bit-tech.net

Lenovo unveils 4k ThinkVision 28 / Pro2840m monitors

Lenovo unveils 4k ThinkVision 28 / Pro2840m monitors

The Lenovo ThinkVision Pro2840m

Lenovo has unveiled a pair of new 28in, 4k resolution monitors in the shape of the Lenovo ThinkVision Pro2840m and Lenovo ThinkVision 28.

Lenovo ThinkVision Pro2840m
The Lenovo ThinkVision Pro2840m is a professional grade model with a 10-bit colour panel, height and rotation adjustment and a plethora of connectivity. As well as DisplayPort, there's mini DisplayPort, HDMI, MHL, USB BC 1.2, three USB 3.0 and two USB 2.0 ports.

Hidden away round the back are also a couple of 3W speakers while controls are touch-sensitive and ranged along the front of the bottom-right bezel.

Perhaps the chief standout of this model is that it's finished with pane of glass on the front, which may put off some discerning users that can't abide reflections.

Expected to arrive in April 2014 it has an MSRP of $799, which is very reasonable for a 4K panel.

Lenovo unveils 4k ThinkVision 28 / Pro2840m monitorsLenovo ThinkVision 28
The other new model is a massive multi-touch panel that also houses an Android-running computer. Powered by an Nvidia Tegra processor with 2GB it brings Android 4.4 KitKat to the world of 4K screens.

The display itself is the same as the ThinkVision Pro2840m, with an UltraHD 4K panel and a glass front. However it is also touch sensitive and can fold flat for easier touch interaction.

In the base are connections for three HDMI, DisplayPort and Ethernet: a selection that clearly marks out its multimedia-centric intentions. It also features two 5-watt speakers, a pair of noise-cancelling microphones and a front-facing 2-megapixel camera.

The ThinkVison 28 is expected to hit retail with a price of $1,199 in July 2014.

21 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
.//TuNdRa 6th January 2014, 21:18 Quote
If that translates 1:1 over here; £800 for a 4K panel with that kind of connectivity is amazing, I'm very curious to see how this is going to perform when its actually released.
edzieba 6th January 2014, 21:29 Quote
Hopefully it'll come over as exchange + VAT (~£590). In either case, this provides direction to Dell's P2815Q, so hopefully a minor pricing war will ensue, or at least price-parity. I'd wager they'll be using the same panel too.
jrs77 6th January 2014, 21:58 Quote
Damn, if this would only be 23" or 24" instead of 28".

I very much dislike screens with more than some 50cm width, as I can't sit infront of them seeing the whole screen without turning my eyes/head.

Also, there's no information to be found what panel they use, so probably it's going to be a TN-panel.

I'd like to see a 23" or 24" screen for < €600 with an IPS-panel that has the resolution of the 15" MacBookPro (2880 x 1800) pretty please.
Combatus 6th January 2014, 23:14 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
Damn, if this would only be 23" or 24" instead of 28".

I very much dislike screens with more than some 50cm width, as I can't sit infront of them seeing the whole screen without turning my eyes/head.

Also, there's no information to be found what panel they use, so probably it's going to be a TN-panel.

I'd like to see a 23" or 24" screen for < €600 with an IPS-panel that has the resolution of the 15" MacBookPro (2880 x 1800) pretty please.

My thoughts exactly. Having used the 31in Asus 4K we have in the lab at the moment, I'm in the firm mind that 27in is the limit for me and 24in is perfectly fine for me as well as I prefer having a couple of monitors for work rather than a single large one too.

However, more pixels are always welcome so I second a bump in pixel density! Seeing what a difference it made compared to the Dell 30in we have too, I'd jump on a 24in-26in display with 4K or even somewhere between 2,560 x 1440 and 4K.
Er-El 6th January 2014, 23:19 Quote
Nevermind the resolution, I'm more interested in that colour depth; 10 bit per RGB channel. Anyone think 10 bit displays will be the next big leap, once the 4k craze has passed? I was hoping for 12 bit at least, but considering the colour depth of displays never gets the attention it warrants, I can appreciate that.
edzieba 6th January 2014, 23:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
Also, there's no information to be found what panel they use, so probably it's going to be a TN-panel.
Unlikely. Under the assumption that it's using the same panel as Dell's 28" UHD monitor (two panel fabs turning out the same size and spec panel in the same period of time, and it's an unusual size? Not likely), all of Dell's Pxx14x display series have used AH-IPS, with the exception of the P2714H which used AD-PLS (an IPS variant). I can't see them bucking that record for a near-flagship panel.
Quote:
Anyone think 10 bit displays will be the next big leap
Probably not. 10-bit displays (both native 10bit addressable, and 8-bit+FRC 10-bit addressable) panels have been around for quite some time. Only a very small number of professional graphics packages are 10-bit aware and actually able to take advantage of it, and there seems to be no sign of any sort of push for this even in professional areas, let alone the consumer market.
Pete J 7th January 2014, 06:18 Quote
Tip for the guys/gals who think a 31" screen is too big: sit further back :p.

