Articles: Monitors
 

Bookmark and Share

(0) 
Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 ]

The default brightness is set to 100%. I reduced it to 60% to get 100nit screen brightness. The brightness is controlled through modulation of the power of the backlight lamps at 170Hz frequency.

The color curves are almost ideal – well, this is expectable with such a monitor. But of course, in this case the initial setup of the monitor isn’t that important: this monitor is intended to work with a hardware calibrator and it is implied that the owner will first of all recalibrate the monitor to meet his/her particular requirements.

The modulation of the power of the backlight lamps does not vanish even at the maximum brightness and brings a serious distortion into the response time measurements. That’s why the graph above shows you only the pixel rise time. Yet even this time indicates that the matrix is not fast, and the declared 50 milliseconds are all here. On the other hand, I doubt someone will buy such a monitor for playing Counter-Strike or something, while for a color corrector the response time doesn’t play a big role.

The matrix’s contrast ratio is on about the same level with other S-IPS-based monitors reviewed in this article, and the brightness is slightly below 200 candelas per sq. m.

It would make no sense to compare the ColorEdge CG21 with the monitors described earlier in this review, because it belongs to a completely different class. But I want to stress the fact that the difference is in the functionality rather than in the LCD matrix. Yes, LCD panels for such professional monitors undergo a much more rigorous testing, but they do not differ fundamentally from others. For example, the NEC SpectraView, an immediate rival to the CG21, uses exactly the same matrixes as are employed in the above-described Mitsubishi UX21LCD.

 
Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 ]

Discussion

Comments currently: 0

Add your Comment