may i ask you what do you think about nec e243wmi?

Hi

i would like to buy a nec monitor
i don't know the different between nec ea and nec e (in this case 243wmi)

i read that the nec monitor have a great color accurancy

on bh i see asus and dell are the most sold and with great review

about asus i got one , great monitor for the price but after 2 years ) it starts to have problems in the ips , like a shape of micro dust , gray

about dell are great monitor i tried several on the store , i found some with yellow tint and other with an high dead pixel ammount

just to ask ,some feedback , is enough good this monitor to be calibrated?
to be used like second monitor , or in same case like first monitor

thanks

The specs on this monitor look plenty good for a regular amateur photographer. It would be inadequate for someone in graphics design or a photographer such as a high end wedding photographer. Just saying if you have over 10,000 euros invested in the rest of your camera system, a monitor with a higher resolution would be called for. If you use non L lenses on a advanced consumer camera, this monitor may be good enough.

Edit: Did ask for more information on your camera system. I had looked for it the new way (profile) and missed the list in your signature. Now having seen your signature, I have to say this monitor is not up to the standards of all the rest of your system. Unless this is only for use as a second monitor, I sure would be looking for a better monitor. At least one with higher resolution if not anything else.

Nogo wrote in post #17551534
The specs on this monitor look plenty good for a regular amateur photographer. It would be inadequate for someone in graphics design or a photographer such as a high end wedding photographer. Just saying if you have over 10,000 euros invested in the rest of your camera system, a monitor with a higher resolution would be called for. If you use non L lenses on a advanced consumer camera, this monitor may be good enough.

Edit: Did ask for more information on your camera system. I had looked for it the new way (profile) and missed the list in your signature. Now having seen your signature, I have to say this monitor is not up to the standards of all the rest of your system. Unless this is only for use as a second monitor, I sure would be looking for a better monitor. At least one with higher resolution if not anything else.

hi
thanks
it's because it does only support rgb and not adobe rgb gamma? i don't even know if this monitor is 8 or 16 bit
what can you advise me?

mantra wrote in post #17551567
hi
thanks
it's because it does only support rgb and not adobe rgb gamma? i don't even know if this monitor is 8 or 16 bit
what can you advise me?

The cost of this monitor being so low is mainly due to it not being a wide gamut monitor, that is true. It does support 16.7 million colors so I believe it supports more than 8 bits but might not support 16. The spec sheet does not have this information. If you only need sRGB colors the color support of this monitor is likely all you need.

But, what concerns me about this monitor is that it only supports a resolution of 1920 x 1080. Five years ago that was great, but it is only "good enough" today. I personally only have 1920 x 1080 but wanted more when I ordered my monitor. The only reason I did not get more was because I am using a laptop with only VGA and HDMI outputs on the computer. I had no intentions to upgrade my computer for at least 3 or 4 years so I saved a few bucks and got the maximum resolution I could use. But in Lightroom using that monitor with cameras that have resolutions with a large side in the 5000 pixels the regular view is pretty compressed and when you go to 1:1 it is really zoomed in. With a higher resolution monitor, the 1:1 view would not be as zoomed in and when viewing the whole image you would also have more detail.

The cost of the higher resolution monitors (not wide gamut) is not that significant. I just believe by looking at the quality of the rest of your gear that you are serious enough about photography that you would regret not getting a monitor that supports at least a little higher resolution. The only reason I would settle for that resolution would be, if, you are like me and, you would have to upgrade your whole system just to use a higher resolution monitor.

IMHO as a wedding photographer any decent quality IPS monitor is fine for most people once calibrated. The only people who need absolute perfect color are people doing critical color matching. For wedding and portrait photographers as long as you're in the right ballpark of color temp to make nice looking photos (which isn't the same as accurate color) I don't think it matters.

Nogo wrote in post #17552201
The cost of this monitor being so low is mainly due to it not being a wide gamut monitor, that is true. It does support 16.7 million colors so I believe it supports more than 8 bits but might not support 16. The spec sheet does not have this information. If you only need sRGB colors the color support of this monitor is likely all you need.

But, what concerns me about this monitor is that it only supports a resolution of 1920 x 1080. Five years ago that was great, but it is only "good enough" today. I personally only have 1920 x 1080 but wanted more when I ordered my monitor. The only reason I did not get more was because I am using a laptop with only VGA and HDMI outputs on the computer. I had no intentions to upgrade my computer for at least 3 or 4 years so I saved a few bucks and got the maximum resolution I could use. But in Lightroom using that monitor with cameras that have resolutions with a large side in the 5000 pixels the regular view is pretty compressed and when you go to 1:1 it is really zoomed in. With a higher resolution monitor, the 1:1 view would not be as zoomed in and when viewing the whole image you would also have more detail.