How have 4K monitors got so cheap?!
jrs77 7th January 2014, 08:08 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete J
Tip for the guys/gals who think a 31" screen is too big: sit further back :p.

How have 4K monitors got so cheap?!

Sitting far enough to see the whole screen would require to have the screen at an approx distance of 100cm, which would be ~30cm more than the current position of the screen. Ergonomically correct is about an arms length to the screen.

Additionally a ~30" screen would require a desk that is 110cm of depth....
Bindibadgi 7th January 2014, 10:30 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Er-El
Nevermind the resolution, I'm more interested in that colour depth; 10 bit per RGB channel. Anyone think 10 bit displays will be the next big leap, once the 4k craze has passed? I was hoping for 12 bit at least, but considering the colour depth of displays never gets the attention it warrants, I can appreciate that.

It's a TN panel. All budget 4K monitors this year will be TN based. IGZO is 5x more expensive still (and will remain so) and there are no LTPS panels of this size being made.
edzieba 7th January 2014, 10:38 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
Ergonomically correct is about an arms length to the screen
A common misconception. the 'arms length' rule-of-thumb was bought in in the CRT era when you could assume that 99% of users would be looking at a 15" CRT.
What you want to be looking at is the field of view: how large the display appears from where you're sitting. In the film and TV world this is fairly standardised at 35-40°for HDTV and cinema (though old rules-of-thumb about SDTV still get parroted, resulting in people sitting too far away and complaining they can't see what all this fuss about HDTV is about), but for desktop ergonomics it's less standardised; the recommendation is to sit far back enough that you can see the entire viewing area comfortable without needing to move your head (depends on how far you can comfortably move your eyes), and to then increase text size to a level where you don't need to lean forward to read it.

this does mean you need a 'deeper' desk for larger monitors to be comfortable, of course. If you're lacking space, or use a corner desk, it may not be possible to sit a comfortable distance from a larger monitor.
jrs77 7th January 2014, 11:21 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by edzieba
A common misconception. the 'arms length' rule-of-thumb was bought in in the CRT era when you could assume that 99% of users would be looking at a 15" CRT.
What you want to be looking at is the field of view: how large the display appears from where you're sitting. In the film and TV world this is fairly standardised at 35-40°for HDTV and cinema (though old rules-of-thumb about SDTV still get parroted, resulting in people sitting too far away and complaining they can't see what all this fuss about HDTV is about), but for desktop ergonomics it's less standardised; the recommendation is to sit far back enough that you can see the entire viewing area comfortable without needing to move your head (depends on how far you can comfortably move your eyes), and to then increase text size to a level where you don't need to lean forward to read it.

this does mean you need a 'deeper' desk for larger monitors to be comfortable, of course. If you're lacking space, or use a corner desk, it may not be possible to sit a comfortable distance from a larger monitor.

The ergonomics is aswell about the keyboard in relation to the screen, as in placed directly in front of the screen, so that you can track your fingers on the keyboard in addition to the teyt you're writing on the screen.
The further away the screen, the bigger the distance between the keyboard and the screen and the more you need too move yooour eyes/head between keyboard and screen.

This is the common denominator for desktop-ergonomics in interior or industrial design.

http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/650/z5o9.jpg
Corky42 7th January 2014, 11:24 Quote
Cant we just grow longer arms, or put our eyes on stalks like a snail :)
Maki role 7th January 2014, 12:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by edzieba
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
Ergonomically correct is about an arms length to the screen
A common misconception. the 'arms length' rule-of-thumb was bought in in the CRT era when you could assume that 99% of users would be looking at a 15" CRT.
What you want to be looking at is the field of view: how large the display appears from where you're sitting. In the film and TV world this is fairly standardised at 35-40°for HDTV and cinema (though old rules-of-thumb about SDTV still get parroted, resulting in people sitting too far away and complaining they can't see what all this fuss about HDTV is about), but for desktop ergonomics it's less standardised; the recommendation is to sit far back enough that you can see the entire viewing area comfortable without needing to move your head (depends on how far you can comfortably move your eyes), and to then increase text size to a level where you don't need to lean forward to read it.

this does mean you need a 'deeper' desk for larger monitors to be comfortable, of course. If you're lacking space, or use a corner desk, it may not be possible to sit a comfortable distance from a larger monitor.

