Re: Eizo CG241W vs. NEC 2690 SpectraView
Re: Eizo CG241W vs. NEC 2690 SpectraView
- Subject: Re: Eizo CG241W vs. NEC 2690 SpectraView
- From: Joseph Piazza <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 19:24:21 -0500
I may have missed it, but following this thread, I see no one
weighing in on the Eizo CG241W or really drawing much of a comparison
to the NEC. A better comparison would be to compare the NEC 2490 -
that's more like apples to apples. Having set up and calibrated both
displays, here are some key features, comparisons and observations:
1) An on-board circuit to control brightness and uniformity. ASIC on
the EIZO and ColorComp on the NEC. However, the EIZO ASIC uses 16-bit
internal calculation to achieve better grayscale rendering and shadow
detail. Not sure what the NEC does exactly, maybe 10-bit? The EIZO
looks smoother, detail is better and highlight areas look great, just
like the old high quality CRTs.
2) LCD Panel. A high quality S-IPS panel is ideal. But since no
manufacturer ever discloses this important spec it's very difficult
to know what you're actually getting. My guess is the NEC is IPS and
the EIZO is S-IPS. I think EIZO uses a better quality glass and this
could be one reason it looks better. Can someone give us an answer here?
3) 12-bit internal calibration is available on both.
4) Color gamut. The NEC claims 75% Adobe RGB while the EIZO claims 96%.
5) Software. SpectraViewII vs. Color Navigator. Who cares? They are
both more than adequate. The important thing is the hardware and the
ability to have the LUT on the monitor and not on your video card.
6) Both have drift correction sensors to correct for brightness
fluctuations.
7) Warranty. The NEC has a nice 4-year warranty, but EIZO stands
behind their display for 5-years.
8) Price. No doubt, the NEC is cheaper at 1400.00 USD vs. the more
expensive 2345.00 USD. You'll still need a qualifying Spectro for the
EIZO. I prefer to use my Eye-One Pro. The i1Display2 is recommended,
so if you don't have one, tack on another 250.00 USD.
I agree with a couple of comments from the thread: 1) You get what
you pay for. The EIZO is most likely a better piece of hardware. 2)
The ultimate judgement is visual. It gets really pointless with all
the technical data and colorimeter measurements of solid patches. Not
to mention to the painfully boring amount of speculation and
conjecture in the average posting! Look at a good high quality image
and see what you've got. View a monitor wedge to see how your blacks
are holding up, etc., etc.
After seeing and using both I went with the EIZO despite the higher
price tag, but I wouldn't laugh at the guy using the NEC.
Joseph Piazza
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden