bit-tech.net

NEC MultiSync PA241W Monitor Review

Comments 1 to 20 of 20

Reply
Xir 5th May 2010, 08:33 Quote
Bravo to another consumer friendly priced monitor review.
How about taking a look at the other end of the market?
What's the best sub 100pound monitor?, the same maybe for 150 or 200pounds.
Isn't about 80% of all sold displays sub150pounds?
julianmartin 5th May 2010, 08:33 Quote
does anyone else think monitor reviews have dropped in quality on bit-tech over the past 6 months? where is the colour accuracy testing? and how on earth has no HDMI gone by unmentioned? why hasn't this been compared to the likely competitor from Dell, the U2410 as opposed to the U2710?!
Xir 5th May 2010, 08:35 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by julianmartin
how on earth has no HDMI gone by unmentioned?

It's got displayport. HDMI is so...common? Not needed in this price range :D
Nikumba 5th May 2010, 08:58 Quote
Also since this monitor is aimed at design professionals why would they care about HDMI? DVI and Display port would be the connections I would be after, I could understand them pointing out lack of HDMI if this was a consumer styled monitor

Kimbie
Picarro 5th May 2010, 09:06 Quote
And please. As stated in the first reply. Could you review some decently priced monitors? I am not about to spend 1k pounds on a simple monitor.
John_T 5th May 2010, 09:36 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Picarro
And please. As stated in the first reply. Could you review some decently priced monitors? I am not about to spend 1k pounds on a simple monitor.

I've just done a quick check of the last ten monitor reviews they've done:

NEC MultiSync PA241W - £824.47
Alienware OptX AW2210 - £299
Dell SP2309W - £186.15
NEC MultiSync EA231WMi - £303.78
ViewSonic FuHzion VX2265wm 3D - £214.99
Eizo Foris FX2431 - £884.35
Eizo FlexScan S2242W - £431.08
HP LP2475w - £436.60
HP LP2275W - £284.92
NEC MultiSync P221W - £425.49

That's five out of ten around or below £300, three around the £400 mark and two super-luxury ones.

Not a bad mix really.

Although I agree that a budget round-up at some point would be very welcome - as would a look at some Samsung's, LG's, Iiyama's & the like. I'm sure more people buy Samsung or Iiyama than Eizo or NEC...
Combatus 5th May 2010, 10:34 Quote
We'll certainly consider looking at some cheaper monitors but to be honest the results are usually very similar ie lacklustre TN panel with often poor build quality.

@julianmartin - FYI we haven't compared it to the U2410 because we haven't reviewed it yet and the fact that it isn't the likely competitor to the PA241W - this is a professional screen that costs twice as much.
Xir 5th May 2010, 11:43 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Combatus
We'll certainly consider looking at some cheaper monitors but to be honest the results are usually very similar ie lacklustre TN panel with often poor build quality.

They are.
That's why we need a review, we know we get a decent monitor if we spend >500ounds, but most non-professional users out ther buy a sub-200pounds monitor. (or cheaper)
So that's were the decision is hard to make. What's least worse for xx pounds?
And you've reviewed only one like that. (according to the list above)

I like the build quality of the S-Class, but still most people go out and buy corsa's :D
vampalan 5th May 2010, 11:46 Quote
LoL.. here's me thinking where are the big brothers of that NEC, 27? 30?... been looking for a decent large screen with loads of vertical height for the past year.
Found them.. LOL
SRP a lot of money.
http://www.nec-display-solutions.com/p/uk/en/products/choice.xhtml?cat=LCD&e=e1s1
julianmartin 5th May 2010, 12:06 Quote
I know you haven't reviewed it yet. Since when was the U2710 a pro screen then or even being at all relevant as it is so much bigger and rammed with multimedia inputs? It is exactly the same tech as the U2410 too right?

And if that is the argument, why have you compared it to the HP LP2475w? How is that a valid competitor if the U2410 is not?

If it is a pro screen (and I'm not saying it isn't) surely a mention on colour accuracy was pretty important, especially to actually justify why it has a better panel than either the Dell or HP offerings that are mentioned? All that review gives is a worded assurance and a use of the rather subjective Lagom blacks test...

I realise HDMI is a multimedia styled interface but it still deserves a mention when both the other monitors mentioned in this review have it and more.
FreQ 5th May 2010, 12:20 Quote
Nice review, covered everything I needed to know. I am surprised the lack of HDMI wasn't mentioned, but no biggie.

The vast majority of people who read bit-tech are going to be geeks who want best bang for buck, and I think roughly £450 is the limit for a 24" monitor before people start switching off.

Cheap monitor reviews might be useful (it's what most people buy) but I'd like to see more 30" reviews. Lots of us now have 24" monitors (LP2475w) and I'm already thinking about upgrading to a bigger screen and ditching the TV altogether. Saying that, I hope manufacturers start releasing more big screens.
Cobalt 5th May 2010, 13:09 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreQ

Cheap monitor reviews might be useful (it's what most people buy) but I'd like to see more 30" reviews. Lots of us now have 24" monitors (LP2475w) and I'm already thinking about upgrading to a bigger screen and ditching the TV altogether. Saying that, I hope manufacturers start releasing more big screens.

I don't get this obsession with having huge screens on your desk. 24" is about as big as I want at this viewing range. I'd prefer an increase in pixel density over arbitrarily large diagonals.
Lizard 5th May 2010, 13:28 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreQ
but I'd like to see more 30" reviews

We looked at this part of the market recently, but unfortunately very few manufacturers make 30in displays and those that have, haven't updated their models in years.

For example the current Dell 30in is 3+ years old and the current HP is 4+ years old and not made any more so is very hard to buy (it's out of the stock at nearly all retailers).

Shame really, as I for one, and others in the bit-tech/CPC office would definitely buy a huge monitor if new models with comtemporary image quality and panel technology existed.
Combatus 5th May 2010, 14:18 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by julianmartin
I know you haven't reviewed it yet. Since when was the U2710 a pro screen then or even being at all relevant as it is so much bigger and rammed with multimedia inputs? It is exactly the same tech as the U2410 too right?

And if that is the argument, why have you compared it to the HP LP2475w? How is that a valid competitor if the U2410 is not?

If it is a pro screen (and I'm not saying it isn't) surely a mention on colour accuracy was pretty important, especially to actually justify why it has a better panel than either the Dell or HP offerings that are mentioned? All that review gives is a worded assurance and a use of the rather subjective Lagom blacks test...

I realise HDMI is a multimedia styled interface but it still deserves a mention when both the other monitors mentioned in this review have it and more.

We can't comment on products we haven't reviewed, which is why we don't make any references to the U2410. As such we can only comment on monitors such as the HP LP2475W and Dell U2710 which we have looked at and also feature IPS panel technology - after all, the main point of the review is to assess whether P-IPS and the premium price tag are worth it for bit-tech's audience who are mainly concerned with input lag, response time, ghosting and how games and video look, for example.

As for HDMI, well I take your point that other monitors have it, but this fact is stated in the specs and we also mention that the only way to get the most out of it is to use DisplayPort so lack of an HDMI port is much less of an issue than on a more mainstream monitor.
cybergenics 6th May 2010, 14:28 Quote
Why do Bit tech keep telling us S-IPS is automatically superior to S-PVA. For gaming YES, for photography, not necessarily.

First of all if you had the choice of S-IPS or S-PVA for Pro Photo work, your first concern would not be choosing between them, it would be looking at which model you were looking at was likely to have any back lighting issues and panel uniformities.

The reason Eizo panels are so pricey is because they implement a factory-programmed correction using per-pixel LUT to compensate for backlight and/or panel uniformities measured at testing stage before assembly, before the panels even get into the bezel. Then again, if IPS was automatically superior like Bit Tech keep spouting on about, whey are Eizo still using it ?

If you look at Pro PVA panels they often have higher contrast capabilities, better blacks, better viewing angles and a wider gamut.

Whilst both are better than TN, Bit Tech's statements about IPS being best rank up amongst CPC/BT classics like 'all Q6600's do 3.6 on air'.

