I'm looking to upgrade my 2x27" generic HP monitors to one or two 32" monitors that can work with my PC as well as with my MacBook. I'll just use the PC for basic computer tasks, and use my MacBook for Lightroom and iMovie editing. The Apple Pro seems to be a safe if very expensive choice, and not so good with the PC. I see a lot of rave reviews of the ASUS 6k monitor. Benq seems to get good reviews for a combination of photo and video editing.

There are lots of monitor choices around these days, but the field for truly colour accurate monitors is much more limited. I have a pair of Eizo color edge monitors, One is a CS2731 and the other is a more basic Eizo model. I use the good panel for my image and the second screen will have the various toolbars, like actions, libraries, history etc on it. It is also used when I need another app open and visible at the same time.

Realistically as far as I have been able to work out Windows only properly supports one monitor profile, though I haven't dug in more deeply recently. If I recall correctly I calibrated the secondary panel once and used a workaround to apply the calibration. One of the reasons to have a high end monitor is so that they can be calibrated well to show the full colour gamut they are capable of, so to me it makes sense to have one good quality monitor and a second for more pedestrian work that doesn't need the colour accuracy.

I think you won't go wrong with Eizo panels. Though they mostly have 27" panels and some larger ones in the high end CG range but they are quite pricey. They have good warranty cover and dead pixel policy.

This company is enthusiastic about colour accuracy and you read their monitor recommendations here, they recommend Eizo and for cheaper monitors BenQ range:

Monitor Recommendations | Image Science

Hi,

100% agree with Chris. Eizo is the benchmark. Tested several monitor and ended up with Eizo for my picture editing. Little pricey, but really true color after right calibration, long warranty and no dead pixel. And my monitor is working for years now without any issue. Second monitor together wit the Eizo I use a cheap LG but this one is only for the toolbars, open folders, rename/edit files etc., not for picture editing.

Br Markus

Thanks for the Eizo recommendation. I’d seen that brand mentioned, but am not familiar with it. Will dig deeper.

I came across this 6k 52” from Dell that is intriguing as it promises to work with up to 4 computers simultaneously, working as a single monitor or multiple monitors.

Dell 52” Wide 6k Monitor

On 2/10/2026 at 9:18 PM, ACHiPo said:

Thanks for the Eizo recommendation. I’d seen that brand mentioned, but am not familiar with it. Will dig deeper.

I came across this 6k 52” from Dell that is intriguing as it promises to work with up to 4 computers simultaneously, working as a single monitor or multiple monitors.

Dell 52” Wide 6k Monitor

appears it is a standard gamut monitor covering sRGB only. I find the extended blues and greens in Adobe RGB particularly useful for UW work. The Eizo panels cover all of Adobe RGB colour space.

9 minutes ago, Chris Ross said:

appears it is a standard gamut monitor covering sRGB only. I find the extended blues and greens in Adobe RGB particularly useful for UW work. The Eizo panels cover all of Adobe RGB colour space.

In my opinion, it is not only useful, but even necessary to use Adobe RGB gamut for blue water. sRGB cuts off most of the important cyan.

Just now, waso said:

In my opinion, it is not only useful, but even necessary to use Adobe RGB gamut for blue water. sRGB cuts off most of the important cyan.

Agree, you can see what happens when you convert to sRGB, The water colour goes off completely. I used to convert to sRGB for web display, but these days I leave it in Adobe RGB.

3 minutes ago, Chris Ross said:

Agree, you can see what happens when you convert to sRGB, The water colour goes off completely. I used to convert to sRGB for web display, but these days I leave it in Adobe RGB.

In fact, years ago I used to always upload an image in two different color spaces to forums so that owners of wide gamut displays could also enjoy it.😁

Thanks all. Appreciate the input. How are Eizo monitors for video editing?

22 hours ago, Chris Ross said:

Agree, you can see what happens when you convert to sRGB, The water colour goes off completely. I used to convert to sRGB for web display, but these days I leave it in Adobe RGB.

Just on the question of sRGB vs Adobe RGB, if you were ordering a photobook (eg. from Mixbook), would you (re)process the selected photos as sRGB, given that Mixbook recommends sRGB?

Or would you leave them as Adobe RGB?

And I'd appreciate any recommendations on photobooks anyone cares to make...

Thanks

On 2/9/2026 at 8:34 PM, Chris Ross said:

...One of the reasons to have a high end monitor is so that they can be calibrated well to show the full colour gamut they are capable of, so to me it makes sense to have one good quality monitor and a second for more pedestrian work that doesn't need the colour accuracy.

