Dell G2410 or U2410? Help me decide.

Basically I have a G2410 now. I want a second 24". The only other choice is an HP that is sold out eveywhere. I can get the G2410 for around $200. That's a steal.

I know the U2410 is an IPS monitor and better. It will run $600. I am a hobbyist who considers himself an average post processor. I use Elements, Lightroom, and several plug-in filters.

The real question is whether or not I will get $400 more in detail/quality/ color accuracy? Or, for the average guy, is the LED G2410 adequate? It gets amazing reviews as one of the best TN monitors for photo editing. Apparently, the LED backlight elmininates shifts and more accurately reproduces blacks.

I find the prints I order from Adorama Pix (4x6 thru 11x13) to be pretty close to what I expect. I calibrate with a Spyder 2 if that matters.

Thanks in advance!

On a $600 budget, take a good look at the NEC P221W-BK-SV with Spectraview II.

http://www.necdisplay.​com …20-4bbe-8e6a-ca1c522e6cbf

http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …21W_BK_22_Wides​creen.html

If I am going to drop $600 I would want the 1920x1200 desktop space.

Some things to consider:

Do you want a monitor designed for multi-media, video games, etc. or a monitor designed for graphics and photo editing?

Do you want a monitor that has an integrated calibration system or one that is a bear to calibrate for photo editing use?

Wide gamut or normal (sRGB) gamut? Spyder2 does not handle wide gamut displays well so think about adding the cost of a new calibration device to your budget.

I use this machine for 75% photo editing and 25% logging into work and doing emails/word processing type stuff. I do not play games or watch videos ever.

Addicted2EOS wrote in post #9815904
I use this machine for 75% photo editing and 25% logging into work and doing emails/word processing type stuff. I do not play games or watch videos ever.

Then that eliminates the G2410.

From Dell's website regarding the G2410:

"With an outstanding resolution of up to 1920x1080 pixels and 1000:1 contrast ratio this monitor boasts vivid color detail, excellent color accuracy and uniformity. Additionally 250 cd/m² brightness provides a well lit picture all across the screen and its response time of 5 ms helps to deliver fast action motion. Plus it comes fully equipped with both analog VGA and DVI-D connectors which give you the connectivity option for a complete multimedia experience."

Regarding the U2410:

"Compatibility with industry color spaces such as Adobe RGB (96% coverage) and sRGB (100% coverage) enables the U2410 Monitor to meet the needs of professional users involved in color-centric work"

"A higher color gamut of 1.07 billion colors allows for an astonishing range of colors to be displayed. The high data accuracy of 12-bit internal processing helps to distinguish very low grayscale tones, allowing for a greater level of detail in dark areas."

I guess I am having a hard time believing that I will notice such a difference to justify the $400 (triple the price). Are you saying that the differences will be clear or subtle ?

PS: Thanks for all the help!

Addicted2EOS wrote in post #9815945
...Are you saying that the differences will be clear or subtle ?

Probably more like "garish" vs "accurate".

BTW... The U2410 often goes on sale for less than $500, free shipping.

http://slickdeals.net …ch_archive=0&se​arch=u2410

Webster defines GARISH as tastelessly ornate.

I assume you meant that the colors will be more vibrant?

Addicted2EOS wrote in post #9816036
Webster defines GARISH as tastelessly ornate.
I assume you meant that the colors will be more vibrant?

Yep.

Ok. Now, I assume you recommend the Spyder 3 to go with this monitor (to replace my Spyder 2)

Addicted2EOS wrote in post #9816080
Ok. Now, I assume you recommend the Spyder 3 to go with this monitor (to replace my Spyder 2)

If your Spyder2 is the Spyder2 Pro... keep it! Otherwise, consider the Spyder3 Elite or X-Rite Eyeone Display 2.

Keep in perspective that these acquisitions are a fraction of the price of a good lens, camera body, or Photoshop.

Almost positive it's a Pro. I'll check tonight.

Your price point issue is well taken. Thanks!

I can't but help weigh in rather late in this thread.

Please explain why your second monitor needs to be 24"? You already have a 24" monitor that does your 1920x1080. This gives you lots of screen real estate for many of your office apps, and such. In adding a second screen for photo editing, why do you need a large pixle count?

I have two monitors, but I use Photoshop. I have never used lightroom or elements so I don't know how they work. But in Photoshop, have my picture in the colour correct screen and all my toolbars and pallets on the main screen. The Dell 2209WA works wonders like this.

I have taken some of my more favorite editing tools and made a custom toolbar that is 1 block wide and keep that on my dell. I am working on getting full advantage for the Wacom tablet with it's menus now.

Why do you need those extra pixles on a big monitor? Colour correctness is more important than 18% more size. Most of the edits you do are not going to be at 1:1 anyways so you are scaling no matter what you do. And also most probably when you print you are dis guarding pixles too.

Just curious if I am missing something here?

Matt.

mjmackinnon wrote in post #9818920
...Please explain why your second monitor needs to be 24"? ...

Speaking for myself, not the OP... Have you never just WANTED something, for no other reason? If I could, I'd have an array of three 30 inch Eizos in front of me.