Charlie Schmidt wrote:
BenQ PD2725U 27 Inch 4K UHD AQCOLOR Computer Monitor with Thunderbolt 3 for MacBook, Mac Monitor, HDR, 100% sRGB, 95% P3

Thanks for your reply, unfortunately the BenQ PD2725U is a 16:9 display, a no-go for me.

Marc S Photography wrote:
EIZO has 4/3 and 5/4 ratio monitors, but 1600x1200 is the highest resolution that I see among those.
EIZO does have a square 28 inch monitor with a resolution of 2048x2048. No HDMI though.
As far as I know 16x10 monitors are only available as 24 inch 1920x1200  monitors.

I've looked at Eizo but as you say, they are quite low-res (and expensive).
I can't find any Eizo square monitor with more than 1920x1920.

patpro wrote:
Hello,

I'm currently trying to find a good 27" display for my post prod work (Capture One Pro).
Perfect display would be:

- around 27"
- aspect ratio as square as possible (4:3, 3:2, 16:18, etc.). 16:9 is a no-go
- at least 3 video input ports (1 can be USB-C, 1 has to be HDMI)
- good image/color quality

4K is a plus, not a requirement.

Any idea?

Also, are some of you using the LG Ergo DualUp 28" or the Huawei Mateview and have a feedback to share?

Thanks a lot!
Patrick

Could you explain why you need it to be square (or squarish)?

It has been quite a while since I’ve seen a 4:3 or 5:4 monitor. Most monitors today are 16:9 or worse (21:9, and I think even wider).

Could you get a 16:9 monitor and use the centre 9:9 section? A 4k monitor could get you 2160x2160, for example. You might want to get something like a 32” monitor so the 9:9 section is closer to 27”.

patpro wrote:
I don't need a squarish display, I want one
In fact I have a limited desktop size and the max space available for a display is around 62cm wide (ie. longest side). It's about the size of a 27" display with a 16:9 aspect ratio.
Using the center part of a 16:9 monitor could work but it means I've got 18,5% less lines and many pixels around to do... nothing.
The Huawei Mateview is a 28.2" display with 3:2 aspect ratio (3840 x 2560 px). It has good specs (500 nits, 1200:1 contrast, and the 3 video inputs I need). it could really be perfect but I'm a bit concerned about it's quality.

If you have limited width, could you get away with pivoting a 16:9 monitor to run vertically giving you a 9:16 monitor? You might even be able to fit a 32” monitor in vertical orientation - would that appeal? My BenQ SW321c monitors are only 45cm tall, so they’d be 45cm wide. And you’d have 2160 wide by 3840 high.

If you shoot all your images in landscape orientation, thus would be less help, though…

patpro wrote:
I've looked at Eizo but as you say, they are quite low-res (and expensive).
I can't find any Eizo square monitor with more than 1920x1920.

https://www.eizoglobal.com/products/atc … itors.html shows an industrial control 1:1 monitor of 2048x2048.

Note that it is an Air Traffic Control Monitor, so I would imagine it's price would be  out-of-range ...

Frozen Instant Imagery wrote:
If you have limited width, could you get away with pivoting a 16:9 monitor to run vertically giving you a 9:16 monitor? You might even be able to fit a 32” monitor in vertical orientation - would that appeal? My BenQ SW321c monitors are only 45cm tall, so they’d be 45cm wide. And you’d have 2160 wide by 3840 high.

If you shoot all your images in landscape orientation, thus would be less help, though…

Quick stats from my production in 2021/22/23: 25% shot in landscape orientation, 75% shot in portrait.

Going 9:16 can be a problem as I wear progressive lenses. Unless I get a non-progressive pair of glasses dedicated to work in front of my computer, a very tall display is not suitable. With progressive lenses your supposed to look down at your screen. My personal tests shows that I should not aim for something taller than 50cm (with stand and all).

Marc S Photography wrote:
https://www.eizoglobal.com/products/atc … itors.html shows an industrial control 1:1 monitor of 2048x2048.

Note that it is an Air Traffic Control Monitor, so I would imagine it's price would be  out-of-range ...

Very impressive specs And it seems to support a full real KVM where most modern display will only have partial support for 2 PC. Like you say, it's probably super expensive and the 20 ms response time is really bad.

In the mean time I've spent part of last Saturday reading Amazon.fr reviews (mostly German ones) for the Huawei Mateview. Not so sure I'll get one after reading so many bad stories…

patpro wrote:

Quick stats from my production in 2021/22/23: 25% shot in landscape orientation, 75% shot in portrait.

Going 9:16 can be a problem as I wear progressive lenses. Unless I get a non-progressive pair of glasses dedicated to work in front of my computer, a very tall display is not suitable. With progressive lenses your supposed to look down at your screen. My personal tests shows that I should not aim for something taller than 50cm (with stand and all).

Strange you should say that - I got a pair of "computer" glasses about 3 years ago, and it was a really good move - means I don't have to keep my head at a particular angle to use the monitor (my day job is in front of a screen, too). I'd recommend it. I got them made up in a frame from a Danish company called Lindstrom - the frame is called Corona (very topical when I got them!), and the lenses are almost round, so they have no heavy corners. The complete pair of glasses only weighs about 11g, so they are very comfortable to wear for long periods. They make using larger screens easy.