I think you won't go wrong with Eizo panels. Though they mostly have 27" panels and some larger ones in the high end CG range but they are quite pricey. They have good warranty cover and dead pixel policy.

Chris,

I've been traveling for work the past few days, so while I read this a couple days ago I went back through the thread and realized I missed a lot.

Your point of having one panel for calibrated work makes sense. It's not clear why you would need an Eizo for the second monitor? Wouldn't a less expensive monitor work fine for more pedestrian work?

I looked at the 31" as I really want a bigger monitor for video editing. It's speedy! But if I keep my 27" HP monitor and just add the Eizo it won't be too terrible.

One thing I like about the Dell is the ability to accommodate a MacBook and PC with a single keyboard/mouse. While not a requirement, I'd like to be able to continue to use my PC as long as it runs, while using my MacBook for Lightroom and iMovie. I don't think the Eizo will do this without adding a switch of some sort.

Thanks again for all the info! I'm diving into the Image Science link. The BenQ SW321C seems like it might be a less expensive option to Eizo with a 99% aRGB, although I understand it's not quite at the same level. Also its video editing capability is not clear.

One thing I'm seeing is both the Eizo and BenQ brightness is fairly low at 350 and 250 nits, compared to 1000 nits for the Apple Pro XDR and 400 for the Dell 52.

I need to do more homework on the difference between sRGB and aRGB and P3. I hear you on the value of the aRGB blues for underwater photography, but I don't have a feeling for what the different standards really mean to images.

Edited 17 hours ago17 hr by ACHiPo

Just found this video which explains the difference between the standards:

Which Color Space should you use for Photography

I don't believe video editing places any special demands on a monitor as long as it has a decent refresh rate. Might be good to ask the question of an experienced video person though. A separate switch is indeed an option for and is a good idea if you are using two separate machines. Good ones can be pricey if they are 4K capable though.

Many high end monitors have multiple inputs that you can switch between on the monitor itself, if you get one like that you can get a basic KM switch to switch keyboard, mouse and any other USB peripherals and they are quite cheap. For example there is a 32" BenQ model that has two HDMI and one display port and one of the Eizo models has two display ports.

I would add that we spend all this money on the best cameras lenses, etc. but for 95+% of people we only ever view the finished product on our monitors. I know everyone has a budget they need to consider, but it seems to me cheaping out on a less capable monitor throws away a portion of all that effort to get the best image. There are diminishing returns of course, but I think full or near full Adobe RGB coverage, good contrast and good calibration facilities are important, and this means looking at the colour accurate series for your monitors.

15 minutes ago, Chris Ross said:

I don't believe video editing places any special demands on a monitor as long as it has a decent refresh rate. Might be good to ask the question of an experienced video person though. A separate switch is indeed an option for and is a good idea if you are using two separate machines. Good ones can be pricey if they are 4K capable though.

Many high end monitors have multiple inputs that you can switch between on the monitor itself, if you get one like that you can get a basic KM switch to switch keyboard, mouse and any other USB peripherals and they are quite cheap. For example there is a 32" BenQ model that has two HDMI and one display port and one of the Eizo models has two display ports.

I would add that we spend all this money on the best cameras lenses, etc. but for 95+% of people we only ever view the finished product on our monitors. I know everyone has a budget they need to consider, but it seems to me cheaping out on a less capable monitor throws away a portion of all that effort to get the best image. There are diminishing returns of course, but I think full or near full Adobe RGB coverage, good contrast and good calibration facilities are important, and this means looking at the colour accurate series for your monitors.

Chris,

I'm starting to get it. Thanks!

Evan

2 hours ago, dentrock said:

Just on the question of sRGB vs Adobe RGB, if you were ordering a photobook (eg. from Mixbook), would you (re)process the selected photos as sRGB, given that Mixbook recommends sRGB?

Or would you leave them as Adobe RGB?

And I'd appreciate any recommendations on photobooks anyone cares to make...

Thanks

It depends on the capabilities of their printing system. Ideally you would soft proof your images using the profile they use in their system. If you send Adobe RGB images into a system that can only do sRGB, you have no idea how it will impact colours unless you soft proof or convert to that profile.

Googling Mixbook process says they use a CMYK digital press. Traditionally CMYK has a more limited gamut than what can be displayed on your monitor. Inkjet prints done on a high end printer can match 100% of Adobe RGB, however the prints produced are not really suited for books as they can be quite fragile.

So in short given that they don't seem to provide soft proofing profiles, it would be best to follow their recommendations for sRGB.