Prad.de is a good source for monitor info.
rickysio 6th May 2010, 15:06 Quote
Am still using my Samsung SyncMaster 971P, mostly because it costed me under SGD200, and is a M-PVA monitor - it owns every single monitor I have had the chance to view with the nearly 180 deg viewing angle (both a boon and a negative - where's my privacy!) and the sheer inky blackness. Images that look fine on a TN panel looks like crap on this! The less than perfect Photoshops are immediately exposed - shocking, yes, but it sure as hell made me raise my PS abilities to a high level more quickly than I would have with a TN. The resolution (quatitatively) sucks, though. 1280x1024 is not very high, but I don't really see a need for more - it just means that I need to spend more on more powerful GPU's, and spend EVEN more for a quality panel. PVA seems to be the best middle of the road tech, offering the BEST bang for the buck, while offering superior blacks.
cybergenics 6th May 2010, 15:40 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickysio
Images that look fine on a TN panel looks like crap on this!

Only when you use a decent monitor do you start to realise how many people are taking rather low quality photos on often, very expensive cameras.
rickysio 6th May 2010, 16:02 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by cybergenics
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickysio
Images that look fine on a TN panel looks like crap on this!

Only when you use a decent monitor do you start to realise how many people are taking rather low quality photos on often, very expensive cameras.

A terrible shame - I mean, their camera probably costs more than SIX times that of my monitor!
Pino 10th May 2010, 21:32 Quote
Thanks for the review, but I'm somewhat disappointed I'm afraid...

I'm currently looking to upgrade my monitor setup. Mainly for amateur photography and I do parttime webdesign en video edit jobs.
The NEC PA241W is on the top of my list. Mainly because this line (as the successor of the x90 line) should do extremely well concerning color accuracy and image quality and according to the first other reviews it delivers.
Second reason is that is has a programmable LUT which means that you can do full hardware calibration which is saved in the monitor itself instead of in color profiles for the OS or the LUT of the video card. Anyone who works with both color-managed and non-color managed applications on one system knows how annoying the difference can be.
Third very important reason is the 14bit 3D LUT which enables very accurate producing both sRGB as well as Adobe RGB color spaces. This is something few other monitors offer. Those things combined this thing is almost cheap compared to the Eizos it competes with.

I'm not trying the promote this display here, but when I start reading a review about this type of monitor I expect and hope such features to be discussed and/or critized. These are the things of interest for people who are shopping for this type of display and worth paying this kind of money instead of for instance the HP LP2575 (which as I gather from reviews is very, very good value, but still wide gamut only, no hw calibration and poor color accuracy out of the box).

It's like reading a review about a Porsche 911 and stating that it can go 250km/h just like a Golf GTI can. Or saying that it's low value for money because the 911 is not very suitable for pulling a caravan when you want to go on holiday....Even when the review were written in a travellers magazine, and even when the statements are correct, such comparisons simply are not very informative to the reader....

Just my final thoughts...
julianmartin 13th May 2010, 11:50 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pino
Thanks for the review, but I'm somewhat disappointed I'm afraid...

I'm currently looking to upgrade my monitor setup. Mainly for amateur photography and I do parttime webdesign en video edit jobs.
The NEC PA241W is on the top of my list. Mainly because this line (as the successor of the x90 line) should do extremely well concerning color accuracy and image quality and according to the first other reviews it delivers.
Second reason is that is has a programmable LUT which means that you can do full hardware calibration which is saved in the monitor itself instead of in color profiles for the OS or the LUT of the video card. Anyone who works with both color-managed and non-color managed applications on one system knows how annoying the difference can be.
Third very important reason is the 14bit 3D LUT which enables very accurate producing both sRGB as well as Adobe RGB color spaces. This is something few other monitors offer. Those things combined this thing is almost cheap compared to the Eizos it competes with.

I'm not trying the promote this display here, but when I start reading a review about this type of monitor I expect and hope such features to be discussed and/or critized. These are the things of interest for people who are shopping for this type of display and worth paying this kind of money instead of for instance the HP LP2575 (which as I gather from reviews is very, very good value, but still wide gamut only, no hw calibration and poor color accuracy out of the box).

It's like reading a review about a Porsche 911 and stating that it can go 250km/h just like a Golf GTI can. Or saying that it's low value for money because the 911 is not very suitable for pulling a caravan when you want to go on holiday....Even when the review were written in a travellers magazine, and even when the statements are correct, such comparisons simply are not very informative to the reader....

Just my final thoughts...

THANK GOD someone else can see what I was trying to get at.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums