically. I’m not a professional photographer, just a dedicated enthusiast with OCD tendencies.
You mentioned that you don’t like recommending specific models, which I understand, but perhaps you’d be kind enough to say what you use, and if you’re satisfied with it.
Thanks again.
Now, if I were making prints with a very high-end printer for sale, I might want an equally high-end monitor, controlled lighting in my editing space, etc. just because if I'm being paid as a professional I'd want to provide technical excellence to the best of my ability even if the customer never noticed.
But I'm not.
reid thaler
Senior Member
As one that does own an aRGB monitor and prints on a wide format printer, I recently wondered about the difference between an aRGB and an sRGB monitor and your can review that thread here.
I would be hesitant to buy another Dell monitor. I have an UP2715K monitor which is technically 5K but have never consistently gotten it to run at 5K, only 4K, and I'm on my 3rd GPU.
This is also my 2nd UP2715K. The first died with power issues just outside of their 3 years warranty and Dell didn't supply parts or offer repairs. I did buy another, UP2715K on eBay for about $650 USD a few years ago, which is hanging on, despite some de-lamination which presents as an expanded bubble, but only at the top of the screen.
In between these two monitors, I did buy another Dell and the BenQ and had such a striking experienced I felt compelled to write a review on Amazon which you can read under reviews here. TL;DR: The BenQ was better in every way, and cheaper.
So my recommendation: You have to decided if aRGB is worth it. It sounds like if you aren't printing your own big photos, it's probably not. That said, I would recommend a 27" 4K monitor, and calibrate it with an X-Rite (now Calibrite) screwing Mac owners by not updating their software and forcing them the buy new calibrators, they don't deserve your money. Buy a used ColorMunki Display one on eBay for $70.
I think 27" is the ideal size. Yes, a monitor can be too big. You wouldn't want a screen the size of a drive-in theater a foot a way from your face, and that's my thinking about monitors larger than 27" You don't want to pan your head the see the whole screen. And a 27" 4K (yes, GET A 4K monitor--it's the only thing you look at that connects you with your photography) has greater pixel density than a 32" 4 monitor.
Hope this is of some help
Reid
Photography Education and Lightroom Instructor, San Francisco Bay Area
www.lumiograph.com
Kodak Brownie
Argus 126
Quaker Oats Container Pinhole Camera
I would be hesitant to buy another Dell monitor. I have an UP2715K monitor which is technically 5K but have never consistently gotten it to run at 5K, only 4K, and I'm on my 3rd GPU.
This is also my 2nd UP2715K. The first died with power issues just outside of their 3 years warranty and Dell didn't supply parts or offer repairs. I did buy another, UP2715K on eBay for about $650 USD a few years ago, which is hanging on, despite some de-lamination which presents as an expanded bubble, but only at the top of the screen.
In between these two monitors, I did buy another Dell and the BenQ and had such a striking experienced I felt compelled to write a review on Amazon which you can read under reviews here. TL;DR: The BenQ was better in every way, and cheaper.
So my recommendation: You have to decided if aRGB is worth it. It sounds like if you aren't printing your own big photos, it's probably not. That said, I would recommend a 27" 4K monitor, and calibrate it with an X-Rite (now Calibrite) screwing Mac owners by not updating their software and forcing them the buy new calibrators, they don't deserve your money. Buy a used ColorMunki Display one on eBay for $70.
I think 27" is the ideal size. Yes, a monitor can be too big. You wouldn't want a screen the size of a drive-in theater a foot a way from your face, and that's my thinking about monitors larger than 27" You don't want to pan your head the see the whole screen. And a 27" 4K (yes, GET A 4K monitor--it's the only thing you look at that connects you with your photography) has greater pixel density than a 32" 4 monitor.
Hope this is of some help
Reid
Photography Education and Lightroom Instructor, San Francisco Bay Area
www.lumiograph.com
Kodak Brownie
Argus 126
Quaker Oats Container Pinhole Camera
Hello again,
Please forgive my persistent ignorance, but you seem to know a lot about this, and I still feel that I need some guidance. Specking out a proper monitor for photo editing is way beyond my expertise, and the more I read the more confused I become
. Basically, all I want is a good, high quality, 24-27” monitor that will provide a clear and (color) accurate display of my images, allow me to edit them accurately, and produce clear and accurate TIFF files for printing (I outsource most of my images to a professional lab). I’m not a professional, just an enthusiastic amateur who sometimes sells prints, and someone who is a little anal about “getting things right.”
Perusing the Internet, I see many options for 2K and 4K IPS monitors, priced anywhere from $400 to $4,000. I’m not a rich man, so finding a reasonably affordable solution is appealing (especially after spending $15,000 on camera equipment over the past few years), but I want whatever I buy to be right. Some say that 4K isn’t really necessary for photo editing, but I don’t know if this is true. Color accuracy is critical of course, which is why my OP mentioned near 100% RGB coverage, but perhaps this is overkill for what I do? One thing that seems very important is the need for any monitor to be calibrated periodically, so having one that either has built-in calibration capability, or allows external calibrators to be used.
One of your responses mentioned the LG 32UN650-W monitor. Do you know if there’s an equivalent 24” or 27” model? I’ve also looked at BenQ monitors, which seem to have a good reputation, but again there seem to be many models to choose among, from $350 to $3,500. Any specific suggestions that you may have would be greatly appreciated.
