HP Z27q Monitor Review: Aiming For More Pixels
by Brett Howse on December 22, 2015 8:00 AM ESTAdobeRGB Calibration
AdobeRGB tests are done with the same workflow as sRGB, but with the target gamut set to AdobeRGB. As with the sRGB, precalibration results are done for 200 nits, and then calibrated results are done for 200 and 80 nits.
Grayscale
Set to AdobeRGB, the pre-calibration results are quite a bit improved over the sRGB values. They are so good that there is actually little reason to calibrate this display if you are using it for AdobeRGB. The average error rate on grayscale is only 1.08, and the gamma curve is almost perfect. The white point is very close to correct as well.
Saturation
Saturations are very good again, with an average error of just 0.5. This is a great result for an uncalibrated display, and you can see that it easily covers the much wider gamut of AdobeRGB here.
GMB
I feel like a broken record a bit, but the pre-calibration results for GMB are fantastic, with an average error of just 0.462. HP has done a fantastic job on the AdobeRGB LUT for this display.
200 cd/m2 Calibrated
Since the pre-calibration measurements were so good, there would be very little if any need to calibrate this display, but for completeness that has been done.
Grayscale
Although the couple of spikes for grayscale have been corrected, the overall result is actually slightly worse than out of the box. The gamma jumps up, and the white point is off. The results were better before, so if I was using this I would throw this out and leave it at stock.
Saturation
With the white point slightly moved, the overall error rate has actually gone up. It’s still excellent, but not as excellent as before.
GMB
The final test also has a higher score, which at 0.67 is still excellent, but the calibration did nothing to help this display on AdobeRGB gamut. Let’s see how it does at 80 nits.
80 cd/m2 Calibrated
Setting the display to 80 nits, it was then calibrated again.
Grayscale
Overall the result is very good again, although the gamma is not as flat as it was before calibration. The white point and average error rate are both very good though.
Saturation
Much like at 200 nits, the pre-calibration measurements are actually better again, but the end result even with the slightly worse scores is still a very accurate representation of the AdobeRGB color space.
GMB
A result of 0.96 is very good, and the Z27q pretty much had no issues with any of the colors in our Gretag Macbeth test.
Relative Color Comparator - Displayed color on bottom, correct color on top
The results from AdobeRGB are even more impressive than the sRGB space. The Z27q can easily hit pretty much 100% of this target gamut, and the built in LUT is incredibly accurate when targeting AdobeRGB. This is one of the rare times were calibration pretty much did nothing.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
92 Comments
View All Comments
SanX - Wednesday, December 23, 2015 - link
Watch my lips: all that standard traditional PC monitor crap is dead. Monitors must be 4K 50+ inch size, period. I can not even look at that old junk after using for 6 months Samsung 50" 7100 4K TV. Despite it formally is a TV it's light years better then anything else called "PC monitor".The only defect -- it has no PnP functionality so that your PC can not switch it ON. As a result if your PC is ON and TV is off the PnP functionality of Windows may think that you changed monitor to standard resolution and move your open windows to the upper left corner. There exist software which can restore windows positions. It has one of the best latencies ~20ms so with GTX980TI class graphics card it is great for gamers too.
Zan Lynx - Wednesday, December 23, 2015 - link
I wouldn't say regular monitors are dead. I do agree that 50" 4K screens are amazing. It is exactly like having four 24" 1080p monitors in front of you without the obnoxious screen borders.AnnonymousCoward - Friday, December 25, 2015 - link
The Samsung 7100 lags 44ms in 4:4:4 mode, according to http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1853884 That's totally unacceptable.SanX - Friday, December 25, 2015 - link
The only where this could be unacceptable is fast gaming for which there specially exist Game mode which halves the lag. Additional ms you get from high end graphics. Aside from games, in PC mode the 44 ms is still more then twice the human reaction time, I personally do not feel any lag at all, repeating, AT ALL. Monitor quality just overwhelms you, the wow factor is incredible. Do not look at any smaller regular monitors even 4k 28", like Samdung or ASUS, even for free, they are unacceptable in PC text use without scalingSlyNine - Friday, December 25, 2015 - link
Which means you're increasing reaction time by 50%.This would, and has, drove me nuts with tv's used as monitors.
AnnonymousCoward - Monday, December 28, 2015 - link
> more then twice the human reaction timeReaction time is different than observing feedback from your moved hand. The former requires you to interpret a stimulus and respond. The latter involves consciously moving and looking for the result. The difference is probably about a factor of 10: ~200ms reaction time, ~20ms threshold for seeing a result.
SanX - Saturday, December 26, 2015 - link
You still live with impressions of old TVs 50-100 ms lags playing games but things changed a lot.The 44ms lag for standard PC usage (browsing and programming) is absolutely great and not noticeable. For games you have Game Mode with 20-25ms lags which is not noticeable too unless you are a champion of the Republic of Gamers. No other TV monitors beat that (may be only Sammys JS7500 and the Vizio's with 18ms lag) while all Sonys, LGs etc TVs are in 33-55ms and longer range and still are used with for example Playstation for ages.
AnnonymousCoward - Sunday, December 27, 2015 - link
I easily notice 30ms lag with any mouse usage. I'm also a fast user with high acuity. I consider 20ms to be the max acceptable.Using non-4:4:4 in games is clearly a compromise.
It's not true that no other "TV monitor" beats the JU7100. check out this thread: http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1874753 The Crossovers and Wasabi only lag 20ms in 4:4:4.
But hey, if you're a slow user and don't notice 44ms, that's great.
SanX - Sunday, December 27, 2015 - link
I repeat that the only where 44 ms is potentially niticeable is fast gaming, but for that exists game mode whete no one motice any lag as it is way below the human threshold. When I move mouse with as fast as possible circular motion for example I don't see any delay in position of mouse on the screen and on the table een recording this comparison on 30fps video (means it is below 33ms)Who trust your compilation from unknown sources obtained with unknown measurement methodology? Who would use unknown unrated brands? Who needs a monitor unusable for text and browsing because the monitor size MUST be 48 inch minimum to be comfortable for texts without DPI scaling, some people even claim 53 inch minimum? Those monitors you have mentioned are too small for multiple use. For gaming they are OK, for office use not, for use as a 4k TV - way too small, plus their quality is questionable.
Go to the best place which assesses all 4K monitors thoroughly for multiple use calles Rtings www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/by-usage/pc-monitor/best
AnnonymousCoward - Monday, December 28, 2015 - link
Man, you're wrong on pretty much everything :)I just told you, I NOTICE 30ms! But you still foolishly repeat 44ms can only be noticed in fast gaming. And 26ms game mode is beyond human detection. It's beyond YOUR detection, not everyone's! (is that not obvious yet?)
> Who trust your compilation from unknown sources obtained with unknown measurement methodology?
Do you have better data? Even if there's +-5ms of error, the data is immensely useful.
> Who would use unknown unrated brands?
They still use AH-IPS LG panels, and that's arguably _better_ than Samsung's VA.
> MUST be 48 inch minimum to be comfortable for texts without DPI scaling
Nope. 43" is only 103 PPI. And anything bigger is a lot less comfortable (with a normal viewing distance) since the screen is too big and you have to move your head around. Or, you get a 55" and push it farther back to prevent moving your head around, and then have an even higher effective PPI due to further viewing distance.