Skip to main content

AOC C2783FQ 27-inch Curved VA Monitor Review

Grayscale, Gamma & Color

Grayscale Tracking

Our grayscale and gamma tests are described in detail here.

Image 1 of 3

Image 2 of 3

Image 3 of 3

All our glowing talk about contrast wouldn’t be worth much without accurate grayscale, gamma, and color. Fortunately, the C2783FQ gives up nothing in those areas. Starting in the default Standard mode with no adjustments, we see only tiny errors in the 80 and 90% steps. If you look very closely, you might see a purple tint, but only if you know it’s there. We’re perfectly happy to add this display to our list of products that don’t need calibration. Users should be more than satisfied with this level of grayscale performance.

The sRGB mode doesn’t really offer any gains in the grayscale test. It appears to be identical to Standard, except you can’t adjust brightness, contrast, or gamma, which is an issue for us. If you don’t calibrate, leave it in Standard.

There are gains to be had in the User color temp mode, however. Adjusting the C2783FQ’s precise set of RGB sliders results in excellent tracking that nearly matches many of the professional displays we’ve tested. Only small tweaks are necessary to achieve this result. We also had to lower the Contrast slider by three clicks.

Comparisons

Image 1 of 2

Image 2 of 2

1.90dE is certainly a low error for an un-adjusted monitor. A calibrated result of .71dE is even better. Both numbers exceed our expectations for a business-class display. We think the C2783FQ is suitable for proofing duties based on this and the other results you’ll see below.

Gamma Response

Image 1 of 2

Image 2 of 2

We couldn’t quite achieve an ideal 2.2 average value in our gamma tests. In the Standard and sRGB modes, the trace runs closer to 2.4. Changing the preset takes the result too far below the line; around 2.0 in fact, which is too light, especially given the C2783FQ’s high contrast. Gamma 1 is the better visual choice. Calibration brings the average closer to 2.3, which represents a slight gain. We’re satisfied with our sample’s performance, although a 2.2 option would be a good addition to the OSD.

Comparisons

BEGIN PHOTO ALBUM

Image 1 of 2

Image 2 of 2

END PHOTO ALBUM

Despite a high average value, tracking is extremely tight. This also makes the error less noticeable. After calibration we measured 2.34 which is a 6.36% deviation from 2.2. While we’d like the C2783FQ to track 2.2 perfectly, none of this causes a problem for image quality. It’s really quite excellent.

Color Gamut & Luminance

For details on our color gamut testing and volume calculations, please click here.

Image 1 of 6

Image 2 of 6

Image 3 of 6

Image 4 of 6

Image 5 of 6

Image 6 of 6

As we performed the benchmarks, we were concerned that the gamma tracking would harm color saturation tracking, but thankfully that is not the case. Aside from a slight aberration in red, the color points are pretty much spot-on. Gamut luminance is a bit below the line, but no more than 10%, except for red, which is a tiny bit lower. The resulting errors are nearly all below 3dE. Red and green are off only slightly. If we could fix one thing it would be the hue error in magenta. When looking at the error levels though, it is barely above the visible threshold of 3dE. Like the grayscale result, Standard and sRGB are pretty much the same. Calibration improves gamut accuracy a little but not enough to make a significant difference.

Comparisons

Image 1 of 2

Image 2 of 2

Calibration takes the average color error from 2.72dE to 2.39dE. Again it’s not something most users will be able to see, even in a side-by-side comparison. We think it’s worth doing for the gain in grayscale accuracy more than anything else. There is really nothing to complain about here. The C2783FQ has excellent performance right out of the box and post-adjustment.

Our group contains a few over-achievers in the gamut volume test. The three ultra-wides all render more than 100% of the sRGB gamut. Our review subject does perfectly well with 98.19%. That last 1.81% is due to tiny hue errors in blue and green that move the side of the triangle in a bit. None of this is a deal breaker. Even without an ICC profile, this display is qualified to serve as a proofing tool.

  • NinjaNerd56
    I have a similar flat version of this screen, and love it. $209 on sale at Best Buy last year.

    I use it with work laptop and home game tower every day...it's been OFF about 2 minutes since I got it.

    Good stuff, Maynard!
    Reply
  • Dantte
    I want a 34" 21:9 1440p curved AMVA with 120Hz+ and g-sync. Please, someone make this display

    UPDATE: I looked into this and apparently AUO (they build the panels for Acer) is working on this exactly panel, @200Hz, and should be available in 2017. FreeSync and G-Sync are unknown at this time. They are also working on a 4K 144Hz panel that should come out around the same time in 2017.
    Reply
  • sillynilly
    Great price for an ok monitor. Could never go backwards to a large format 1080 panel, but for many people, this could be a decent option. I'm with Dantte - that's the monitor I'm looking for.
    Reply
  • jaber2
    Not sure if I want the wires not hanging from the monitor, this design makes my head hurt
    Reply
  • TheDane
    Low rez.... boring! Please - more 3440x1440 and 4K gaming monitor tests. Since I tried gaming on a 3440x1440 (21:9) I simply cannot go back to anything less than 2560x1440.
    Reply
  • Korpxx
    People like Thedane give me a headache
    Reply
  • TheDane
    Korpxx: Sorry about that. Doesn't change my opionion one bit though.
    Reply
  • nitrium
    I'd go for something like this instantly if it was 2560x1600 (16:10) 144Hz IPS with FreeSync.
    Reply
  • Eggz
    CORRECTION:

    The opening paragraph says that 34' ultrawides are usually 3440 x 2160, but they are usually 3440 x 1440. The 2160 number is part of 4K, not ultrawide.
    Reply
  • harrkev
    Can somebody explain the "curved monitor" thing to me with anything besides "because we can?"

    Da Vinci pained the Mona Lisa on a completely flat surface. Van Gogh did not have a curved surface when he painted "The Starry Night." OK. I admit that the Michelangelo chose a curved surface when he painted the Sistine Chapel ceiling.
    Reply