Eizo vs NEC and IPS vs PVA.

<p>Hello,</p>

<p>My old iMac with its matte 8 bit IPS screen died and I need a new monitor but have great difficulty choosing one. At first I thought the choice was easy; I read great things about the Dell U2410 so I bought it but didn't like it much and returned it. Now I'm looking at the serious stuff, at Eizo and NEC monitors.</p>

<p>However, as I can't justify going over $ 1000 I am looking at the more modestly priced monitors. I don't necessarily need/want a wide gamut monitor but I do want a true 8 bit panel.</p>

<p>Here's my short list:<br>

- NEC P221W(€ 390)<br>

- Eizo CG222W (on sale for € 480 it's a demo model but it comes with full 5 year warranty)<br>

- Eizo Flexscan S2243W (€ 540)<br>

- NEC 2490WUXi2 (€ 690)</p>

<p>I would love some input on this as I go back and forth and can't decide, particularly because I have some concerns regarding S-PVA panels, like:<br>

a. viewing angle<br>

b. the phenomenon I read about that, and I quote: "the shadow detail that blend to black when you are looking right in front of the s-pva screen. Details appear as soon as your [sic] looking sideways." Here is a link to the pics the poster added to show his point: http://tiny.cc/aaqm3</p>

<p>I would be grateful for a bit of help.</p>

 

<p>the 2 NEC you mention are excellent.</p>

<p>What was the problem with the Dell? it is a superb entry level monitor for the price, and at around 500$ you cant go wrong. Did you calibrated it with a device? or simply use it as is out of the box... not a good thing to do with ANY monitor.</p>

<p>So remember that; when you get your new monitor, you will also need to buy a spider3 pro or a i1display pro.. that add another 300$ to your invoice.. but it is a must if you are a bit serious about color management.</p>

<p>Eizo are fine, great products. I just have never seen anything making the larger price point over the NEC justified. P221W is entry level NEC SpectraView and for the price, not bad at all. I’d recommend the 2490 if budget permits or, the newer PA series if they are available for you (they can be calibrated quite excellently without an instrument using Multiprofiler which is free). </p>

<p>Thank you for the replies.</p>

<p>As to the Dell, the colours seemed very muddy. I did not have a calibration device at the time but I didn't think this had anything to do with the monitor not being calibrated. The colours looking a bit off with too strong reds, yes. But what I'm talking about was different, it was like I was looking through a dirty shield. The screen simply lacked clarity.<br>

There was also a colour cast in one of the corners, although I'm sure I could have exchanged the Dell for another that would be without this fault.</p>

<p>However, if you are telling me that I was wrong with returning the Dell, that it is in fact a 'superb entry level monitor' then I am rather confused as how to interpret those sites that say the Dells and HPs and the likes aren't any good but that the serious photographer needs an Eizo or a NEC.</p>

<p>Yes, budget permits buying the 2490. But if e.g. the NEC P221 is just as good, then I would prefer that obviously.<br>

I have looked at the NEC PA241 as well, but it is slightly over budget. Spectraview prices in Europe are ridiculous to begin with of course. The PA241 costs € 892, the SV edition costs € 1503! Although I have learned that I can simply buy the regular one and use the US Spectraview software. Still, 900 euro for a monitor is too much, I simply can't justify it.</p>

<p>What about the questions I asked about PVA panels? Coming from an IPS panel will the viewing angle be a problem you think? And what about those blacks when looked at straight as opposed to from a bit of an angle? It seems a paradox to me: you want to look straight at a PVA panel or else things will begin to deviate rapidly, yet for blacks you do need a bit of an angle...<br>

Any thoughts on this?</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Yes, budget permits buying the 2490. But if e.g. the NEC P221 is just as good, then I would prefer that obviously.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Its not. The more expensive panel is IPS.</p>

<p>I didtn say ALL the Dell are good.. i say that the Dell U2410 is a excellent entry level monitor ONCE calibrated correctly. And yes, muddy screen and weird color can be the result of a uncalibrated monitor.. BUT color cast in one corner is not normal.. so yes, you could have exchange it for another unit and be happy. This Dell is use by professional when they need to equip there 10 computer workgroup.. better to spend 10x 500$ then 10x 1000$.. and many if not most amateur that dont have 1000$ budget for a monitor prefer to invest there hard earn money on something they can trust and use by real competent user (many of them are here on Photo.net ; )</p>

<p>The review you are reading opn Amazon and alike are mostly from people who dont know anything or close to anything about color management or photo editing.. and complaint about what they dont understand or the lack of 20 kind of connection for tv, laptop, hdmi etc...</p>

