Originally posted by reeftool Spec sheets go way beyond my knowledge. My test was done in the store. The monitor didn't noticeably change color or contrast even when standing several feet to either side. It was on sale and under $200. When I got it home, I adjusted the brightness to the room, installed the driver and ICC profile, loaded up Lightroom and made a print from my Canon Pro 9000 Mark II printer. It looked very, very close and that's about as good as I could ask for. I think that's the whole goal of having a quality monitor. If your shots look good on the screen and your prints look the same, then you have a good monitor. Some people don't see colors the same so I'll mention my new monitor for a while whenever I post so to be sure that other computers are seeing my shots the same.
I hope that my explanation on how I came to choose my monitor and my musings have not been taken as any kind of critique on your choice.
As you point out everyone has a different criteria on how they choose -
I was merely explaining mine and how I came to buy what I did.
I really enjoyed reading your choice and the way you set it up.
The fact that mine uses the latest AH-IPS was really after the fact -
I only discovered that "bonus" -
the most important criteria (for me) was having 100% sRGB, and on a factory calibration/preset.
AH-IPS are used in the very high pixel density smartphone screens
I believe it is that has brought the prices down for (ips) monitors more suited for photographic work.
Thanks