NEC PA242W Monitor Review
by Chris Heinonen on September 27, 2013 9:00 AM ESTFor the AdobeRGB testing the targets are the same as sRGB except for colorspace. Light output, gamma, and everything else remains the same.
|
Pre-Calibration (updated) |
Post-Calibration, 200 cd/m^2 |
Post-Calibration, 80 cd/m^2 |
|
| White Level (cd/m^2) | 199.7 | 200.2 | 79.55 |
| Black Level (cd/m^2) | 0.3328 | 0.3645 | 0.1501 |
| Contrast Ratio | 600:1 | 549:1 | 530:1 |
| Gamma (Average) | 2.2265 | 2.18 | 2.4294 |
| Color Temperature | 6442K | 6507K | 6472K |
| Grayscale dE2000 | 1.2235 | 0.5104 | 0.8575 |
| Color Checker dE2000 | 0.8203 | 0.7093 | 0.7103 |
| Saturations dE2000 | 0.8436 | 0.7073 | 0.6561 |
AdobeRGB performance is similar to sRGB performance before calibration. The grayscale has tiny, tiny errors but that's it. The gamma is even better than before, and so is the color gamut. This is all right out of the box, using the AdobeRGB preset. Even the on-screen brightness number is only off by 1 cd/m^2 or less. That might even be instrument positioning error that accounts for that. I really fail to even see the point of calibrating a display like this. It comes out of the box so perfect, that I can't imagine wanting it much better.
Post-calibration with a 200 cd/m^2 target the AdobeRGB calibration is slightly better than with sRGB. The gamma is more accurate and the grayscale errors are slightly smaller. Color errors are non-existant and nothing else is here to complain about. Basically the NEC is perfect here.
With the 80 cd/m^2 target it is virtually identical as well. The gamma is better than in sRGB mode and everything else is so close as to not matter. Invisible error levels are still invisible. There's nothing to complain about here at all.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
74 Comments
View All Comments
DanNeely - Friday, September 27, 2013 - link
Defect rates on an 8k panel would probably be prohibitive.ZeDestructor - Friday, September 27, 2013 - link
I'm curious on how high they are...If it remains withing tolerable limits, I'd happily take upto 200 dead pixels or something similar...
MrSpadge - Saturday, September 28, 2013 - link
Let's talk again once you have a few dozen permanently white, red green or blue dots right in your primary viewing area!ddriver - Saturday, September 28, 2013 - link
As long as the pixels aren't clustered in a small region dead (dark) pixels will probably not be distinguishable. Stuck bright pixels are a different matter, but at that pixel pitch shouldn't be that much annoying too.ZeDestructor - Saturday, September 28, 2013 - link
As ddriver said,, as long as it isn't in a cluster, its fine. 200-400 dead pixels spread out over a 440+ppi 24" panel at 30-60cm (my view distances for a desktop) will be pretty hard to spot..SodaAnt - Friday, September 27, 2013 - link
I know that I've seen an 8K prototype at 30" before at least, and it was pretty damn beautiful, but as far as I know, the (well known) company that made it hasn't brought it to market yet.speconomist - Friday, September 27, 2013 - link
You mean 32K, as the 20''monitor is 16 times larger than a 5'' inches monitor.garadante - Friday, September 27, 2013 - link
No, it'd be 8k. Yes, it would be 32 megapixels (roughly) but 4k doesn't mean 4 megapixels. It means 4k pixel width. So 8k pixel width is the same as a 1080p panel stacked 4 wide, 4 high.BlakKW - Saturday, September 28, 2013 - link
I would really like to understand your analogy of 4 wide, 4 high...it would help me remember the reason 4k is better and how this scales when you add a "k". Also, I've seen it argued that even 4k exceeds the human eye's ability to differentiate, so at what point does "everyone" agree you can't tell the difference?ZeDestructor - Saturday, September 28, 2013 - link
4 wide, 4 high he means in terms of "stitching" 1920x1080 (2Kx1K resolution, abbreviated to 2K in some circles, 1080p elsewhere) panels, leading to an effective resolution of 7680x4320 (8Kx4K naming).When I was referring to a panel sizes, I was referring to the diagonal measurement, as most things are quoted/marketed/sold using that measure. Thus 20" = 16 5" panels.
"4k is better and how this scales when you add a "k". " It doesn't. K stands for "kilo", the x1000 prefix.