<p>You want real advice, you come to a real photo site where amateur and pro alike share real and good information.. lucky you, 2 of those user that does this for a living have already answer you.</p>

<p>Now if you can buy yourself a real highend monitor, do so. I feel that the P221 vs the 2490 have similar visual result in the real world, but i much prefer to have 24inch vs 21.. so if you can afford the 2490 go for it for sure.I never see the newer 2490model.. i cant honestly suggest what i never saw, but im sure it is equal or better than the *old* 2490.</p>

<p>Since i dont dance in front of my monitor and correctly put them at eye level.. even a laptop monitor in a way could do in need.. angle of vision are important when people look at your monitor over your shoulder, or when you have a laptop.. but if you correctly set your monitor and work *normally* angle of vision is not suppose to be such a problem.</p>

<p>For more technical do or dont.. Andrew is your man.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Patrick, the sites I was talking about were shootsmarter and imagescience. How trustworthy they are I don't know. And this is basically my problem in a nutshell:<br>

I don't know anything about monitors and so need to find people who do. The problem is that there are many people who seem to know this stuff, but their views are often conflicting and how is one to know who is right and who is wrong? This is a real problem. So please don't be offended. I am really confused and am only trying to get some clarity.</p>

<p>Take e.g. Eizo monitors. Their expensive, high end monitors are PVA panels for the most part. Yet at the same time people say that IPS panels are better. So for me this is a paradox and very confusing.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>I was talking about were shootsmarter and imagescience.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>shootsmarter, not so much. </p>

<p>im not offended : )</p>

<p>in a nutshell...</p>

<p>Eizo are amazing monitor, but overpriced vs a NEC for the same visual quality.</p>

<p>NEC are the best bang for your buck in the professional serie and for professional.</p>

<p>Dell make 1or 2 really good monitor for photo editing, the rest are excellent for your dentist.</p>

<p>No monitor under 500$ as today are consider good for photo editing, good as better than your laptop monitor i mean.</p>

<p>and quickly;</p>

<ul>

<li>S-IPS/H-IPS panels are generally considered the best all around panel type, but they are more expensive and very few are made. High end, expensive.</li>

<li>S-PVA/MVA panels offer better color reproduction and viewing angles than TN panels, have slightly worse response times than TN or S-IPS, offer the best contrast ratios, may suffer from color shifting or input lag and have higher availability than S-IPS panels. Mid range, fair price.</li>

<li>TN panels are very cheap and have the fastest response times, but suffer from inferior color reproduction, contrast ratios and viewing angles. Low end, inexpensive.</li>

</ul>

<p>http://www.pchardwarehelp.com/guides/lcd-panel-types.php</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>I don't know anything about monitors and so need to find people who do.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You have found them: Patrick and Andrew.</p>

<p>Yes, Kent, but we're still waiting from Andrew to confirm or deny the viewing angle shift in shadow detail illustrated in Levina's Luminous Landscape link on PVA panels such as might be the case with the NEC P221. Levina would just like to make an informed buy.</p>

<p>I mean three posts and Andrew still doesn't answer this. He seems to do that a lot in other related threads. I don't understand why.</p>

<p>Thanks very much for the explanation, Patrick. Much appreciated. The first part of your answer in particular is very helpful and cleared up a thing or two.</p>

<p>See, I got the impression that Eizo's ColorGraphic monitors were the cream of the crop in monitor land, so when I learned that Eizo offered a CG222W demo model for half the normal price I jumped, thinking that this one surely was the best of them all then. Yet the consensus among you is that the NEC 2490 would be the better choice, which came as a bit of a surprise, but which in light of your explanation is beginning to make sense now.</p>

<p>I do know the differences between the three main panel types though, but the only experience I had in the real world is with TN and S-IPS panels so I know these first hand. But I have never worked with a PVA panel and I'm trying to understand how different it would be from the S-IPS panel that was in my old iMac and that I loved so much. And if I could live with those differences. So when I ask questions like the viewing angle and how about that detail shift in the dark areas depending on angle, I am trying to get a feel of the thing, as it were.</p>

<p>Tim is right in that I am trying to make an informed buy. Thank you, Tim! :)</p>

<p> </p>

<p>At the time I had a P221W, I don’t recall there being any such issues. But again, the P221W isn’t a IPS panel and the 2490, which I recommended is (its larger and isn’t a wide gamut display that the OP said he preferred).</p>

<p>Levina, what ever display model you decide to buy, make sure you buy from a vendor with a liberal return policy. There are manufacturing differences from the cheapest to the most expensive brands and models out there just so you're aware of that.</p>

<p>I went with a 22" Dell 2209WA IPS panel, sRGB-ish, fluorescent backlit LCD and couldn't be more happier with it. It calibrates very close to my 20" 2004 G5 iMac that recently died. The Dell cost me $300 from Amazon. When it showed a noticeable cool (6700K) on one side and warm (5900K) on the other I swapped it for another directly from Dell.</p>

<p>But another FYI...while doing some dusting around the connector ports recently, I found a green refurbished sticker stuck, out of sight, underneath the bottom panel surround. Wasn't told I was going to be getting a refurbished unit from Dell during the exchange, but it's a lot better than the new one.</p>

<p>Here's a PN thread showing a photo of the Dell attached to my old iMac and how close they calibrate...</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00WAfF</p>

<p>Tim, I looked for that Dell 2209WA monitor a few months ago, but it was nowhere to be had. Also tried the second-hand market. Nothing. A pity that it was discontinued.</p>

<p>You know it's funny, but I always used my iMac's eyeball calibrator as well and have always been pleased with the results! :)</p>

<p>Anyway, I think I will go for the Nec 2490. Seems the best choice right now.</p>

<p>Thanks everyone for the help.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Levina, SuperCal is another Mac OS eyeball calibrator that's easier on the eyes to use during the raster target slider adjusts than Apple's. </p>

<p>Found out recently in emails with Brock Brandenberg, creator of SuperCal, that he's now able to access the same XYZ colorant matrices measured and written into the display ROM chip at the factory with higher quality equipment than a $200 colorimeter on any display including the iMac.</p>

<p>This didn't used to be the case before OS X and now that he's written it to work with Snow Leopard and Lion the final profiles are as accurate as Apple's eyeball calibrator profiles and I can attest very close to my i1Display colorimeter profiles. </p>

<p>I asked him what got fixed and Brock said Apple fixed it by improving the Mac OS graphics API that interpreted the ROM chip machine code into ICC compliant standards. Before, Brock had to use a very expensive software to do the interpretation often with not very accurate results. </p>

<p>Thanks very much for that bit of info, Tim. I will definitely check it out!</p>

<p>I hope it's all right if I revive the thread as I have something to add?</p>

<p>See, before purchasing the NEC 2490 I decided I wanted to see a PVA panel with my own eyes after all, and found a wonderful store that I had never heard of but is specialized in everything for the professional photographer. It is located in the outskirts of town and it was huge and they had a large corner filled with Eizo's.</p>

<p>So I set myself behind the CG223w, plugged in a memory stick with a selection of my photographs and was pretty much blown away. I always thought my 8 bit matte S-IPS iMac screen was beautiful, but this Eizo was a different class altogether. I simply loved how it looked: the satin matte quality, the soft clarity of the colours. Just beautiful.</p>

<p>I said earlier that Eizo here had a CG222w on their sales list, but they're all out. However, they made me an offer: the CG222w, new, for € 600.</p>

<p>My question now is: how does the NEC P221w compare to this Eizo? Specs seem similar, and the NEC would still be 200 euro less expensive. But is it as good as the Eizo?</p>

<p> </p>

as me and andrew said numerous time: the eizo is just a more expensive similar monitor vs the nec... they are both

built for pro in mind

<p>Patrick, that is not an answer to my question as I very well know they are similar and are both built with the pro in mind. Why do you think that that is an argument at all? It isn't, as it says nothing about the respective monitors.</p>

<p>But no worries, I have found an answer to my question elsewhere from someone not so biased, somebody who could point out some of the fundamental differences between the two panels. From that I deduced that the Eizo is the better one. And the one I will purchase.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>excellent choice. dont forget also to get a calibrator for your expensive monitor.. spider3 pro and i1 display pro come to mind.. why? because they are good : )</p>

<p>And the argument was more that you can save 200euro for the same kind of quality, precision, and color fidelity... if you where less arrogant you would have seen that.</p>

<p>One of the most difficult things about asking for advice on the internet is that you have to decide who to believe in the case of conflicting advice. And just because one source doesn't agree with another doesn't make it biased. It is just as likely that the other source is biased or even wrong. What some reasonably savvy people do is to go through a number of their "advisers" posts to see how cogent they are and importantly to see how other experienced posters react to their contributions. Also to look at their background to see whether there is anything there (or not) to mean that they are likely to have relevent expertise. And maybe if it is relevent to look at their work on a website or on here to make sure that your adviser is a competent photographer so you don't confuse eloquence with quality of advice. <br>

I don.t see anything in Patrick's posts to indicate bias. He's been trying to tell you that you can get pretty much the same performance from two monitor brands, one notably less expensive that the other, thats all, and he works in the field day in day out to form those views. When you've got Andrew Rodney, a very well respected writer and educator in the field giving you a similar point of view then you can be pretty sure there is something in it. </p>

<p>I've never seen an Eizo but have the p221 sitting in front of me here. The shift in contrast and color with viewing angles is minimal compared to a TN display or laptop. I don't think it's much of an issue is you usually edit sitting in one place. The overall quality of the display is better than S-IPS panels I have in my office as I don't have shifts from green to magenta across the screen and there is less banding in the shadows. The other nice thing about NEC is the Spectraview software which directly accesses the monitor's internal look-up table and sets brightness, contrast, etc. itself with minimal intervention. This saves a good bit of time when you calibrate. Im sure the higher-end NECs are better but this display is good enough for my photo and video editing and better than the CRTs I used to use.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I always thought my 8 bit matte S-IPS iMac screen was beautiful, but this Eizo was a different class altogether.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, beautiful is one thing, but what about a match between your iMac, Eizo and a print? The monitor is suppose to show you the intended color edited into the image, not whether it's more beautiful viewed on another more expensive display.</p>

<p>I'm sure it looked more beautiful on an uncalibrated Eizo, but what will your images look like after you calibrate it? Back to the old less beautiful view on the iMac?</p>

<p>If you were not biased, Patrick, then I apologize, but that is the idea I was getting from you from the start. When I came here for help and listed the 4 monitors I had to choose from, all I got from you was that both the NEC's were excellent. That seemed odd to me, as it indicated that you thought these NEC's were superior to the Eizo's and I felt this could not be true, at least not for the P221w. Also, I had asked a couple of specific questions that were not met.<br /><br />Andrew then responded saying that Eizo monitors are 'great products' but that the larger price point over the NEC is not justified in his opinion. A reasonable answer. He also said that the P221w is not bad at all for the price.<br /><br />'Not bad at all' is not the same as 'excellent'. So now I feel I have somewhat conflicting opinions and as I am trying to get more information I feel I am getting an attitude from you, telling me how fortunate I am to already have two professionals answer me. <br /><br />Excuse me? That's like saying: we know this stuff, you don't, so take our word for it.<br />But that's not how things work with me. So I ask more questions, trying to get answers, which turns out to be rather difficult. <br /><br />Then I go out, look at the Eizo (can't find a shop were they have NEC's on display), come back and try again. But once more you give me an answer that tells me nothing about the displays in question. Again it's all about the price tag. <br /><br />But okay, let's look at that price tag then and see if the argument applies in this particular case. <br /><br />I can buy the Eizo CG222w for a little under 600 euro. The NEC P221W will cost me 370 euro. However, the Eizo comes with the hardware calibration software included and as I already have a Spyder 3 Pro I'm set to go. The NEC comes without the software. It has to be purchased separately. Now I don't know if it will work with the Spyder but if not it will set me back another 220 euro. If I can use the Spyder it will cost me an additional 75 euro. <br />The Eizo comes with a hood. The NEC does not. <br />The Eizo comes with 5 year on site warranty. The NEC with 3 years carry in.<br /><br />So in terms of money, these particular monitors do not differ much in price and so, in my opinion, the price tag should not be taken into account. <br /><br />Oh, and did I say that if the Spyder works with the Spectraview software I could simply buy the software? Well, I can't. I'm in Europe and the download link on the NEC site is closed for Europeans. I can buy the whole kit of course (from a store like B&H), but I can't download the software alone (at least I haven't found a legitimate download link). So if I have to buy the whole spectraview kit the NEC is actually more expensive than the Eizo.<br>

<br />I also hear that NEC support in Europe is dreadful. I don't know if this is correct, but I do know this: I have sent an email to both Eizo support and NEC support (both the European branches), asking a question about calibration. Eizo responded within 36 hours. NEC has yet to respond (it's been a week). <br /><br />Back to the monitors themselves. You keep saying that both monitors are similar. Well, I already know that, don't I. That's exactly the reason it's been so difficult to choose between them. So what I need is differences, which I didn't even realize myself until somebody elsewhere simply listed some of the differences. The most important ones being that the NEC has a 10 bit LUT where Eizo is 12 bit. That the P221 is reported to suffer from slight banding, where the Eizo does not. <br /><br />So all things considered, I do think the Eizo is the better choice here.<br /><br />Tim, I understand your concern, but this is a very serious store and the monitors were all calibrated. My pictures looked pretty much the same as on my iMac in terms of colours, although they looked slightly richer which is no surprise on a Wide Gamut monitor. What I meant about the beauty of the screen, was the screen itself. It has a beautiful soft, satin like finish that looks a lot like the finish on the iMac, but even better. :)</p>