LG 34UM95 Monitor Review
by Chris Heinonen on June 18, 2014 7:00 AM ESTPre-calibration I used the Warm color temperature preset and the Gamma 1 setting. This provided results closest to our targets of 200 cd/m2, sRGB color gamut, and a gamma of 2.2. The RGB balance is good overall and the largest issue is the gamma. Yellow and Green are slightly over-saturated but most of the color gamut is good overall.
| Pre-Calibration |
Post-Calibration, 200 cd/m^2 |
Post-Calibration, 80 cd/m^2 |
|
| White Level (cd/m^2) | 207.8 | 198.8 | 81.3 |
| Black Level (cd/m^2) | 0.2023 | 0.205 | 0.085 |
| Contrast Ratio | 1027:1 | 970:1 | 955:1 |
| Gamma (Average) | 1.98 | 2.20 | 2.37 |
| Color Temperature | 6791K | 6511K | 6494K |
| Grayscale dE2000 | 1.65 | 0.46 | 0.81 |
| Color Checker dE2000 | 2.08 | 1.30 | 1.34 |
| Saturations dE2000 | 2.84 | 1.15 | 1.20 |
Post-calibration the RGB Balance is nearly perfect and the gamma is ideal as well. Color errors are improved due to the more accurate gamma but the 100% yellow and green colors are still overly saturated. Our contrast ratio drops slightly but is still good. With our 80 cd/m2 target and sRGB gamma the 100% issues at Green and Yellow remain but other colors are much better.
With a white LED backlight system, the LG is limited to the sRGB gamut. Using the internal color management system you can correct the over-saturation in the yellow and green colors but I would advise against it. I did this and while 100% improved, every saturation below 100% is worse and and the color checker test is worse as well. It is nice of LG to include a CMS system, but it does not function correctly in my testing. I would much rather see a multi-point white balance, which does work correctly, to help correct for the RGB balance and gamma inside the display instead of in the video card LUT.
Post-calibration the LG 34UM95 is good but not excellent. For most people it should be just fine, but for graphics professionals the extra saturation will pose a problem. LG also provides their own calibration software but I was unable to get it to run correctly on my MacBook Pro or PC. Even when it detected the display correctly it is unable to use my i1Pro or i1DisplayPro meters to calibrate itself. Assuming this performs similar to my last experience using it, CalMAN will still provide superior results as the LG display lacks an internal LUT.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
110 Comments
View All Comments
FroggyTaco - Wednesday, June 18, 2014 - link
Shopping this monitor @B&H I found a cheaper version. It appears to only lacking the TB option.LG 34UM65-P for $699 no TB ports
LG 34UM95-P for $999 has TB ports
FroggyTaco - Wednesday, June 18, 2014 - link
Nvm I failed to notice the resolution diff in my initial search.Pork@III - Wednesday, June 18, 2014 - link
"Very long array" :)cas1 - Wednesday, June 18, 2014 - link
What input was used when calculating input lag? I've seen other users report awful input lag on this monitor. Your review makes it seem amazing.Did you try DisplayPort 1.2 & did you have issues with it?
cheinonen - Thursday, June 19, 2014 - link
HDMI is used for input lag, as it is for every display. I have had no issues with DisplayPort 1.2 with it, and I've had DP 1.2 issues with other displays.japtor - Wednesday, June 18, 2014 - link
I'm wondering about the lack of internal LUT...cause this guy says there is one, is he just mistaken?:http://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1213797-lg-34um9...
cheinonen - Thursday, June 19, 2014 - link
I tested the internal LUT with the HDMI input and doing it manually it does not improve the image. Instead it improves 100% saturations and causes issues at every other level. For the PC, accessing the LUT requires using the LG calibration software, which I mention in the review would not run for me. They have sent me a new sample and I'm going to try to do it again.japtor - Thursday, June 19, 2014 - link
Thanks, hope it works out.BTW according to this guy the display can also apparently work as a KVM with the TB and USB uplink port on separate machines:
http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=26774...
TrackSmart - Wednesday, June 18, 2014 - link
Nice review.A photo showing two documents side-by-side on the display might give readers a better sense of how a wide-aspect monitor compares to dual monitors for productivity. Maybe with something in the image for a sense of scale? In either case, your thoughts on productivity were quite helpful for those of us who don't watch movies on their computer screens.
GTVic - Wednesday, June 18, 2014 - link
A 20" 4:3 + 24" 16:10 dual monitor setup is a decent setup and wider. You would need 3:1 or 27:9 instead of 21:9 to match. So about 8" more width, 880 more pixels, giving 4320x1440.