The cost of the higher resolution monitors (not wide gamut) is not that significant. I just believe by looking at the quality of the rest of your gear that you are serious enough about photography that you would regret not getting a monitor that supports at least a little higher resolution. The only reason I would settle for that resolution would be, if, you are like me and, you would have to upgrade your whole system just to use a higher resolution monitor.

thanks a lot
so i will conside the higher resolution , asus maybe

tim wrote in post #17552483
IMHO as a wedding photographer any decent quality IPS monitor is fine for most people once calibrated. The only people who need absolute perfect color are people doing critical color matching. For wedding and portrait photographers as long as you're in the right ballpark of color temp to make nice looking photos (which isn't the same as accurate color) I don't think it matters.

Tim do you think the nec 243wmi is decent ips quality monitor ?
thanks

I couldn't say, I have no special knowledge in this area. NEC are a good brand and the specs look good so it's probably not rubbish. I doubt it will help your photography more than a good quality Dell.

mantra wrote in post #17552996
Tim do you think the nec 243wmi is decent ips quality monitor ?
thanks

It's probably a very decent IPS monitor. As Tim said, NEC is an excellent brand and although this particular monitor is not one of their high end monitors, that doesn't mean it's a bad IPS monitor. But then, very few are these days. The NEC e243wmi has a AH-IPS screen (from LG), which is excellent. And it has a very low power consumption, which is great.

With monitors an important question used to be: is it a true 8-bit panel or is it 6-bit panel with advanced frame rate control (A-FRC) to get the 16.7 million colours? A few years ago some manufacturers produced inexpensive IPS monitors with true 8-bits panels, but they have become very rare, if there are any at all today. So most inexpensive IPS monitors are 6-bits + A-FRC now. Dell and Asus use the same trick for their low end IPS monitors. It's the price you pay for a cheaper monitor. However, I just read somewhere that the advanced frame rate control technique has improved considerably the last couple of years and that you would probably not see the difference with a true 8-bit panel. In short, this is no reason, in my opinion, to discard the NEC 243wmi. Besides, if you do, you will also have to forget about the cheaper Dells and Asus' and will have to buy a high end monitor.

I myself have a NEC from the PA line that was on sale (I had a great deal). However, I very deliberately chose a standard gamut monitor and not an wide gamut monitor. Like Tim said, you should only get one of those if you are doing seriously critical colour work. Otherwise they're more trouble than anything else in my opinion. As to resolution, a 24" 1920x1080 will do fine. Don't let all the high res screens hype of today blind you.

Good luck with your choice.

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #17578831
It's probably a very decent IPS monitor. As Tim said, NEC is an excellent brand and although this particular monitor is not one of their high end monitors, that doesn't mean it's a bad IPS monitor. But then, very few are these days. The NEC e243wmi has a AH-IPS screen (from LG), which is excellent. And it has a very low power consumption, which is great.

With monitors an important question used to be: is it a true 8-bit panel or is it 6-bit panel with advanced frame rate control (A-FRC) to get the 16.7 million colours? A few years ago some manufacturers produced inexpensive IPS monitors with true 8-bits panels, but they have become very rare, if there are any at all today. So most inexpensive IPS monitors are 6-bits + A-FRC now. Dell and Asus use the same trick for their low end IPS monitors. It's the price you pay for a cheaper monitor. However, I just read somewhere that the advanced frame rate control technique has improved considerably the last couple of years and that you would probably not see the difference with a true 8-bit panel. In short, this is no reason, in my opinion, to discard the NEC 243wmi. Besides, if you do, you will also have to forget about the cheaper Dells and Asus' and will have to buy a high end monitor.

I myself have a NEC from the PA line that was on sale (I had a great deal). However, I very deliberately chose a standard gamut monitor and not an wide gamut monitor. Like Tim said, you should only get one of those if you are doing seriously critical colour work. Otherwise they're more trouble than anything else in my opinion. As to resolution, a 24" 1920x1080 will do fine. Don't let all the high res screens hype of today blind you.

Good luck with your choice.

hi
do you know if this model has a true 8bit panel or 6bit panel?
i have it right now to test it , i calibrated with color munki and the colors are great and i calibrate the contrast and brighness
i own an eizo CG241w (great monitor ) but i guess it's going to be replaced ,there is an halo of dark pixels
after i calibrate the cheap nec the colors look amazing , used the eizo for years

thanks

I don't know which panel is in the NEC monitor, but in this price range I doubt it is a true 8-bit. The thing to look out for is banding. With a true 8-bit panel transitions between colours are more smooth where a 6-bit panel tends to suffer from banding. But as I said, most lower end monitors are 6-bit + FRC, and as long as you don't see any banding, I really wouldn't worry about it.