Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: 4k Monitors, is it necessary?

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,173
    Post Thanks / Like

    4k Monitors, is it necessary?

    Sorry I posted this here but I wanted to hear the opinions of MFDB users.

    The 4K monitors are getting cheaper (Dell, Asus, etc.) and I've been considering to upgrade. My question is: is it really necessary?

    I do photo editing 90% of the time. and 80% of the image files are taken using Aptus 12 80mp back. I have limited use for 4k Video capabilities (don't have a 4k camera yet, might get one in the future, but not a priority).

    I assume the 4K monitors will allow me to have more real estate in viewing the images. Will the software (tool bars, menus, etc.) get smaller as the pixels count increase? My fear is that I won't be able to read them clearly.

    Lastly, will I need new graphic cards to drive the 4k monitors? I currently use Dual nVidia GTX580 in SLI.

    Thank you

    MM

  2. #2
    Senior Member RVB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    807
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 4k Monitors, is it necessary?

    I don't think 4K is necessary but it is really nice to use,I used one briefly last week on a nMP,it was an Asus 31",it was a great viewing experience,Its amazing how much real estate you have on this monitor.

    The real problem with current 4K monitors is the lack of true colour calibration and low Adobe RGB gamut,the Asus is only 60% Adobe RGB,so If I wanted to go 4k for photography I would prefer to wait for an Eizo or NEC.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Holland
    Posts
    158
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 4k Monitors, is it necessary?

    According to the Geforce website your graphics card has a maximum resolution of 2560x1600, so no, it can't display 4k.

    I sat behind the Dell 4k offerings for a while (the UP2414Q and 3214Q?) they definetely looked impressive. My everyday screen is an EizoCG243W, but the jump in resolution is very apparent. Felt a bit like when Youtube suddenly pops into HD after a few seconds of playing a video. The gamut is really good too (I think around 100% Adobe RGB) and from what I read on the web they are quite easy to calibrate too. If I could afford it, I would definetely spring for one of those. But the smart money is probably going to wait for another 6 months to a year to get a bit more choice.

  4. #4
    Senior Member RVB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    807
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 4k Monitors, is it necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by JeRuFo View Post
    According to the Geforce website your graphics card has a maximum resolution of 2560x1600, so no, it can't display 4k.

    I sat behind the Dell 4k offerings for a while (the UP2414Q and 3214Q?) they definetely looked impressive. My everyday screen is an EizoCG243W, but the jump in resolution is very apparent. Felt a bit like when Youtube suddenly pops into HD after a few seconds of playing a video. The gamut is really good too (I think around 100% Adobe RGB) and from what I read on the web they are quite easy to calibrate too. If I could afford it, I would definetely spring for one of those. But the smart money is probably going to wait for another 6 months to a year to get a bit more choice.
    I don't think I would rate the Dell for colour accuracy.. here is a quote from Anandtech "Changing the color gamut to AdobeRGB instead of sRGB produces similar pre-calibration results. The grayscale is pushing red and this leads to dE2000 errors that are visible. A larger issue is the color gamut, as it is over-saturated at the points below 100% and has a serious tint shift in magenta. The color errors are very visible and it happens at all saturations for almost all colors."

    Rob

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Holland
    Posts
    158
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 4k Monitors, is it necessary?

    Ah, yes, I see now that I read an overly enthusiastic owners review. It seems it's not really up to the job fully yet. But I do still think they are impressively close to making a high quality monitor. I couldn't really judge color accuracy in the store. It was a controlled environment in a grey studio, but it was just a demo and I couldn't play with calibration. Colors didn't seem overly flasy like many lower end monitors and pretty realistic. But I didn't look too seriously, because I couldn't afford a new monitor anyway. We were just having a discussion about screen resolutions.
    The extra resolution is definetely nice, but accuracy is still far higher on my list, since I print on a regular basis. Still time for me to save up then.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  6. #6
    Senior Member RVB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    807
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 4k Monitors, is it necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by JeRuFo View Post
    Ah, yes, I see now that I read an overly enthusiastic owners review. It seems it's not really up to the job fully yet. But I do still think they are impressively close to making a high quality monitor. I couldn't really judge color accuracy in the store. It was a controlled environment in a grey studio, but it was just a demo and I couldn't play with calibration. Colors didn't seem overly flasy like many lower end monitors and pretty realistic. But I didn't look too seriously, because I couldn't afford a new monitor anyway. We were just having a discussion about screen resolutions.
    The extra resolution is definetely nice, but accuracy is still far higher on my list, since I print on a regular basis. Still time for me to save up then.
    Start saving for one of these ... Eizo Brings to Light New Small Color Edge 4K Monitors | explora

    I'm also using the Eizo CG243W at the moment and the colour is very good,I think that when you need accuracy only NEC and Eizo are up to the job,both use LUT's.. I think the 30" is minimum for this resolution ,otherwise the pixels are too small..

    Rob

  7. #7
    Senior Member bradhusick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA USA
    Posts
    2,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    53

    Re: 4k Monitors, is it necessary?

    I have a Dell 24" 4K monitor and I like seeing photos on it. It is an IPS display, unlike Dell's 28" 4K display (stay away from that one), and the colors are damn accurate. I use it next to an NEC PA271W calibrated display.
    Brad Husick

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,173
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 4k Monitors, is it necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by bradhusick View Post
    I have a Dell 24" 4K monitor and I like seeing photos on it. It is an IPS display, unlike Dell's 28" 4K display (stay away from that one), and the colors are damn accurate. I use it next to an NEC PA271W calibrated display.
    I read the 24'' is much better than the 28'' (and twice as expenseive) because the 28'' lacks 60hz and true color

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Vienna, Austria
    Posts
    145
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 4k Monitors, is it necessary?

    Slightly tongue-in-cheek: (this is based on my experience using a Macbook Retina 15", which is pretty close to a 4K desktop monitor pixel-density-wise) you won't believe how much better/sharper the corners of once deemed so-so lenses look in 100% view compared to a regular 70 to 100 dpi monitor.

  10. #10
    Member Rollei6008i's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    HK
    Posts
    106
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 4k Monitors, is it necessary?

    For my opinion, not only MFDB users need 4K monitor , even DSLR need them.
    My 5D2 also has more pixels than a 4K monitor , so if I can see a good 4K mon with reasonable price, I had to need it.
    Reason is simple : You need a good monitor to enjoy your masterpiece . At film age, you also want a better projector for your Kodachrome.
    Unluckily, the display seems cannot catch up the development of camera sensors.
    Most unluckily , I still using Dell U2410 due to lack of money.

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 4k Monitors, is it necessary?

    High resolution is a nice to have, but as far as I can see it makes no difference whatsoever in terms of editing images for prints. You can zoom in to check detail. For pixel peeping with new "retina" screens people will zoom to 200% (otherwise pixels are too small to peep unless you have super vision), not 100% as for the old screens, so the zoomed in box will cover the same area as before.

    What's really really important is wide viewing angle (so you don't get color and contrast shifts when moving your head a little), and a sane gamma curve (contrast). A fairly low contrast screen like many IPS panels are I actually see as an advantage as it better mimics the look of a print. High contrast screens "look better" at first view, but crush blacks and whites. Calibration takes care of not only fixing colors, but also black crushing etc, but the less calibration needs to do to adjust the screen the better it is, to strong calibration need may lead to banding issues.

    At some point 4K monitors will have these properties and be affordable, but I will not buy one until then.

    I do agree though in terms of displaying work on screen instead of through a print, it's a bit painful that you can't show all the fantastic resolution. But we're getting there

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Irvine, CA
    Posts
    230
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    24

    Re: 4k Monitors, is it necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by gebseng View Post
    Slightly tongue-in-cheek: (this is based on my experience using a Macbook Retina 15", which is pretty close to a 4K desktop monitor pixel-density-wise) you won't believe how much better/sharper the corners of once deemed so-so lenses look in 100% view compared to a regular 70 to 100 dpi monitor.
    Hi-

    I just bought a Toshiba 15.6" 4K Laptop. The display resolution is about 282ppi. What I've noticed is that even the HR lenses like the 40mm HR and 100mm HR remain very sharp at f16 and f22 when examined at 100%. The apo-Sironar Digital lenses also showed excellent sharpness at f16 and f22. That was not the apparent case when viewed on a 24" 2K calibrated monitor. This will change my use of the smaller apertures when I use large shifts and most shots using tilts.

    jim

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •