LG Announces 27- and 31.5-Inch 4K UltraFine OLED Pro Monitors

[Tsing]

Image: LG



LG today announced two new UltraFine OLED Pro monitors, the 31.5-inch 32BP95E and 27-inch 27BP95E.



Both of these displays feature 4K UHD resolution (3,840 x 2,160) panels and an incredible 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio thanks to OLED technology. Users can also expect 99 percent coverage of the DCI-P3 color space, as well as hardware for self-calibration and a monitor hood for blocking out external ambient light.



From LG’s press release:



To ensure that these models display vibrant colors as intended under the conditions optimal for productivity, both OLED Pro monitors come with detachable self-calibration sensors and monitor hoods. When used with the free-to-download LG Calibration Studio software, the calibration sensor measures the light emitted from the display at times predetermined by the user and automatically makes the necessary adjustments to...

Continue reading...

 

[Riccochet]

I'm guessing these monitors are not bright at all. As in, you better be in a dark room or they'll look like dogpoo.

 

[Brian_B]

I'm guessing these monitors are not bright at all. As in, you better be in a dark room or they'll look like dogpoo.

Possible. They do support HDR400 -- which isn't a great spec, but does list a minimum brightness of 400nits. Combined with absolute black, HDR would still look good at that level, as opposed to an IPS that has to compete against the backlight bleed for contrast.

Yeah it would struggle in direct sunlight, but I don't think you'd have to be sealed in a crypt of darkness for it to look good either.

 

[LazyGamer]

I'm just hoping that they don't skimp on running higher refresh rates and VRR.

 

[Brian_B]

I'm just hoping that they don't skimp on running higher refresh rates and VRR.

I can almost guarantee they will. These are "creator" oriented, for folks doing pictures/video. All the talk will be about color accuracy. They will probably remain 60Hz

 

[LazyGamer]

I can almost guarantee they will. These are "creator" oriented, for folks doing pictures/video. All the talk will be about color accuracy. They will probably remain 60Hz

Well, Apple started putting higher-refresh features on their laptop displays - and let me tell you, working with photos, videos, or even audio mixing (along with other more mundane desktop tasks), higher refresh rates help people work faster.

 

[Brian_B]

Well, Apple started putting higher-refresh features on their laptop displays - and let me tell you, working with photos, videos, or even audio mixing (along with other more mundane desktop tasks), higher refresh rates help people work faster.

There is a rumor LG will be coming out with refreshed lineup of Apple-oriented Pro monitors soon - which might include that. I wouldn't be surprised if it's just these same monitors with a USB - C interface either though.

 

[Zarathustra]

As I have commented on other threads, both 27" and 31.5" are way too small for 4k.

4k really comes in to its own starting at 40".

So, while these are not for me, there is one thing about them that I find encouraging, and that is that LG is willing to put OLED panels into something they are calling "monitors" now.

With monitors there is a potential for a menu bar being in the same spot on a screen for 8+ hours a day 5+ days a week.

They seem to be getting confident when it comes to burn-in.

The question is, is there anything different about these monitors than current gen LG OLED TV's that makes them more resistant to burn-in?

I'd love to get me one of those new LG C2 42" TV's announced for early next year, IF they can be show to be burn-in resistant enough for desktop productivity use...

 

[LazyGamer]

As I have commented on other threads, both 27" and 31.5" are way too small for 4k.

unless desktop scaling is in play.

And to be honest, it should be. Apple does 5k at 27", for example. Another is that 4k at 150% scaling is exactly 1440p, which at 27" and 31.5", depending on view distance and eyesight, is just about perfect.

I realize that there are plenty of pitfalls to this approach, but personally speaking, I'm tired of jagged, aliased text. No amount of software wizardry is going to make up for pixels that are too large - the natural anti-aliasing of higher resolutions is what's really needed.

 

[Brian_B]

I realize that there are plenty of pitfalls to this approach, but personally speaking, I'm tired of jagged, aliased text. No amount of software wizardry is going to make up for pixels that are too large - the natural anti-aliasing of higher resolutions is what's really needed.

I love my 27" 4K @150%

It is not the same at all as 1440 for text and static graphics. But I respect it isn't for everyone.

Then again, maybe it's just the audiophile in me thinking there's a difference...

 

[Zarathustra]

unless desktop scaling is in play.

And to be honest, it should be. Apple does 5k at 27", for example. Another is that 4k at 150% scaling is exactly 1440p, which at 27" and 31.5", depending on view distance and eyesight, is just about perfect.

I realize that there are plenty of pitfalls to this approach, but personally speaking, I'm tired of jagged, aliased text. No amount of software wizardry is going to make up for pixels that are too large - the natural anti-aliasing of higher resolutions is what's really needed.

Disagree. I see no need to ever have a desktop resolution over 100ppi. Not now, not in a hundred years. 100 DPI is the pinnacle above which lies only waste. It's a waste of desktop real estate, and needlessly drives up graphics processing load and power usage.

Honestly, i don't think I'd ever choose anything over 100ppi for the desktop.

For phones, definitely, and laptops maybe, but on the desktop? I just don't see the point. There is so much more I'd rather do with the processing power than waste it on needlessly high resolution.

And mind you, this is coming from someone who has been at 4k since 2015.

 

[Brian_B]

Honestly, i don't think I'd ever choose anything over 100ppi for the desktop.

But it looks “warmer”

/s

 

[Zarathustra]

But it looks “warmer”

/s

Lol. I wasn't going to go there.

I mean, subpixel smoothing techniques are pretty **** good these days, but I can see how some would prefer smoother fonts.

I guess I am so used to them these days that they don't bother me. They work, and are perfectly legible. it's not their job to be "pretty".

I look at it as a matter of tradeoffs, with the benefits from pumping up the PPI above 100 being minimal, and the drawbacks being significant.

 

[DrezKill]

I have often heard it said among hardware reviewers that at 27", 2560x1440 provides the best pixel density, and that going past 1440p at 27" is just a waste. I have a friend who has had two 27" 4K monitors though, and he loved them both, so who knows. To me personally, I think you need to start getting to HDTV sizes before the advantages of 4K can really be felt.

...4k really comes in to its own starting at 40".

Yeah that sounds about right.

...there is one thing about them that I find encouraging, and that is that LG is willing to put OLED panels into something they are calling "monitors" now.

Yeah, I really wanted to see LG bust out some OLED monitors (not TVs, monitors) for a while now. OLED monitors sure took their sweet time coming to market. And gonna be a while still before they start hitting reasonable prices.

The question is, is there anything different about these monitors than current gen LG OLED TV's that makes them more resistant to burn-in?

I'd love to get me one of those new LG C2 42" TV's announced for early next year, IF they can be show to be burn-in resistant enough for desktop productivity use...

That is a very good question. Been on my mind ever since I started asking for OLED monitors. Honestly I have no idea what the current state of things are with regards to burn-in on current-gen OLED panels. I have a lot of friends who use HDTVs with their PCs (some since 2007), but only one of them has an OLED HDTV (LG CX), and he does not output to the TV from the PC very often.

I already know I'm not going LCD again for my next HDTV. Gonna be OLED or whatever is better (and affordable) at the time. I just got a new monitor earlier this year, but I wonder what kind of display my next monitor will be.

 

[Zarathustra]

I already know I'm not going LCD again for my next HDTV. Gonna be OLED or whatever is better (and affordable) at the time. I just got a new monitor earlier this year, but I wonder what kind of display my next monitor will be.

My home theater setup has actually been down since moving in may. I have to re-do the room before I can set it up and just haven't had the time.

I actually decided to give away my old 65" Panasonic Plasma in the meantime because it was taking up space. Once I remodel that room and set things up, I am planning on going with an LG C series 77" OLED screen.

I recently bought an LED lit LCD TV for the living room though. I needed something smaller that would fit there and the plasma was too big and heavy. I went with an LED LCD as the room gets a ton of sun, so it needs to be able to be bright. Also, I'm not a big on doing an serious watching there, so I was OK with something that isn't the top quality right now.