Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: LED powered LCD monitors vs. florescent powered LCD displays  (Read 8202 times)
bellimages
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 317


WWW
« on: November 05, 2008, 07:47:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Let's talk about LED backlit displays ........

Is it a proven fact that the newer LED displays are accurate enough for photographers? I know that there are some strong arguments for using them (no warm up time, longer lifespan, less power consumption). But, with that said, is the technology a proven itself yet? Should I steer away from purchasing the older LCD technology (like the NEC 2690, or 3090)Huh

I can not find what the light source is for teh NEC 2690 and 3090. I'm assuming that it's florescent, like the Apple Cinema Displays, since they don't say otherwise. Does anyone know if this is correct. I'm surprised that NEC doesn't provide that type of information in their specs.
Logged

Jan Bell, Owner/Photographer, Bell Images
www.bellimages.com

"Making the simple complicated is commonplace, Making the complicated simple, awesomely simple, that's creativity."    Charles Mingus
walter.sk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1334


« Reply #1 on: November 06, 2008, 08:53:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: bellimages
Let's talk about LED backlit displays ........

Is it a proven fact that the newer LED displays are accurate enough for photographers? I know that there are some strong arguments for using them (no warm up time, longer lifespan, less power consumption). But, with that said, is the technology a proven itself yet? Should I steer away from purchasing the older LCD technology (like the NEC 2690, or 3090)Huh

I can not find what the light source is for teh NEC 2690 and 3090. I'm assuming that it's florescent, like the Apple Cinema Displays, since they don't say otherwise. Does anyone know if this is correct. I'm surprised that NEC doesn't provide that type of information in their specs.
The NEC 2690 and 3090 are backlit by flourescent tubes.  They do have LED displays on their website, at quite a jump in price.  I am buying the new 2690WUXi2 based on the great reports given to the older 2690WUXi's qualities for photo editing.
Logged
jani
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1604



WWW
« Reply #2 on: November 07, 2008, 12:46:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: bellimages
Is it a proven fact that the newer LED displays are accurate enough for photographers? I know that there are some strong arguments for using them (no warm up time, longer lifespan, less power consumption). But, with that said, is the technology a proven itself yet? Should I steer away from purchasing the older LCD technology (like the NEC 2690, or 3090)Huh
That's a very good question, and I must admit that I haven't read any definitive answer to this question.

Theoretically speaking, high power LEDs are more stable than CFLs, in addition to having a longer life-span (can be more than 40,000 hours, as compared to typically around 10,000-15,000 hours for CFL), but no matter the lighting source, production quality control is important.

If there is uneccesarily high heat build-up in a LED array, lifetime degrades significantly. If humidity penetrates the diode, lifetime degrades significantly. If the LED isn't protected against UV light, lifetime may degrade dramatically if exposed to UV-rich light.

For LCD panel backlighting, UV shouldn't be a problem, and humidity is a factor in the manufacturing process. Cooling is a factor in system design.

So, again theoretically speaking, you can avoid these problems.

When it comes to controlling intensity accurately, yes, diodes can be controlled nicely, given decent controller circuits.

Are we there yet?

Let's see how e.g. Apple's new 24" panels turn out in a couple of years; there are only slightly less than 9,000 hours a year anyway.
« Last Edit: November 07, 2008, 12:47:37 PM by jani » Logged

Jan
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad