I'm getting conflicting reports on the net regarding the blacks. Some say they are still not as good as a CRT. That extra real estate should be good for photoshop, but I hate having to compromise on quality. The PVA technology (patterned vertical alignment) is supposed to be a major improvement. How do you find the image quality in general, compared to a CRT?
I must admit that I haven't seen a high-quality CRT in ages, and that it's a failing of my own. I had a medium-quality CRT, and after 5 years of service, I bought my Samsung 710T. Most of my friends and colleagues moved to LCD monitors before me.
Comparing is difficult without having a high-quality CRT right next to it, but from what I can see, I'm tentatively satisfied. The blacks are really very close to black, at least according to my eye.
The Samsung 710T was good enough (except for the lamentable brightness/contrast change depending on vieweing angle) to replace any consumer grade CRT, and similarly-priced CRTs were no longer available. The Dell 2405FPW is a very clear step above it.
I have no problem seeing myself choosing this one over a CRT, but the chief reasons would be:
- Screen real estate
- Geometric perfection
- Desk space saved
There's currently no way that I could fit a 22" CRT on my desk, and even a 20" would be pushing it.
Quality wise, I'm reminded of the Apple Cinema Display HD 30" model, except for the size. Perhaps it is the same panel as in the 23" HD? Dell's panels are made by Philips, according to my Dell representative.
The factory supplied profile works well for daily use.
Viewing angle differences in brightness/contrast are nearly invisible, as they are on the Apple 30". I don't see significant differences until I've changed the viewing angle by 30 degrees or more.
Reflections from other light sources do not appear to be disturbing after my first two evenings of use.
The contrast is good (as it should be, with a 1000:1 specification). I see fairly clear differences between dark greys and near-black while retaining differences between different highlights, which is clearly better than the previous display. But there are still differences I'd like to see, which I hope will improve with proper calibration.
As others have commented, yes, the display is bright. But that is
I can't comment on color reproduction yet, though it appears to be easier to get good reproduction out of this unit than from the 710T.
My images certainly look
better, but whether that comes from spending approximately 1500 dollars on a display or not, well, who knows ...
There are no dead or stuck pixels that I can see yet.
And of course, being able to view entire images at 45% rather than just 30% has immense value for judging quickly whether something might be a keeper or not.
If both contrast and color reproduction improve just a bit after calibration, I'll keep* this monitor.
And I'll certainly post my opinion.
For a lower price than the Dell 2405 in Australia I can get a LaCie 22" CRT with a dot pitch of 0.24mm and maximum resolution of 2048x1536, which I guess would be more accurate than all but the most expensive LCD monitors. I'm undecided .
That monitor (LaCie Electron 22blue IV, I presume) is at almost exactly the same price as the Dell over here. Dell recently slashed the price by nearly 40%, permanently, just after I'd haggled for a lower price for my monitor. Maybe you can try to do the same.
I also considered the LaCie 321, but after reading a couple of favorable reviews of the Dell, I suspected that this monitor might just be good enough while providing a really comfortable amount of screen real estate.
*Thanks to Norwegian legislation on remote purchases, I'm allowed to decide to return this monitor within 14 days of receiving it, as long as it's in fundamentally the same state and I pay for the return shipping. So I'm not using it as a whiteboard quite yet.