What external monitor are you using?

[runsongas]

The benq SW series and Philips 5k are the two budget lines with wide gamut Adobe rgb without breaking the bank, but each has issues with uneven quality.

Dell UP and the LG 5k ultrafine are pricey but the screens look damn good.

I have a 29 inch nec I have been using for nearly four years and it has been good, but I do want to move up to a 4k/5k now that I am shooting with a hero6.

 

[Chris Ross]

What will be your main use for the new monitor?

Based on your question about calibration, I will assume that photo and/or video editing will be a significant part of what you will be doing. If so, you will also need to consider the "colour space". Will you want a monitor that can show 100% of the Adobe ProPhoto colour space ($$$$) or, since images posted to the web are in sRGB, would a monitor that is capable of displaying the full sRGB colour space meet your needs?
View attachment 501854

Typically monitors that you will find on the shelves at your local Staples or Best Buy will not be capable of displaying either of these to 100%.

FWIW, I am also looking for a new computer and monitor. The biggest thing that I do that will be driving my ultimate selection will be photo editing. While I have not totally ruled out an iMac (I am keeping an eye on the Apple refurbished page), it looks as though I will probably be going with a Mac Mini and a new monitor. Like I said, I do a lot of photo editing, but I am not a pro who relies on selling my work to make a living, so for me, I can not justify the expence of getting a monitor capable of the 100% Adobe ProPhoto colour space. I do however post my images to the web and I want to best possible image I can get, so I am looking at a monitor that will display 100% of the sRGB color space.

I don't know if that helps or not, but I hope it does (or at least gives you something else to consider).

I don't believe there are any monitors around that don't display all of sRGB, it is a fairly low hurdle. This article is from on company that deals in high end imaging particularly for printing and has their recommendations for colour accurate monitors.:

Monitors for High Quality Imaging Work - Image Science

have a read and look at the monitors they currently recommend in the link at the bottom.

 

[ConchyJoe]

Great info thanks! It is going to take me a while to digest.

 

[Hoag]

I don't believe there are any monitors around that don't display all of sRGB, it is a fairly low hurdle. This article is from on company that deals in high end imaging particularly for printing and has their recommendations for colour accurate monitors.:

Monitors for High Quality Imaging Work - Image Science

have a read and look at the monitors they currently recommend in the link at the bottom.

I would tend to agree with your comment if you are talking specifically about monitors that are marketed for photo editing or design work, but if you were to walk into an office supply store (in a previous post I used Staples or Best Buy as examples) and bought a random monitor from them, it likely would not cover the entire sRGB space. For many of us, photography is a hobby and the extra cost of an upgrade from a monitor capable of sRGB to a monitor capable of a large colour space such as ProPhoto may not be worth it.

Obviously, a broader colour space desirable, but it will also come at a higher price. For many of us, there is a happy medium. Photography is a hobby. I am not a professional photo or video editor, and I seldom print my images, so having a monitor with a wider colour space will not be worth the investment to see the nuances that a final print will yield. Instead, I simply upload the vast majority of my images to the web (smugmug.com). Since the web tends to be sRGB, I am happy if that is what colour space my monitor is. (I also know that the vast majority of people who look at my images will not be doing it of a calibrated monitor set up for photo editing but will likely be looking at them on a monitor that they picked up for $99 on a "Black Friday sale" at one of the office supply chains.)

Each person will have their own unique needs and budget and a $1000+ monitor may not be the best option for everyone. It might fall into the "wants column" rather than the "needs column".

OTOH, if I simply opt for a new iMac when I upgrade my computer, it will come with a 4K (21.5") or a 5K (27") monitor which uses the P3 colour space based on the current (2017) specs.

 

[kelemvor]

I've been using an 30" LG W3000H for a few years as my main, flanked by an ever changing pair of inexpensive "side" monitors. currently 24" viewsonic. The LG covers most of the Adobe RGB color space. As an older panel, it puts out some heat and consumes a lot of electricity... I'd like to replace it.

I'm seriously considering looking into 4k tv's. They're dirt cheap even with IPS and HDR10/Dolby Vision/other features. Worst buy seems to have IPS 4k tv's in the $300 range for 50"?! I paid a little over $1000 for my 30" panel when I got it... sniff.

I second @runsongas comment about colorimiters. Even if you're using a crummy panel, calibration makes all the difference in the world.
I've been using a datacolor spyder3 colorimiter for years. It makes an immeasurable difference. If you get one, don't forget to calibrate your laptop's internal panel too. You won't believe what you were missing. Using a colorimiter effectively seems to be a bit of an art, but it's not too terrible to learn.

Are you using it for video games? Most tv's are only going to do 120hz or 60hz at 4k. That can be a problem for games. I just got my son a 27" 4k IPS gaming monitor and that bad boy was $800. It does the job barely. You're going to have to pony up around $2k for a proper high speed 4k gaming panel.

 

[runsongas]

Using a 4k TV has some other issues though. For even a 40 inch, your dpi drops to only 110, which is roughly same level as a 30 inch monitor at 2k. You don't get the crispness of 200 dpi that you get with the retina monitors. Also depth of field and viewing distance are impacted by going to a TV instead of monitor.

 

[Chris Ross]

One of the bigger issues with TVs is image brightness, as a part of the calibration you set the brightness, the most common thing is that you end up processing your images to be too dark, plus these days seems to be hard to find one less than 40", unless it is "only" HD and putting one of them on your desk might be a problem. And as stated above the resolution is about equal to standard definition monitor. A HD (1920 x 1080) 32" TV which may fit on the desktop will be about 60 DPI and look quite grainy when viewed up close.

 

[runsongas]

brightness is less of a problem with the hdr sets these days though. you can get 500 nits pretty easily on even the budget brands like TCL and 1000+ on the nicer ones from samsung/lg/sony/vizio.

 

[Chris Ross]

brightness is less of a problem with the hdr sets these days though. you can get 500 nits pretty easily on even the budget brands like TCL and 1000+ on the nicer ones from samsung/lg/sony/vizio.

Which is exactly the problem, there is a standard brightness for imaging work which is 120 cd/m2 which I believe is 120 nits. You want the high brightness for games and movies not imaging. The very bright monitors often do not turn down well and don't remain accurate at the brightness levels which are the standard for imaging. If you process your images on an ultra bright monitor then you'll adjust the exposure down to get them to look right on that monitor, but anyone using a monitor that is closer to the standard the images will look dark and muddy. This is fine to a certain extent if you are the only one looking at them, but not if you are sharing them. Calibrating the monitor takes care of it to a certain extent but tends not to work very well if you need to turn the brightness down to minimum.

All this makes sense, TVs are designed to be watched from a few metres back, monitors are generally less than 1m away so don't need to be as bright. Getting the brightness right allows you to get the most out of your image.

 

[runsongas]

except the contrast with local dimming is 5x to 10x better on 4k TV's than 4k monitors frequently until you get to professional grade displays like the eizo. The contrast is still very good even with brightness turned down for HDR tv's.