Hmm, I'm not a huge fan of going above 27-28" as a monitor for different reasons. I find that I get disoriented when using a large screen, even if it's within that vowing angle range you mentioned. There's just something about sitting far enough away from a screen that makes it harder to use for me. This is especially the case with FPS titles or other games that require lots of fast/twitch movements. I've mostly observed it through consoles where switching from the living room TV to one of my monitors simply allows me to play much better.
Bindibadgi 7th January 2014, 14:36 Quote
Isn't the general rule of thumb that distance from screen = 1.5-3x size of display, depending on your personal comfort and content being consumed. Obv. TVs are bigger because you sit further away and don't have to read tiny text.
jrs77 7th January 2014, 14:51 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bindibadgi
Isn't the general rule of thumb that distance from screen = 1.5-3x size of display, depending on your personal comfort and content being consumed. Obv. TVs are bigger because you sit further away and don't have to read tiny text.

Rule of thumb for TVs is 10cm distance / 1" diagonal, but PC-screens have a higher resolution so that rule doesn't apply here ofc.
Usually people are sitting way too close to their TVs, especially when you think about 50" screens in three room 60m²-flats :p

Rule for PC-screens is, that you need too have the whole picture of a single screen in the same FOV as the keyboard infront of it, but it's an old rule that stems from typewriters and a sheet of DinA4 ontop of it.

Anyways, the ergonomical rules for sitting on a desk apply nevertheless, and combined with the rule of having the whole screen in a single FOV results in my drawing above.

Try it out yourself with the lower edge of the screen some 5cm above the desk, tilted some -5 to -10°. Sit upright in your chair, with the foots, knees and hip in 90° angles. This way you look slightly down to the screen, having the keyboard allmost in the same FOV as the screen itself. This way you doon't need to move your head at all and have it coomfortably leaned slightly forward, putting as little stress on your neck as possible.
edzieba 7th January 2014, 21:00 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
Rule of thumb for TVs is 10cm distance / 1" diagonal, but PC-screens have a higher resolution so that rule doesn't apply here ofc.
Usually people are sitting way too close to their TVs, especially when you think about 50" screens in three room 60m²-flats :p
For a 50" HDTV and the THX recommended hFoV of 40°, you should be sitting 1.5m from your TV for optimum viewing. Most people, used to SDTVs, will sit a lot further than that (your recommendation would give you a viewing distance of 5m, WAY too far!). This is unlikely to change much for UHDTV unless much higher framerates become common, as you would start to encounter odd temporal artefacts in panning scenes and scenes with fast opposite motion (e.g. walking against a moving background). See Charles Poyntons' excellent 1998 paper on Motion Portrayal (view the PDF version if possible).
jrs77 7th January 2014, 22:07 Quote
4-5m would be totally fine for a 50" TV, I know I do like to watch TV this way. Anything closer is simply too close, but hey, everyone should watch TV the way he likes it ;)
edzieba 7th January 2014, 22:20 Quote
Here's the relevant THX recommendation. By sitting further away, you're missing out on most of the benefits of having a HDTV. These are also the sort of distances that editors, colour graders, etc will be sitting at to master the TV shows and films you'll be watching, as it is desired to produce it in the same environment it is meant to be watched in.
Bindibadgi 8th January 2014, 02:56 Quote
While we're on the subject of watching TV. It makes me laugh how many people put TVs above fireplaces. How can that possibly be ergonomic? It's WAY too high to enjoy!
Combatus 8th January 2014, 12:29 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by edzieba

this does mean you need a 'deeper' desk for larger monitors to be comfortable, of course. If you're lacking space, or use a corner desk, it may not be possible to sit a comfortable distance from a larger monitor.

This. My desk is nearly 80cm deep but I've got a big hutch behind it. Even with my keyboard pull-out tray I wouldn't get far enough back to make >26in comfortable. This and I think it would be a little disconcerting to have a screen further away from my eyes than 90cm or so but that's just me! :D
Maki role 9th January 2014, 00:25 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bindibadgi
While we're on the subject of watching TV. It makes me laugh how many people put TVs above fireplaces. How can that possibly be ergonomic? It's WAY too high to enjoy!

As somebody with a tv above a fireplace, I would like to disagree. Usually I like to watch tv whilst lying down, rather than sitting upright. As such, my head tends to lean back naturally or be propped up, meaning my natural viewing angle is around that height. It's all just a preference thing really though isn't it?
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