sRGB Calibration

Calibration of the monitor is done with SpectraCal’s CalMAN 5 suite. For contrast and brightness, the X-Rite i1DisplayPro colorimeter is used, but for the actual color accuracy readings we use the X-Rite i1Pro spectrophotometer. Pre-calibration measurements were done at 200 nits for sRGB with Gamma set to 2.2. In addition, the display is also calibrated for 80 nits.

Grayscale

Out of the box, the grayscale could use some work. The white point is a bit warm, gamma is too high near 100%, and there are error levels over 3 at a couple of the measurement points. Overall the dE is just 2.5, which is reasonable, but anyone wanting to use this display for professional work is going to need to calibrate it.

Saturation

The saturation numbers are much better, which is good since the LUT is not adjustable. Overall the dE is just 1.7, which is very good, and none of the individual tests had an error over 3. You can see that the sRGB gamut is nicely profiled.

GMB

Gretag Macbeth is the most comprehensive test, which goes outside of the standard gamut and saturation tests, and includes many other important colors such as flesh tones. Once again the Z27q is very accurate, with an overall score of just 1.41, which should be plenty accurate for most people. In fact, the grayscale is a part of this test, and it would have pulled the score up even higher. This is a very good result.

200 cd/m2 Calibrated

Next, we use the CalMAN software to calibrate the display. Since this display does not have an accessible LUT, the video card LUT is the only one able to be calibrated. This fixes pretty much just grayscale, but in this case that is the only thing that really needs work anyway.

Grayscale

Once calibrated, the grayscale is almost perfect. The gamma curve is much closer to where it should be, and the overall error level averages just 0.82. The 100% level is better, but still not perfect, but other than that the other results are very much improved. The white point is also fixed with calibration.

Saturation

The improved white point also has a nice impact on the saturation sweeps, with an overall average error level of just 0.73.

GMB

The Gretag Macbeth test also sees a nice improvement, going to an average error level of 0.93, which is fantastic. There were a couple of the colors which spiked close to dE of 3, but overall this is a very accurate panel once calibrated.

80 cd/m2 Calibrated

Since the average office space may not calibrate just at 200 nits, we also run through the tests again at 80 nits calibrated to see if the panel is as accurate with the backlight lowered.

Grayscale

There are no issues once calibrated at 80 nits. The average error rate is just 0.82 again, matching the 200 nit score. White point and gamma are very good as well, although there is a slight bump in gamma close to 100% white level.

Saturation

The saturation score has even improved at 80 nits, coming in at just 0.51 dE2000 average. Please pardon the graph – there is a bug with our workflow for the 80 nit level for saturation.

GMB

Once again we can sum up the Z27q as a very accurate display, once calibrated. The built in LUT for sRGB is very accurate, with the Gretag Macbeth average dE2000 of only 0.56. Considering you can’t calibrate the LUT on your own, it is even more important that HP gets it correct at the factory, and it appears that they have done their homework.

Relative Color Comparator - Correct on bottom, displayed on top

I don’t really find the inaccurate grayscale to be a big issue out of the box. Anyone purchasing the monitor for professional work is going to be calibrating it anyway. Prosumers who are after a 5K panel and don’t have the software or hardware to do calibration will likely be happy with the out of the box results too, since they are fine for most people.

Contrast, Brightness and Gamut AdobeRGB Calibration
Comments Locked

92 Comments

View All Comments

  • usernametaken76 - Tuesday, December 22, 2015 - link

    It would look like native res 2560x1440. That's not really "pretty damn big" it's more along the lines of "just right."
  • stephenbrooks - Thursday, January 7, 2016 - link

    Depends how big someone likes text to be and how far away they prefer their monitor to be. I was given a 2560x1440 27" monitor and chose to run it at 125% scaling, so I guess I'd ask for 250% scaling on the 5K version! (Incidentally, even going from 100% to 125% makes text noticeably smoother)
  • PixyMisa - Tuesday, December 22, 2015 - link

    200% is actually about right for a 27" 5K monitor. I haven't tried it with Windows, but that's exactly what my retina iMac does.

    I have a 4K 28" monitor on my PC at 150%, and 5K is 1.33x the resolution of 4K.

    I use 200% scaling on my 15" 4K notebook too (okay, yes, I'm a retina screen junkie) and that looks great, but you sit closer to a notebook screen than you do to a desktop screen.
  • sharath.naik - Friday, January 1, 2016 - link

    5k is actually 1.7x the resolution of 4k. That's nearly twice.
  • PEJUman - Tuesday, December 22, 2015 - link

    I went from 1600p 30" to 4k 27" and finally settled on 4K 40", which I feel is the perfect PPI for 100% scaling. Incidentally, the 1600p 30" have very similiar PPI. I think 5K needs to be in the 50" range.

    I have better than 20-20 vision and still thinks 125-175% scaling is a little wasteful on the overall effective real estate.
  • bug77 - Tuesday, December 22, 2015 - link

    I have yet to see one, but I also have the feeling even 4k is too much for 27".
  • timbotim - Tuesday, December 22, 2015 - link

    4k on 27" is -just- OK, works out at 163PPI. I have a 24" 4K which is 183DPI and that is too small; for me anyway, but I'm an old git, so I would imagine it's OK for the younger enthusiasts. But this thing is 215PPI, and I've tried DPI scaling and found it wanting.
  • bug77 - Tuesday, December 22, 2015 - link

    Scaling is ok, everyone can set it to their liking (assuming it works). My concern is I'm not going to see pixels without closing in to ~4"/10cm. For pro-photo editing that may be ok, but for me, it's just more work for the video card, work that I won't see anyway.
  • sharath.naik - Tuesday, December 22, 2015 - link

    27 inch is the minimum size for 4k resolution (Ideal at 36-40 inch). 5k at 27 inch monitor is like a 4k at 20 inch inch monitor, completely unusable at 1:1 dpi. Minimum size for 5k monitor should be close to 34 inches, if not there is no point in paying this amount for a resolution you cannot use.
  • SolMiester - Tuesday, December 22, 2015 - link

    +1.
    I struggle with my 28"4K, IMO 5K @ 27" is a waste of time and money!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now