# Help with choosing monitor



## Cosaco (Jul 8, 2012)

Hi, I'm interested in buying a new monitor but I don't know much about computers; I've been recommended to buy a LED monitor and that's my question: which one should I buy? I wanna watch movies as well as work in Photoshop and other editing software, games are not that important since I don't play that often.

Thanks in advance


----------



## Ikrit (Jul 8, 2012)

you should go with a HD monitor, witch will be around 23" or more
a LED  (witch is just a LCD that uses LEDs for backlight) will last longer then  a traditional LCD, and will consume less power. i don't know much about  picture quality wise, but i think LEDs tend to have more "bloom" and  poorer black levels then the traditional LCD, but don't hold me on that.


----------



## xcliber (Jul 8, 2012)

It's actually the other way around I believe. LED monitors have overall better color, contrast, and brightness than regular LCDs. I was pretty sure that LED backlighting was making older LCDs obsolete by comparison.

As Ikrit said though, you can get a 23 inch 1080p display for relatively cheap nowadays. And by cheap, I mean under $200.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...eactivatedMark=False&Order=PRICE&PageSize=100


----------



## greg-the-fox (Jul 8, 2012)

Cosaco said:


> I wanna watch movies as well as work in Photoshop and other editing software, games are not that important since I don't play that often.



Then an IPS monitor would be perfect for you if you don't mind spending a little more. They have a much higher viewing angle and a wider color gamut (wider range of colors), higher contrast, color accuracy, and are geared for graphic designers and professionals. They do also make cheap consumer models that are closer to a regular panel but still with much better image quality. These usually have some issues because of the price, especially with the backlight, but I think I've found an exception that seems to be too good to be true. I just bought this, I'll have it in a few days.

Read a review
There's a great deal right now
Also on Amazon, you don't get free shipping but you don't have to put up with the nightmare of Dell's website (and when the deal goes away the price on Amazon will be less)


----------



## Runefox (Jul 9, 2012)

There is a caveat to LED backlighting - It's not as "even" as traditional CCFL backlights that are found in "older" LCD's. They do offer a significant energy savings and the potential for a much greater dynamic contrast, depending on the layout of the LED's, but LED's tend to wear down at different intervals from each other, which can lead to dark/bright patches on the screen, while a CCFL backlight degrades evenly over time.

As far as colour depth goes, it doesn't really change between LED and CCFL, unless you're using a monitor with coloured LED's (rare). Many professional monitors use CCFL backlights; Most of Dell's UltraSharp series, for example, are CCFL-backlit. One of the drawbacks to this is backlight bleed, which is one of the only real complaints about those monitors for movie-watching and so on.


----------



## greg-the-fox (Jul 11, 2012)

Runefox said:


> There is a caveat to LED backlighting - It's not as "even" as traditional CCFL backlights that are found in "older" LCD's.



I was under the impression that the exact opposite was true. A florescent backlight relies on a diffusing pannel to spread out the light, otherwise it would be in 'bands', where the lights are located. If the diffusing pannel isn't great, as in a cheap monitor, you can get 'hot spots' in front of the lights. LED is an evenly lit surface produced by a grid of LEDs with a constant brightness. Am I wrong?


----------



## kayfox (Jul 11, 2012)

Both CCFL and LED backlights use various types of diffusers.


----------



## Runefox (Jul 11, 2012)

greg-the-fox said:


> I was under the impression that the exact opposite was true. A florescent backlight relies on a diffusing pannel to spread out the light, otherwise it would be in 'bands', where the lights are located. If the diffusing pannel isn't great, as in a cheap monitor, you can get 'hot spots' in front of the lights. LED is an evenly lit surface produced by a grid of LEDs with a constant brightness. Am I wrong?


There's a couple different types of LED backlighting. One is what you're talking about - A full grid of LED's providing the backlight for the picture. The other is edge-lit. Edge-lit LED backlights are exactly like the CCFL backlights in concept.

The thing is, the CCFL backlight is usually lit by a single CCFL tube, and as that decays in brightness over time, the whole picture is affected uniformly. LED's decay at inconsistent rates, and over time will exhibit inconsistent brightness levels across the picture.

Ideally, we wouldn't need backlights, such as with plasma, OLED and FED/SED displays. It's unfortunate that the latter will never see production, but OLED is evolving at a quicker pace. Plasma has its own disadvantages, too.


----------



## Cosaco (Jul 13, 2012)

greg-the-fox said:


> Then an IPS monitor would be perfect for you if you don't mind spending a little more. They have a much higher viewing angle and a wider color gamut (wider range of colors), higher contrast, color accuracy, and are geared for graphic designers and professionals. They do also make cheap consumer models that are closer to a regular panel but still with much better image quality. These usually have some issues because of the price, especially with the backlight, but I think I've found an exception that seems to be too good to be true. I just bought this, I'll have it in a few days.


---

Seems perfect, has it arrived yet?


----------



## Cosaco (Jul 13, 2012)

Runefox said:


> There's a couple different types of LED backlighting. One is what you're talking about - A full grid of LED's providing the backlight for the picture. The other is edge-lit. Edge-lit LED backlights are exactly like the CCFL backlights in concept.
> 
> The thing is, the CCFL backlight is usually lit by a single CCFL tube, and as that decays in brightness over time, the whole picture is affected uniformly. LED's decay at inconsistent rates, and over time will exhibit inconsistent brightness levels across the picture.
> 
> Ideally, we wouldn't need backlights, such as with plasma, OLED and FED/SED displays. It's unfortunate that the latter will never see production, but OLED is evolving at a quicker pace. Plasma has its own disadvantages, too.



Ok, so, should I buy the U2312HM?


----------



## Ricky (Jul 13, 2012)

I'm not a hardware person but I tend to go with proven technologies that have been around a while because they are cheap and they work well.

I don't know about LED televisions but this LCD one I've had has lasted me many years...

Makes a good computer screen too (no image retention).

I've not seen anything newer that blew me away to the point I'd want something else.


----------



## greg-the-fox (Jul 13, 2012)

Cosaco said:


> ---
> 
> Seems perfect, has it arrived yet?



Yes, it came. This thing looks dead sexy. At first I thought it would be damaged because UPS were idiots and dented up the box pretty bad near the top handle. But the styrofoam packing was really good and completely enclosed it so it was fine. This thing is _really_ sturdy. The stand is really really heavy and fantastic, and just snapped on, no screws. Also the box looked small but it was deceptive, this thing is plenty large at 23". I wouldn't want anything larger, but not having a 16x10 screen is a bit disappointing. Oh well. 16x9 saves me from some headaches that 16x10 provides anyway. But if you want 16x10 you might want to look for something else.

This thing is crazy bright, the default is 75% brightness, I ended up lowering that to 50%, and then again to 25% because it was literally giving me a headache. I'd put it back up to 50% or so when gaming or watching movies but 25% is comfortable for normal use. At 100% it will literally light up the whole room. There is some backlight bleed in the lower right corner on mine and it gets bad if you look at it from a wide angle, but if you're just sitting straight in front of it you probably won't notice too much. Also black isn't pure black but it's good enough. The screen isn't _completely_ uniform in terms of color and brightness, but it's just about completely un-noticeable. The contrast is fantastic, and it looks so much sharper and richer than any displays I've ever seen, apart from maybe Apple's IPS displays, but those cost 4 times as much, lol. 9/10, would highly recommend.


----------



## Cosaco (Jul 17, 2012)

I just ordered today from Amazon and I'm considering buying a P2312H too for my nephew.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jul 17, 2012)

There is also this monitor which I've been happy with if you're looking for an under 200 dollar price range and can't spend the little extra for the UltraSharp.

http://amzn.com/B0062K9LXE

Actually I have 2 of them. 

The Ultrasharp is a bit misleading. It says it has a "Wide Gamut" but it doesn't cover all of the sRGB color space. Mine doesn't either, but I just find that more on the lines of false advertising. Wide Gamut meant to me it will cover more than the sRGB color space but may not cover all of Adobe1998 color space. 

That being said, Dell still makes rather good monitors though I had to calibrate some because they tend to favor the red side a bit much.


----------



## Cosaco (Jul 26, 2012)

Arshes Nei said:


> There is also this monitor which I've been happy with if you're looking for an under 200 dollar price range and can't spend the little extra for the UltraSharp.
> 
> http://amzn.com/B0062K9LXE
> 
> ...



Yeah, I hate when they use the specs just to confuse you.


----------



## Runefox (Jul 26, 2012)

Cosaco said:


> Yeah, I hate when they use the specs just to confuse you.


That's something that's true of almost all wide-gamut monitors, though. They're optimized to be able to handle a workload suitable for print or display. Deep Color / xvYCC for example are different color spaces altogether than sRGB. That being said, Dell claims "100% sRGB", which you'd take to mean the monitor covers the whole sRGB spectrum.


----------



## Cosaco (Jul 31, 2012)

Runefox said:


> That's something that's true of almost all wide-gamut monitors, though. They're optimized to be able to handle a workload suitable for print or display. Deep Color / xvYCC for example are different color spaces altogether than sRGB. That being said, Dell claims "100% sRGB", which you'd take to mean the monitor covers the whole sRGB spectrum.



Indeed, I hope they're telling the truth.


----------