I'm just seeing this discussion now, so I'll try to add a few more points.

First of all, for Video Editors (Resolve): Adobe RGB is largely irrelevant.

• Rec.709 is the standard for SDR (TV, Web).

• DCI-P3 is the standard for Cinema, HDR, and modern displays (Apple devices, OLED TVs). This gamut extends into Reds, Yellows, and skin tones.

As it happens, I’ve recently been looking into replacing the monitors I use exclusively for video editing. Granted, you can’t go wrong with an EIZO monitor, but personally, it’s out of my budget. Looking at the shortlist I made, there are some monitors that also cover 99% of Adobe RGB.

1. ASUS ProArt PA279CRV (27" - Currently my top pick)
   Price: here in Italy about €530
   Pros: It seems to be the only 27" IPS panel in this price range that genuinely covers 99% Adobe RGB + 99% DCI-P3.
   Cons: contrast is standard IPS (1000:1), no IPS Black technology like the Dell U2723QE (which I didn't list here because it lacks Adobe RGB coverage).
   

2. MSI Summit MS321UP (32")
   Price: here in Italy about €700

   Pros: Huge canvas for the Resolve timeline, includes a magnetic hood very useful for color reproduction.
   Cons: dual 32" monitors might be overkill for my viewing distance and I would need a monster desk.
   

3. Lenovo ThinkVision P27u-20
   Price: here in Italy about €800 (fluctuates a lot)
   Pros: Better build quality, Thunderbolt 4 hub.
   Cons: Currently too expensive compared to the ASUS for the same panel performance.

Mi current choice is the Asus. It's the value king for my budget and needs. it's really a unicorn for its price.

Other practical considerations:

I have my desk against a wall so I cannot use standard gas-spring arms (the "elbow" would hit the wall, pushing the screens into my face), I am planning to mount these on a Dual Monitor Stand with a Horizontal Crossbar. This should keep the monitors perfectly aligned and flush against the wall without requiring depth clearance.

The Asus supports DisplayPort MST. (daisy chain). You can plug your PC into Monitor A, and then plug Monitor A into Monitor B. This means you only have one cable running from your computer to drive two distinct extended desktops. It makes for an incredibly clean desk setup.

For photo editing it's ok and a killer feature but for serious video editing it has several drawbacks:

A single DisplayPort 1.4 connection cannot sustain two uncompressed 4K signals at 60Hz with the 10-bit color depth essential for avoiding banding in DaVinci Resolve. To accommodate this data load, the system often forces compromises such as chroma subsampling, which reduces image clarity, or a drop to 8-bit color, which introduces artificial gradients that can ruin grading accuracy. Although Display Stream Compression attempts to mitigate this, introducing compression into a reference signal chain is generally inadvisable for critical work. So I will directly connect each monitor to my Nvidia GPU.

Hope this helps.

Eizo coloredge is probably the best, but also the most expensive...

I cannot compare to other high quality monitors for photographers since this is my first monitor of this kind, but my BenQ SW270c does what is expected from a monitor in this class. Approx. 1 year ago the monitor failed and I had to send it in for repair. It turned out repair is too elaborated (more or less a total loss), but they send me a refurbished replacement monitor (same model) for free on goodwill basis, although the warranty was already over since > 3 years. I can recommend this brand...

Wolfgang

Edited 5 hours ago5 hr by Architeuthis

30 minutes ago, Architeuthis said:

Eizo coloredge is probably the best, but also the most expensive...

I cannot compare to other high quality monitors for photographers since this is my first monitor of this kind, but my BenQ SW270c does what is expected from a monitor in this class. Approx. 1 year ago the monitor failed and I had to send it in for repair. It turned out repair is too elaborated (more or less a total loss), but they send me a refurbished replacement monitor (same model) for free on goodwill basis, although the warranty was already over since > 3 years. I can recommend this brand...

Wolfgang

Yes Benq are very good indeed. I have two of them since 2018 and they work flawlessly.

I'm changing them to upgrade to native 4k.

6 hours ago, Davide DB said:

I'm just seeing this discussion now, so I'll try to add a few more points.

First of all, for Video Editors (Resolve): Adobe RGB is largely irrelevant.

• Rec.709 is the standard for SDR (TV, Web).

• DCI-P3 is the standard for Cinema, HDR, and modern displays (Apple devices, OLED TVs). This gamut extends into Reds, Yellows, and skin tones.

