No, but I just finished spending days reading about various choices and buying the NEC LCD249'WUXi.
I still am not sure if I regret not getting a LED backlit monitor. I'm pretty sure I am happy with a (basically) sRGB monitor instead of wide gamut. In doing a bit of soft proofing experimentation, I just am not doing much outside of sRGB in terms of original shots, and all the labs I use accept only sRGB anyway (your mileage may vary there).
I was VERY surprised at the little difference in it and the cheap Gateway I have (a FPD2485W). The biggest differences are in a deeper black and much better shadow detail, it is a closer match to printed media. The color accuracy is surprisingly identical with both calibrated.
It is also more even across the screen (but it should be for twice the price), and it is more stable, about the same on startup or prolonged use.
But the shadow detail and ability to thus better predict when I have the exposure right for printing was the big need. And it is very good. I do not think it could be bettered-enough to pay double the price for another.
On the other hand, switching from a CRT in a darkened room, I still cannot get the contrast I really want without a brighter display than I like. I'm running at 1'' cd/m2, but at that I get only about 38':1 contrast. I'd really like to be a bit lower in bright and higher in contrast. The HP monitor claims it works down to 4', but the specs do not say what the resulting contrast is, or what the minimum black level is. It may be the LED is going to give you better contrast at low brightness, if that's something you want.
And at least in concept longer total life. Though I've never had an LCD wear out.
But I would start by deciding if you really need wide gamut.
