Monitor Suggestions/Advice wanted

I am looking to replace my monitor and am looking for a 24 inch IPS screen with 16:10 aspect ratio, (1920 x 1200). It will be used mostly for photo editing (Lightroom and Photoshop), but also used for watching videos, using MS Office and browsing the web.

I am being drawn towards 3 possibilities. The first is the Asus PA248Q, which is marketed on the basis of its "professional grade colour fidelity" and being pre-calibrated. The second is a Dell U2412, which seems to be the best of the cheaper alternatives. The third is the Eizo CS2420, which appears to be a very serious step up in terms of quality and comes with a 5 year warranty - but costs £200 more than the Asus and is more than double the price of the Dell.

I am someone who is generally prepared to pay more for better quality (within reason) am therefore drawn towards the Eizo brand. However, I don't need its wider colourspace and wouldn't benefit from it as I am only an enthusiast who posts my pictures online and prints few photos. I have no experience using wide gamut monitors and have read about the oversaturation issues when using them for web browsing and watching videos etc. I am also seriously concerned that I could get in to a knot setting up the monitor for SRGB only and/or switching between the different the Adobe and SRGB colour spaces when processing photos and doing different tasks etc.

If I was to buy the Eizo, presumably I could avoid the oversaturation problems and keep things easy for myself by running it in SRGB mode all of the time? How easy would this be to set up? I appreciate that this would obviously forego the benefits (if any) of having a wide gamut monitor and makes me wonder what I would gain by spending more for the Eizo. Is there any difference in performance, quality or colour accuracy between an SRGB monitor, and a wider gamut monitor being run in its SRGB emulation/mode? Would a SRGB monitor like the Asus/Dell display photos better (and more accurately) than the Eizo being run in SRGB emulation/mode, would there be no difference, or would the Eizo's 10 bit technology (and presumably superior panel and build quality?) enable it to "do SRGB" better?

Sorry if these are stupid questions, but any thoughts/recommendatio​ns would be welcome.

I honestly don't know the answer to your last question, but if it were me, and I was going to run in SRGB all the time, I'd save a lot and get the DELL.

The Eizo's are best and geared to people that are seriously into wide gamut high bit depth etc. It sound a lot like buying the Ferrari to run on a 55MPH limited course to me.

RE: over-saturation issue with higher gamut monitors: that's becoming less of an issue with more standards that support ICC profiles. I also wouldn't trust "pre-calibrated". I say along with getting a monitor, also invest in a calibration system. I've got a X-rite ColorMonki (retails for $160 in the States). It's good because it will check what colors your monitor is able to produce, as well as figure a good contrast ratio for the specific ambient light environment you're in (so you can leave it plugged in and it will continue to check ambient light levels). It then creates an ICC profile that the OS will default to. Windows image viewer didn't use to support ICC, but Windows 10 does. You can also set the calibrated ICC to your working space in Photoshop. Many web browsers support ICC profiles, but if you want to be extra safe and export to sRGB, you can preview the difference under view/proof setup (then enable proof colors). I'd say get the monitor you can afford to get along with a calibrator.

I just upgraded to ViewSonic VP2770 and couldn't be happier with it. But I don't know enough about monitors; my son who is an IT guy selected it for me based on my needs, mainly photography running PS etc.

I think if you buy the Eizo, you'll be spending a lot of money you don't need to spend to accomplish the goals you listed.

On the other hand, it will provide superior working images in post processing, if you should later want to render those images on paper.

Note that the first two monitors don't provide any specs regarding color rendition, while the Eizo provides a percentage of rendition capabilities. As does this monitor, which is midway between the the first two and the Eizo in price. I've been using Dell Ultrasharps for years, and have never had an issue.

If I were you, I'd keep a close watch on Craigslist and eBay. There are a lot of monitors out there that were bought by people who thought they wanted to do post processing, but just never got around to doing it. E.g., I just bought an NEC Multisync 30 inch LCD3090WQXI with built in XRite calibration. It sells for about 1100 bucks, but I got it new in an open box for $150. It was a five hour round trip by car, but worth it.

You might want to take a look at this one as well, you get a lot of the Eizo peformance for significantly less

NEC MultiSync PA272W

I just had to buy a new monitor and opted for an LG 34" ultra wide IPS monitor. Covers all I need it to do, gaming/photography/vid​eo.

I have a Dell U2415, which is very similar to the U2412 but costs a few dollars more. I use it for commercial retouching and have been completely satisfied with it. I don't think you would go wrong with the 2412. Here's a comparison review:

http://www.techwarn.co​m/u2412m-vs-dell-u2415/

When I was looking for a monitor about 2 or 3 years ago I was deciding between the same two monitors, the Dell and the Asus, and I went with the Dell and love it. Looks great and haven't had any problems whatsoever with it. I calibrate it with a Spider Pro 4 and go from there. I do notice though sometimes I can see the calibration "kick in" after turning the computer and monitor on and it seems to give the monitor a little yellow cast (at least to my eyes). However I wouldn't put that on the monitor nor the calibration but more on my eyes. That's probably how it's supposed to look and I get used to it quickly and stuff never comes out with a yellowish cast or anything when I view them on multiple devices. Except for my Zenfolio site which seems to saturate the reds a bit much sometimes but again that's probably the site itself and not the monitor.

I didn't do any research into the Eizo model but if you're decision is down to being between the Asus and the Dell I wouldn't hesitate going with the Dell. One thing you may want to keep in mind however is that the Dell doesn't have an HDMI port whereas the Asus does but even if you want to go that route you could always buy a converter.

Kevin

I recently gave my U2412M to a friend and bought a 34" LG Ultrawide (34UM88). Very happy with this monitor for general productivity, gaming, and especially photo editing. I do a lot of landscapes so the extra width is very nice.

I too have just gone large (BenQ BL3201PT) after using the Dell 2412 for a few years. Great monitor but with camera resolutions rising 1920x1080 just wasn't working for me anymore. Colours were spot on and never shifted after calibration. The wide gamut made jpgs look wrong in windows photo viewer but irfanview etc display them properly.