Which is the best 4K monitor for mainly photo editing, plus a little 1080p video editing?

My choices are :-

1. HP Z24s 23.8" Black 4K Ultra HD Matt £336
60.452 cm (23.8 ") IPS/LED, 4K/UHD 3840 x 2160, 300 cd/m², 14ms, MHL 2.0/HDMI 1.4, HDMI 1.4, DisplayPort 1.2, Mini-DisplayPort, 4xUSB 3.0, audio, 60W, 6.46kg
-Response time14 ms

Or

2. Dell 24 Ultra HD 4k Monitor – P2415Q £334
23,8” (60,47 cm) diagonal visningsstørrelse
Ultra HD 3840 x 2160 resolution @ 60Hz
178° / 178° ultra-wide viewing angle
Stunning color accuracy with 99% sRGB coverage at deltaE < 3
1.07 billion colors
Fast mode @ 6ms; normal mode @ 8ms response time (gray to gray)
300 cd/m² brightness
2 million:1 Mega Dynamic contrast ratio
All digital connectivity (1 x mini-DisplayPort, 1 x DisplayPort (in), 1 x DisplayPort (out), 1 x HDMI (MHL), 4 x USB 3.0)
Tilt, swivel, height adjustable and pivot
Premium Panel Guarantee
VESA® mount support
Dell 3-year Advanced Exchange Service
Dell Display Manager software
ENERGY STAR®, EPEAT® Gold, TCO Certified Displays

Or even

Dell 27 Ultra HD 4K monitor –P2715Q £444
27” (68.47 cm) diagonal viewable image size
Ultra HD 3840 x 2160 resolution @ 60Hz
Ultra-wide viewing angle at 178°/178°
Stunning color accuracy with 99% sRGB coverage at deltaE < 3
1.07 billion colors
Fast mode @ 6ms; normal mode @ 9ms response time (gray to gray)
350 cd/m² brightness
2 million:1 Mega Dynamic contrast ratio
All digital connectivity (1 x mini-DisplayPort, 1 x DisplayPort (in), 1 x DisplayPort (out), 1 x HDMI (MHL), 4 x USB 3.0)
Height-adjustable, pivot, tilt and swivel
Premium Panel Guarantee
VESA® mount support

Any advice very welcome
especially which ones have an actual Glass Screen - no one seems to know!
And which ones can be swivelled into Portrait mode easily!

Ideally I would like a 24" size, but for portrait editing maybe the 27" might be better.
I Prefer not to spend the extra money, but I am interested in your views , especially those who have practical experience of it.

Historically I have not rated Dell, and I have read a few negatives re the Dell 24" locking up on switch on
My prior experience with business laptops was HP was pretty dam bomb proof. But that was 8 years ago and if their current pre sales tech support and presales is anything to go by HP seems to have gone downhill big style.
I cant even find out if the HP has a real glass screen ?? :-0

I also do not understand this Response time lark. The HP seems the worst at 14 ms against the Dells at 9-6 or 8-6 ms - but with a fast GPU will that improve?
What I do not understand is , if it refreshes the screen at 60hz - surely it refreshed every 1/60th of a second; so what do they mean by Response of 14 ms??

Would I even notice it editing?
BTW, Currently on my slow laptop; I uterrly Hate the way a healing brush is miles behind my clicks!!

Any views welcome especially anyone who has seen or used one of these.
Any alternative suggestions under £440 welcome. Please forget the £1000 Eisos etc.
They are Totally Out of the question.

The bigger (diagonal) the better...remember that you have to SEE TEXT when you surf the web, when not editing pictures. I have a 15" laptop with 1600 x 1200 monitor, and the standard size text presented when surfing the web is problematically small. There was a discussion on the forum recently and someone found that a single 4K larger monitor was inferior to two smaller and lower res monitors in tandem, because of the readability issue.

Thanks Wilt,
I Stupidly thought it would scale automatically, and fill the screen i.e. Just be sharper and clearer.

On the topic of response times...it matters largely only to gamers. Are you a gamer?!

Hi
Never tried a Game, no desire .... Prefer the real world... Yep that Old.

Does it also effect Video, then?

Response time is the delay between pixels receiving a command and executing it, ie. the pixel is red, it is told to turn blue, the response time is the delay between the two. On a slow monitor, while gaming this could make the difference between being killed or killing the target(more important at the Pro Tournament level really), in everyday usage it is a non factor.

Submariner wrote in post #17826012
Hi
Never tried a Game, no desire .... Prefer the real world... Yep that Old.

Does it also effect Video, then?

'Video'...frame rate of motion pictures is only 24 fps, yet games might be 60 fps

One thing I notice, at least with the Dell's, the HP doesn't mention it, is the maximum screen brightness, at 300 or 350 cdm, is at least twice as bright as usually required for editing. 120 cdm or less is about usual, in order to match the brightness of prints. I believe that some screens can really struggle to produce accurate colours at the low screen brightness levels. Default settings usually have the screen turned way up near maximum brightness. All the manufacturers seem worried about is how well they can burn your eyeballs!

Alan

I picked this up a few months ago and I have zero complaints.

Dell Ultra HD 4k Monitor P2715Q 27-Inch Screen LED-Lit Monitor
http://www.amazon.com …oh_aui_detailpa​ge_o09_s00

Quality is fantastic, flips into portrait mode very easily and the adjustments are VERY nice. Also, remember that you will need a pretty good video card to support a 4k monitor. They're not usually plug and play.

njstacker22 wrote in post #17827432
I picked this up a few months ago and I have zero complaints.

Dell Ultra HD 4k Monitor P2715Q 27-Inch Screen LED-Lit Monitor
http://www.amazon.com …oh_aui_detailpa​ge_o09_s00

Quality is fantastic, flips into portrait mode very easily and the adjustments are VERY nice. Also, remember that you will need a pretty good video card to support a 4k monitor. They're not usually plug and play.

Hi Very interested, is the screen actual glass or plastic?
Thanks

Hi
Thanks
The HP is 300cd.m2

Wilt wrote in post #17825916
The bigger (diagonal) the better...remember that you have to SEE TEXT when you surf the web, when not editing pictures. I have a 15" laptop with 1600 x 1200 monitor, and the standard size text presented when surfing the web is problematically small. There was a discussion on the forum recently and someone found that a single 4K larger monitor was inferior to two smaller and lower res monitors in tandem, because of the readability issue.

Thanks good to know
Regards
Peter

FYI, I use a single 27" 3.7 Mpixel (2560x1440) IPS monitor and am quite happy for both editing of photos and general computing and web surfing without resorting to having to scale up text to make it more readable, I use it at standard 100% text sizes on Win7 O/S PC with browsers at 100% too.

you want a physically large screen first, resolution second. Consider my 13" high density laptop is no better at editing than my 17" laptop, in fact quite a bit inferior. I just recently returned a 4K monitor in favor of a 34" curved panel. While the pixel density is nice, the native resolution does put more strain in lightroom to process the standard view. The physical space of the 34" is amazing. Works just like dual monitors without the bar in the middle, which is great for editing photos. You can easily surf the web with two pages side by side snapped in. Very odd aspect ratio at first, however, very pleasurable in practice.

Wilt wrote in post #17828716
FYI, I use a single 27" 3.7 Mpixel (2560x1440) IPS monitor and am quite happy for both editing of photos and general computing and web surfing without resorting to having to scale up text to make it more readable, I use it at standard 100% text sizes on Win7 O/S PC with browsers at 100% too.

Thanks