What do you think of this monitor for Mac Pro?

[fearoftigers]

It's to run Logic, no graphics apps.

http://www.samsung.com/hk_en/consumer/computer-peripherals/monitors/consumer/LS27EFHKUV/XK/index.idx?pagetype=prd_detail&subsubtype=70-series

 

[alust2013]

Too low resolution for a 27". You can get a 24 or even smaller with that resolution.

 

[dissolve]

Too low resolution for a 27". You can get a 24 or even smaller with that resolution.

Agreed, that would look horrible. If you're gonna go 27", you'll need to look at the ACD or Dell's monitor. 23-24" monitors have become much more affordable. I'd look in that range if your budget is the price of that Samsung.

 

[Vantage Point]

I have a 27" iMac which has much higher resolution. However, at least for myself, I cannot tolerate this high resolution since it makes fonts tiny and web sized images relatively small (consider that large monitors are pushed back further than small monitor or laptops). Anyway, the solution has been to set my iMac to the resolution of the monitor you linked to and then all is well. I sometimes go back to the native resolution for Photoshop work. Also, using the native resolution of my iMac and increasing the fonts size only serves to screw up the text on some webpages where the words get pushed outside the frame.

As such my recommendation is to either go with a 24" monitor with that resolution or to get a 27" monitor which the higher resolution (if you have good eyes) to get the sharpest result. Personally, I wish Apple still made 24" iMacs (1900 x 1200) but they do not so my next computer may not be a iMac at all so I can use a monitor at its native resolution. Resolution combined with viewing distance, along with appropriate color gamut, are important things to consider when investing in a new monitor.

 

[circularforward]

I have a 27" iMac which has much higher resolution. However, at least for myself, I cannot tolerate this high resolution since it makes fonts tiny and web sized images relatively small (consider that large monitors are pushed back further than small monitor or laptops). Anyway, the solution has been to set my iMac to the resolution of the monitor you linked to and then all is well. I sometimes go back to the native resolution for Photoshop work. Also, using the native resolution of my iMac and increasing the fonts size only serves to screw up the text on some webpages where the words get pushed outside the frame.

As such my recommendation is to either go with a 24" monitor with that resolution or to get a 27" monitor which the higher resolution (if you have good eyes) to get the sharpest result. Personally, I wish Apple still made 24" iMacs (1900 x 1200) but they do not so my next computer may not be a iMac at all so I can use a monitor at its native resolution. Resolution combined with viewing distance, along with appropriate color gamut, are important things to consider when investing in a new monitor.

Similarly, I have a NEC LCD2690, a 26" with 1900x1200 resolution, and I feel it's just right for the distance i have it away from me on my desk. I prefer to keep it a little bit farther from me than most do, and that resolution is nice for that. So the resolution and dpi are dependent on what you prefer and how you like to setup. =)

 

[Vantage Point]

Similarly, I have a NEC LCD2690, a 26" with 1900x1200 resolution, and I feel it's just right for the distance i have it away from me on my desk. I prefer to keep it a little bit farther from me than most do, and that resolution is nice for that. So the resolution and dpi are dependent on what you prefer and how you like to setup. =)

That monitor was on my short list if I bought a 15" MBP. Sadly, after waiting much, much longer than the typically refresh period I needed to get a new computer as my old XP PC was on its last legs. 1900 x 1200 at 26" is really easy on the eyes, as is the matte screen and high color gamut.

If I had to recommend only one monitor for photography, this would be it

 

[Mac_Max]

You should be good with it. I like having the most resolution possible without having to squint but if it fits your budget, you're hard pressed to complain about 1080 resolution.

 

[Fishrrman]

"You should be good with it. I like having the most resolution possible without having to squint but if it fits your budget, you're hard pressed to complain about 1080 resolution."

Something not mentioned so far in this thread is "the age factor".

Younger people simply can't understand because they haven't "arrived there yet".

The newer high-resolution 27" screens -- like that on the 27" iMac -- can be difficult for older folks to see clearly at their native resolutions.

For this reason, sometimes it is BETTER to use a screen with a lower native resolution.

The Samsung 27" display has (I believe) the same resolution as the "standard size" for 24" displays. The difference is that the individual pixels are larger. The net effect is that you are looking at a 24" resolution "slightly blown up" to 27".

If you're still young (as most posters to this forum are), you may find this distracting.

But if you're older, it's wonderful. No more "squinting to see the screen".

I'm 60. If I was in the market for a larger screen, I'd definitely prefer one of the 27" models that have the same rez as do the 24" displays. Just easier to look at.

Just something to be aware of....

 

[filfortugno]

it's fine

if it's only needed to run logic than its quite alright for you.

 

[fearoftigers]

Thanks for the advice.

I'm now thinking about getting a Dell 24" Ultrasharp instead. Any thoughts on that?

I'd love the 27" ACD but just can justify the cost.

 

[Vantage Point]

Thanks for the advice.

I'm now thinking about getting a Dell 24" Ultrasharp instead. Any thoughts on that?

I'd love the 27" ACD but just can justify the cost.

Great monitor and the native resolution should be perfect. However, I believe this a high gamut monitor and it is critical to understand color gamut before using something like this since you can get what appears to be oversaturated color. Proper calibration and converting images to sRGb color space is critical for positn images on the web and sending images to people with regular, lower sRGb color gamut monitors like iMac. It you understand all this and do serious photography work then that might be a superior choice to Apples 27" monitor - and I believe it is not glossy Also, there are reports of some of these not having consistent color across the screen with a green to magenta tint on different areas. In color science green is the opposite color to magenta. see user reviews from Amazon

Something in between the Dell and Apple, price wise is a NEC 2490, normal color gamut, 1900 x 1200 resolution and a high quality panel. Of the three this would be my first choice - I am a photogrpaher