As it happens, I’ve recently been looking into replacing the monitors I use exclusively for video editing. Granted, you can’t go wrong with an EIZO monitor, but personally, it’s out of my budget. Looking at the shortlist I made, there are some monitors that also cover 99% of Adobe RGB.

1. ASUS ProArt PA279CRV (27" - Currently my top pick)
   Price: here in Italy about €530
   Pros: It seems to be the only 27" IPS panel in this price range that genuinely covers 99% Adobe RGB + 99% DCI-P3.
   Cons: contrast is standard IPS (1000:1), no IPS Black technology like the Dell U2723QE (which I didn't list here because it lacks Adobe RGB coverage).
   

2. MSI Summit MS321UP (32")
   Price: here in Italy about €700

   Pros: Huge canvas for the Resolve timeline, includes a magnetic hood very useful for color reproduction.
   Cons: dual 32" monitors might be overkill for my viewing distance and I would need a monster desk.
   

3. Lenovo ThinkVision P27u-20
   Price: here in Italy about €800 (fluctuates a lot)
   Pros: Better build quality, Thunderbolt 4 hub.
   Cons: Currently too expensive compared to the ASUS for the same panel performance.

Mi current choice is the Asus. It's the value king for my budget and needs. it's really a unicorn for its price.

Other practical considerations:

I have my desk against a wall so I cannot use standard gas-spring arms (the "elbow" would hit the wall, pushing the screens into my face), I am planning to mount these on a Dual Monitor Stand with a Horizontal Crossbar. This should keep the monitors perfectly aligned and flush against the wall without requiring depth clearance.

The Asus supports DisplayPort MST. (daisy chain). You can plug your PC into Monitor A, and then plug Monitor A into Monitor B. This means you only have one cable running from your computer to drive two distinct extended desktops. It makes for an incredibly clean desk setup.

For photo editing it's ok and a killer feature but for serious video editing it has several drawbacks:

A single DisplayPort 1.4 connection cannot sustain two uncompressed 4K signals at 60Hz with the 10-bit color depth essential for avoiding banding in DaVinci Resolve. To accommodate this data load, the system often forces compromises such as chroma subsampling, which reduces image clarity, or a drop to 8-bit color, which introduces artificial gradients that can ruin grading accuracy. Although Display Stream Compression attempts to mitigate this, introducing compression into a reference signal chain is generally inadvisable for critical work. So I will directly connect each monitor to my Nvidia GPU.

Hope this helps.

Davide,

Thank you.

I was just going to add that I discovered the ASUS ProArt last night that looks pretty interesting as a lower cost option (it's also quite a bit brighter than either Eizo or BenQ). It's definitely on my list.

One other thing I found interesting in the video I linked above was doing all edits in the largest gamut possible, then clamping to the appropriate color space for the publication medium. The video talks about keeping files in rec.2020 if possible. I don't see any panels capable of rec.2020, so what is the impact of keeping more colors/luminance than the panel can display?

I've seen the color plots for years, but am just now understanding what they mean. I found this graph useful for photo gamuts (I assume rec.709 for video is similar, but I haven't dived down that rabbit hole just yet):

Best,

Evan

Edited 2 hours ago2 hr by ACHiPo

13 minutes ago, ACHiPo said:

One other thing I found interesting in the video I linked above was doing all edits in the largest gamut possible, then clamping to the appropriate color space for the publication medium. The video talks about keeping files in rec.2020 if possible. I don't see any panels capable of rec.2020, so what is the impact of keeping more colors/luminance than the panel can display?

Currently, no monitor on the market can fully reproduce the Rec.2020 color space. Even reference panels reach around 80–90% coverage. Consequently, editing in Rec.2020 requires relying on software scopes instead of your eyes to preserve color data that today's hardware cannot yet physically display. Basically you are doing it mainly for future-proofing. You are saving mathematical color data today so that in 10 years, when MicroLED displays arrive, those colors will finally become visible. 🤡

When it comes to on-screen display, both DCI-P3 and Adobe RGB are superior to sRGB, which is a relic of the past—though like all standards, it refuses to die. However, if we look at printing, A-RGB is better because its color space covers everything that printing papers can reproduce (Adobe designed it specifically with this in mind). DCI-P3 misses out on some of the blues and greens that printing papers are capable of reproducing.

DCI-P3 was originally created for digital cinema projectors. It extends significantly into the Reds and Yellows (perfect for skin tones and warm lighting), but it falls short on Cyans and Greens compared to A-RGB.

This image is self-explanatory (credit)

The Hahnemule PR Ultra Smooth is a printing paper.