LCD Comparison... Any thoughts would help

[mrchainsaw5757]

So I am finally going to indulge myself with a new monitor. I originally was going to go 22" but I decided to be a big boy and go for the 24". So I have been looking at a lot of monitors. I dont just want to settle, I need something with it all. Since I am a graphic designer, theres a lot of facts at hand. I got most of them covered I think though. I mean Im sure these two monitors I picked out arent top of the line, but they are better than the really cheaper stuff. So tell me what you think about these two? Any experiences? Any thoughts?

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=3106999&body=REVIEWS

and

http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/products/Monitors/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=320-6095

 

[jjahshik32]

Graphics designer= Apple Cinema Display 23"

 

[mrchainsaw5757]

too pricey. I dont think its worth it for the price. The only thing I like about them is that they are pre calibrated, the over all design, and the fact that they are apple

 

[jjahshik32]

too pricey. I dont think its worth it for the price. The only thing I like about them is that they are pre calibrated, the over all design, and the fact that they are apple

I've owned a few 2407 Dell with the S-IPS panel as well as trying to find the "right" display at the $400-$600 range all from samsung to LG.. I've used Spyder 2 Pro to calibrate all the monitors and to this day all those monitors does not come close to the vividness/accuracy/depth of color/viewing angle/naturalness of the Apple Cinema Displays even right out of the box and especially at $799 (with student discount) and + tax at $865 in that price range there is NO other 23"-24" display that is better.

I've owned the 245BW Samsung that I bought from Fry's last year and returned it as the TN panel color wasnt as great as even the Dell 2407 (of course its because it had the S-IPS) and its viewing angle is horrible not to mention the depth of color as well.

 

[stainlessliquid]

Both of those are TN since they have 160 degree viewing angles. Under no circumstances should you EVER get TN if you do graphic design or photo editing. They create a vertical gradient based on where your head is because of the poor viewing angle (dark at the top, light at the bottom that shifts with eye level). You will find yourself making changes to your work based on the gradient the monitor creates... or not making changes, like if you want a nice darkblue gradient in a photo of a sky, which the monitor is creating for you so you dont add one and leave the sky a boring flat blue which shows when printed.

If you can only afford $400 then stick with 20" and get an S-IPS monitor (178 degree viewing angle). An S-IPS 20" should run you around $400. Size doesnt matter nearly as much as panel quality. PVA panel types are acceptable as a last resort if you cant find an S-IPS in your price range, PVA's will have a viewing angle in the 170's but not 178.

 

[ktbubster]

My mom does graphic design and print work and we just switched her over from an ancient crt (she's in her early 60's takes a while to switch her to new things) to that exact same dell and she LOVES it. It's not quite as good as the ultrasharps, but it's close. The color accuracy is actually pretty good. She used the money she saved and got a Spyder ultimate calibrator to help with the color stuff and it's really beautiful.

I definitely suggest going for that one. Definitely the best for your buck.

Edit: the panel is a TN so it won't be as good as any of the sips monitors, but for a TN panel it's really nice.

However, if viewing angles or color really really really bother you (the viewing angle really isn't that bad and my mom does lots of test prints of her hard work too so it doesn' tmatter as much... but if that is a problem get a refurb acd 20 inch or just over 500 with tax or save up abit and grab a 23inch for about 800 with tax (749 refurb) or look into the dell ultrasharps as mentioned and save a little more then apple

 

[jjahshik32]

If you can only afford $400 then stick with 20" and get an S-IPS monitor (178 degree viewing angle). An S-IPS 20" should run you around $400. Size doesnt matter nearly as much as panel quality.

Hehe sounds like the 20" ACD is the right one to grab with student discount as well.

 

[eXan]

You cant find ACD-class monitor for less.

 

[Abstract]

I've owned a few 2407 Dell with the S-IPS panel as well as trying to find the "right" display at the $400-$600 range all from samsung to LG.. I've used Spyder 2 Pro to calibrate all the monitors and to this day all those monitors does not come close to the vividness/accuracy/depth of color/viewing angle/naturalness of the Apple Cinema Displays even right out of the box

That's because the Dell 2407WFP does not, and has never had, an S-IPS LCD panel. They use an S-PVA panel made by Samsung.

All 30" Dells have S-IPS, while Dell 20" displays use a mix of S-IPS and S-PVA panels. I'm NOT talking about the "E" series models. I'm talking about the better Ultrasharp models that don't have an "E" in the model, such as the UltraSharp 2007WFP 20 inch model. The chances of getting a Dell 20" S-IPS display is fairly good if you buy a 2007WFP. I own an S-IPS version. I'm not sure about the new Dell 20-inch 2009WFP model, though. Check Hardforums.

My mom does graphic design and print work and we just switched her over from an ancient crt (she's in her early 60's takes a while to switch her to new things) to that exact same dell and she LOVES it. It's not quite as good as the ultrasharps, but it's close. The color accuracy is actually pretty good. She used the money she saved and got a Spyder ultimate calibrator to help with the color stuff and it's really beautiful.

I definitely suggest going for that one. Definitely the best for your buck.

Edit: the panel is a TN so it won't be as good as any of the sips monitors, but for a TN panel it's really nice.

There's no such thing as a "good" TN panel. Sorry. I think your mum may have lower standards, or doesn't really know what truly accurate colour looks like. Maybe she's happy because the colour accuracy is "good enough" for her prints, but it's definitely not accurate. Calibrating it is OK, but she's going to have to calibrate very frequently to get anything accurate. I know you may want to believe that it's a matter of opinion, but unfortunately, in terms of LCDs, it's not really debatable. It's a technological issue, you see, and not something you can sneak past. It's like saying my car isn't as fast as an Aston Martin or Koenigsegg. It's not something that my car can offer technologically to get the same performance.