Please forgive my persistent ignorance, but you seem to know a lot about this, and I still feel that I need some guidance. Specking out a proper monitor for photo editing is way beyond my expertise, and the more I read the more confused I become
. Basically, all I want is a good, high quality, 24-27” monitor that will provide a clear and (color) accurate display of my images, allow me to edit them accurately, and produce clear and accurate TIFF files for printing (I outsource most of my images to a professional lab). I’m not a professional, just an enthusiastic amateur who sometimes sells prints, and someone who is a little anal about “getting things right.”Perusing the Internet, I see many options for 2K and 4K IPS monitors, priced anywhere from $400 to $4,000. I’m not a rich man, so finding a reasonably affordable solution is appealing (especially after spending $15,000 on camera equipment over the past few years), but I want whatever I buy to be right. Some say that 4K isn’t really necessary for photo editing, but I don’t know if this is true. Color accuracy is critical of course, which is why my OP mentioned near 100% RGB coverage, but perhaps this is overkill for what I do? One thing that seems very important is the need for any monitor to be calibrated periodically, so having one that either has built-in calibration capability, or allows external calibrators to be used.
One of your responses mentioned the LG 32UN650-W monitor. Do you know if there’s an equivalent 24” or 27” model? I’ve also looked at BenQ monitors, which seem to have a good reputation, but again there seem to be many models to choose among, from $350 to $3,500. Any specific suggestions that you may have would be greatly appreciated.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 15,230
- Solutions
- 17
- Reaction score
- 7,705
I'd just use the free DisplayCAL, which IMO is far superior to the X-rite software that came with my Colormunki.
"Get DisplayCAL
- For Linux
- For Mac OS X (10.6 or newer)
- For Windows
- Source code"
DisplayCAL—Display Calibration and Characterization powered by ArgyllCMS
Display calibration and profiling with a focus on accuracy and versatility
- Messages
- 15,230
- Solutions
- 17
- Reaction score
- 7,705
I don't think it's necessary for photo editing, but I really like the sharper text of 4K; I don't spend nearly as much time photo editing as I do general web browsing for information.Hello again,
Please forgive my persistent ignorance, but you seem to know a lot about this, and I still feel that I need some guidance. Specking out a proper monitor for photo editing is way beyond my expertise, and the more I read the more confused I become
Perusing the Internet, I see many options for 2K and 4K IPS monitors, priced anywhere from $400 to $4,000. I’m not a rich man, so finding a reasonably affordable solution is appealing (especially after spending $15,000 on camera equipment over the past few years), but I want whatever I buy to be right. Some say that 4K isn’t really necessary for photo editing, but I don’t know if this is true.
OK. If someone put thumbscrews on me and demanded a 27" that's like my LG, I'd tell them the closest I personally know of is the Dell S2721QS.
https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/dell/s2721qs
And if they brought out the Iron Maiden, I'd tell them I have one upstairs as my spare monitor. I liked the Dell's performance, but wanted a monitor slightly larger for gaming.
Do get a colorimeter, since accuracy is important to you.
Good luck with whatever you decide.
(Oh, and make sure your PC's video outputs match the chosen monitor's inputs.)
Last edited:
Because OLED screens can give you the specs you need.
But desktop OLED monitors are quite expensive.
However, a laptop with an OLED screen has 100% DCI-P3, 100% Adobe RGB and >100% sRGB.
They're discounting last year's model by a lot, it's a great price given the specs:
But desktop OLED monitors are quite expensive.
However, a laptop with an OLED screen has 100% DCI-P3, 100% Adobe RGB and >100% sRGB.
They're discounting last year's model by a lot, it's a great price given the specs:
JerseySailor
Senior Member
In my quest to upgrade to a high-quality photo editing monitor, two years ago I bought a BENQ SW270C. I'm sorry that I did!
Once it is up and running, it works just fine. The major problem is that if the PC (and therefore the monitor) goes to sleep, on moving the mouse to wake up the PC, the PC wakes up within seconds, but the BENQ takes a lifetime to wake from its own sleep mode, leaving me there twiddling my fingers.
This has been so incredibly annoying, that I could never recommend getting another BENQ.
Once it is up and running, it works just fine. The major problem is that if the PC (and therefore the monitor) goes to sleep, on moving the mouse to wake up the PC, the PC wakes up within seconds, but the BENQ takes a lifetime to wake from its own sleep mode, leaving me there twiddling my fingers.
This has been so incredibly annoying, that I could never recommend getting another BENQ.
Any estimate of how long your wake-up "lifetime" is?
David Lal
Forum Pro
I have not read all responses but I use a Philips 278e. See:
Buy the Philips 4K Ultra HD LCD monitor 278E1A/00 4K Ultra HD LCD monitor
The 27" E Line monitor features stunning visuals and elegant design for a stylish enhancement to your workspace. Ultra-clear 4K UHD with wide view delivers same the ultimate clarity and lifelike visuals from any front-angle view.
www.philips.co.uk
I have calibrated it and also colour-matched it to the type of paper I use for prints and checked how it performs with the graphics software I mostly use. In the UK this screen costs about GBP£ 200. I am well satisfied with it and get a good match between what my mind's eye remembers, what I see on screen and what I print out.
Here is the A4 graphic I put together (in Adobe Illustrator) for checking and adjustments:
- Messages
- 15,230
- Solutions
- 17
- Reaction score
- 7,705
A contrarian choice for desktop OLED at a relatively low price might be a TV set; I'm seeing them down to 42"-class nowadays from LG and Sony. I've been experimenting with a base 48" LG, and preliminary tests are encouraging, though as with all OLEDs I've seen I'm taking precautions against burn-in.
(Viewing distance is necessarily greater than my normal 32" monitor, of course. It requires an entirely different physical layout, so my experiments are only occasional.)
As always, I suggest reading detailed tech reviews before buying.
JerseySailor
Senior Member
I went and measured that this afternoon. After waking up the PC and monitor, the PC woke in seconds, but it took the BenQ 16 seconds to come back to life.
When you are sitting there waiting to get back to work, that is a loooong time, and no other monitor delays waking up like that.
Last edited:
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum