Nixeus VUE27D Monitor Review
by Chris Heinonen on December 23, 2013 8:00 AM ESTThe main question for the Nixeus VUE27D is how many people are fine with just a DisplayPort input? For Mac users, the cheapest 27” displays haven’t been ideal choices as they only offer DVI inputs and you’d need an active DisplayPort to DVI adapter to use them with a MacBook. Most monitors with DisplayPort inputs have cost a good bit more, but the VUE27D has recently been selling for only $370, cheaper than other DisplayPort options.
You are very limited in adjustments with the VUE27D as only brightness controls are available. The color quality out of the box is okay, but the grayscale quality is worse with a reddish tint that I can see. Most people tend to push their displays more towards the blue end of the color spectrum than the red end, so this might turn some people off. For people without any ability to calibrate their display, there is no way to get rid of this tint.
If you can calibrate, the Nixeus produces a very nice image. The contrast ratio is very good and the one thing I would want to change is to have a lower minimum light level. Because the minimum level is too high it can’t do our sRGB/80 cd/m2 target as well as other displays. Most people will run their display higher than this, but for people after an inexpensive display for doing professional work it is a bit disappointing.
Overall, if you can find the VUE27D selling for $370 as we've seen recently, it winds up as a decent value but not a spectacular one. The more flexible stand is nice to see and helps a bit with the value. However the current price for the Nixeus is around $450, and for $438 you can get the Monoprice Glass Panel Pro. It has a worse stand but more inputs and adjustments available. With that current price difference you can even get an aftermarket stand and the Monoprice becomes a much better value. It seems to have slightly more lag, but the measurements for these two displays are different so I can’t be certain of that either.
There are no major flaws or defects with the VUE27D, and it is a nice follow-up to the prior VUE27. However, the market has changed a bit since our VUE27 review, and for the current street prices I feel the Monoprice Glass offers a bit more value. If the Nixeus goes back to its prior price, or even a bit lower, then it can stand out more against the $300 DVI-only models, but at the current price it comes in a bit too high.
36 Comments
View All Comments
ZeDestructor - Monday, December 23, 2013 - link
Good image-quality results, no ISP of any sort and a single displayport input... Exactly what big screens should be (IMO): All screen, no features I'll never use (I really don't need more than 1 input on a desktop screen).dishayu - Monday, December 23, 2013 - link
+1I mean yes, there are use cases where you do need the ISP and multiple inputs but a vast majority of people don't touch the monitor controls after the initial setup so those things go pretty much unused anyways.
marcosears - Thursday, October 9, 2014 - link
+2 /Marco from http://www.consumertop.com/best-monitor-guide/Daniel Egger - Monday, December 23, 2013 - link
Damn, those are some really horrible product images. Vignetting, unsharp, terrible lighting, barrel distortion... With such a terrible article opening I'm not even interested in reading the rest of the article.shaolin95 - Monday, December 23, 2013 - link
You know, as a photography fan, I try not to be picky about articles but damn you are right, this is extremely bad photography!ingwe - Monday, December 23, 2013 - link
It is not great. I would have really appreciated something better. But let's not be too harsh.ws3 - Monday, December 23, 2013 - link
With which Android phone were these photos taken?abhaxus - Tuesday, December 24, 2013 - link
Don't think the Sony NEX-6 is an android phone. Attempt at troll failed.cheinonen - Monday, December 23, 2013 - link
Yes, my main photography location has been overrun by wrapped presents at this point, so I had to choose somewhere else. I also just switched my camera from JPEG to RAW (NEX-6 with 16-50 lens) and by the time I noticed the lack of any lens correction with RAW, the originals were deleted. I've added Lightroom and Photoshop since then, as well as a prime lens, and so I'll retake these images when I get a chance to avoid them distracting.shaolin95 - Monday, December 23, 2013 - link
haahah only because you got a great camera I forgive you (I love my NEX-6) and indeed when I looked at it quickly thought of my RAW images before DXO 9 since that lens requires heavy correction indeed. :)