Intend to buy a 4K IPS PC monitor for photography

[Jim A]

It is about time I got into the 21st century. Aiming to lash out and buy a PC monitor 4K, IPS. They seem to frequently come in 27″ size, though some are bigger.

I use a second monitor to have my photo-editing program on, keeping the larger monitor for the image. The screen resolution and aspect ratio for all seem to be the same - ie, 3840 X 2160 pixels and ratio 16:9.

The one which has caught my eye so far is the LG 27UK650-W.

I see that apart for IPS monitors there are also VA, which I had not heard of today, so must start googling.

Any ideas and suggestions welcome!

[Cantab]

Jim, I can't provide any specific advice but remember there was a thread on this topic probably a couple of months ago. If you use the search function you may be able to locate it -- although I sometimes have found the search function not to be entirely user friendly.

[Manfred M]

To quote Joel Silver, founder of the Imaging Science Foundation the most important things to look for in a computer screen are (in order):

1. Dynamic range (1000:1; 10-stops is pretty typical with higher end screens);

2. Colour saturation (a nice way of saying that an Adobe RGB compliant screen is better than an sRGB compliant one);

3. Colour fiderlity (this is because you have to profile and calibrate it with an appropriate hardware tool); and

4. Resolution (4K versus something lower like 2K or 2.5K).

[Donald]

Any ideas and suggestions welcome!

Knowing the budget available is necessary for any recommendations to be made.

[xpatUSA]

It is about time I got into the 21st century. Aiming to lash out and buy a PC monitor 4K, IPS. They seem to frequently come in 27″ size, though some are bigger.

I use a second monitor to have my photo-editing program on, keeping the larger monitor for the image. The screen resolution and aspect ratio for all seem to be the same - ie, 3840 X 2160 pixels and ratio 16:9.

The one which has caught my eye so far is the LG 27UK650-W.

I see that apart for IPS monitors there are also VA, which I had not heard of today, so must start googling.

Any ideas and suggestions welcome!

How's your eyesight, Jim? If it's anything like mine, you'd be wasting your money!

In other words, my current 24" monitor (1920x1200px) with 0.265mm pixel pitch - viewed from just under half a meter away (dictated by my computer desk), is at the limits of my detail eyesight. That is to say, I can just barely see the "dots", if at all. If I bought a "4K", it's dots would be well beyond my visual acuity!

[DanK]

Jim,

My response is related to Manfred's. Why are you buying it? What do you want most?

First, I had never heard of VA monitors before. All of the photo editing monitors I have seen have been IPS. I found this on the web, which might be helpful.

For my editing, my highest priority has always been color accuracy. If you are content to stay within the sRGB color space--essentially, if you are only displaying on the web and rarely printing--you can get reasonably high quality IPS sRGB monitors at quite reasonable prices. I used a Dell for several years and found it to be satisfactory, and it worked fine with my calibration tool. I'm sure the model numbers have all changed in the intervening time, so I didn't dig it out of the attic to see which model it was. In any event, it was only 24 inches.

People who print a lot often want wide-gamut monitors because good printers can go out of the sRGB gamut. These also tend to be high-contrast, at least 1000:1. These are quite pricey. The least expensive 27 inch BenQ, which I think is what Manfred uses, currently runs about $600 US. From all that I read, these are very good if you get a good copy, but quite a few people have complained of bad copies. The least expensive NEC or Eizo 27 inch monitors run about twice that. None of the monitors at the low end of these lines are 4K. I have a NEC 27", and its native resolution is 256 x 1440. It's pixel pitch is 0.23 mm.

Personally, for what I do, a smaller pixel pitch wouldn't be particularly useful and wouldn't rank as high as color accuracy. When I need to see detail for editing, I just zoom in. However, for your uses, these may not be the priorities.

Dan

[Jim A]

Many thanks, folks, for your suggestions and comments. Don't worry responding further. In the day since posting I am done a lot of research and the results were great and clear. It was at a special offer for NZ$649 for the weekend (here in NZ) and I have already bought it. I decided that I would keep with IPS. I asked the young man at PB Tech to check for me whether my current graphics card could handle it (plus the side monitor I am keeping) – he checked it out and assured me that it could.
Manfred, it meets all your list except for Adobe RGB. Ted, a couple of years ago I had my cataracts fixed so I now have new lenses in both my eyes – just marvellous! What I read about NA screens was mixed and they may be better now than a year or two ago, but decided against a gamble.
It is my advance birthday present for I turn 75 next month. My wife offered to get me a new lens of my choice, however I eventually decided on a new monitor – I use two for editing.
Here are the specs of my new LG 27UK650-W

Screen Size
27"
Panel Type
IPS
Color Gamut (CIE1931)
sRGB 99% (Typ)
Color Depth(Number of Colors)
10bit(8bit + A-FRC)
Pixel Pitch(mm)
0.1554x0.1554
Response Time (GTG)
5ms (Faster)
Refresh Rate
60Hz
Aspect Ratio
16:9
Resolution
3840x2160
Brightness
Typical 350nits,Min 280nits
Contrast Ratio
1000:1(Typ)
Viewing Angle
178/178 (CR=10) (Typ)
Surface Treatment
Anti-Glare 3H
Input/Output