Eizo vs NEC vs Dell

[JeffKohn]

Actually, it is mentioned - according to specs PA241W has 10bit signal input, 14bit 3D LUT with 16bit processing, and 10bit output.

Even after reading your post and going back to the NEC page I still don't see any mention of 10bit, although they do mention the 14-bit LUT. Either I'm blind, or we're not looking at the same web page.

[Czornyj]

Even after reading your post and going back to the NEC page I still don't see any mention of 10bit, although they do mention the 14-bit LUT. Either I'm blind, or we're not looking at the same web page.

http://www.nec-display-solutions.co.uk/p/u...=LCD&e=e1s1

[bjanes]

I don’t believe its been released.

According to a local store (CDW, Vernon Hills, IL), they expect to receive the PA241W-BK on the 29th of March. I will check back then and post an update and hopefully others will do so also.

Bill

[Chris L]

According to a local store (CDW, Vernon Hills, IL), they expect to receive the PA241W-BK on the 29th of March. I will check back then and post an update and hopefully others will do so also.

Bill

anymore news regarding this monitor?

[Chris L]

anymore news regarding this monitor?

I think its listed at BH for $999 but not shipping for 6 weeks:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/6764...Widescreen.html

[pixtweak]

Yes but I don’t yet have permission to talk about it and have to really start hammering on it. But there is some really interesting new technology here that could make it a game changer.

It's been released, and I am considering this or the Eizo CG223W. I would welcome feedback regarding either of these monitors. I have a Monaco Optix XR which I understand may work better with the Eizo CG223W. Any thoughts on that? Is investing in Specta View II package if I go with NEC PA241W, necessary or significantly better than continuing to use the Optix XR?  I am not clear on exactly how compatible if at all third party pucks are with each of these monitors.

[digitaldog]

Is investing in Specta View II package if I go with NEC PA241W, necessary or significantly better than continuing to use the Optix XR?  I am not clear on exactly how compatible if at all third party pucks are with each of these monitors.

I'd say yes for a number of reasons, the main advantage being the display calibration being handled in the panel with their software and the custom filters in their colorimeter over the XR which expects an sRGB like behavior.

[digitaldog]

Is investing in Specta View II package if I go with NEC PA241W, necessary or significantly better than continuing to use the Optix XR?  I am not clear on exactly how compatible if at all third party pucks are with each of these monitors.

I'd say yes for a number of reasons, the main advantage being the display calibration being handled in the panel with their software and the custom filters in their colorimeter over the XR which expects an sRGB like behavior.

[pixtweak]

Thanks Andrew for your response. I don't want to rush you, but certainly many people are curious to hear first hand observations regarding the PA241W. Do you have any preliminary or additional thoughts based on your experience with the NEC PA241W?

[digitaldog]

Thanks Andrew for your response. I don't want to rush you, but certainly many people are curious to hear first hand observations regarding the PA241W. Do you have any preliminary or additional thoughts based on your experience with the NEC PA241W?

There really isn't more I can say because 1, I have a preproduction unit and 2, I don't have final software (or any SpectraView II software for this unit). 3rd, to really do it justice, one would have to spend some time measuring the device over time and plotting the delta's to produce a sound report as to how effective the self calibration process works.

[billy]

I am not a color mangement guru, I just want to buy a good monitor for processing digital files and doing a little bit of printing, If I buy this NEC PA241 W ( http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/6764...Widescreen.html ), can I continue to calibrate with my monaco optix device and software? Would I have to buy this spectraview software?

[digitaldog]

I am not a color mangement guru, I just want to buy a good monitor for processing digital files and doing a little bit of printing, If I buy this NEC PA241 W ( http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/6764...Widescreen.html ), can I continue to calibrate with my monaco optix device and software? Would I have to buy this spectraview software?

You want to use their (NEC’s) software. It should continue to support the fine Optix instrument you own.

[billy]

You want to use their (NEC’s) software. It should continue to support the fine Optix instrument you own.

cool but let me get this straight; i use my optix instrument but not the monaco optix software that came with it? I use the NEC software that comes with the display?

[digitaldog]

cool but let me get this straight; i use my optix instrument but not the monaco optix software that came with it? I use the NEC software that comes with the display?

Yes. At least in the current version I have, it supports that instrument.

[Ethan_Hansen]

The Spectraview software supports all flavors of Eye-One (Pro (Rev A and D), Display One, and Display Two), the Spyder 2 and 3, Optix XR/DTP94/ColorEye, ColorMunki, and the NEC-branded version of the i1-2 Display that is tuned to work with the 2690 and 3090 panels.

Of the sensors on the list, the Spyder 3 and i1-Pro are going to be the best choices for the PA241W. The dedicated NEC puck may work as well, although we have only characterized a single sample, so can say nothing about the unit-to-unit variability standard i2 Display pucks exhibit. The Spyder 2 is comparatively inaccurate and produces large errors with wide-gamut displays. The Optix XR has real problems with wide gamut displays. Both measured white point and color chromaticity values are way off. The i1-2 is better in this regard, but still inaccurate for LED backlights. It also has high average unit-to-unit variation, so whether any particular unit is accurate is questionable. Recent Spyder 3 pucks (2009 and newer vintage) are OK for unit-to-unit variance (3x higher than the DTP94, half that of the i2 Display) and can at least get in the ballpark for wide gamut, LED backlit panels. Older vintages of the Spyder 3 varied wildly unit-to-unit, so measurement quality was a roll of the dice.

On the spectro front, the i1-Pro is accurate and repeatable except in the shadows. For luminance values below 0.5cd/m² the measured values get swamped by sensor noise. You'll likely see compressed shadow details and some color casts to the lowest levels. Other than that, the results are fine. We have only characterized a single sample of the ColorMunki; based on the results, it is not high on the list of measurement devices you want to use.

The NEC-branded i2 Display sensor looks promising in terms of accuracy with NEC's wide gamut panels. Again, based on our measurements of 17 different i2 Display pucks, there is a wide variation in accuracy. Whether the NEC-tuned puck is a good overall solution or the sample we characterized was a particularly accurate one, I can't say. Quato sells a tuned version of the DTP94 that, from their data, appears to provide both the superior accuracy of the DTP94 in standard gamut ranges and reasonably good accuracy for wider gamuts. We have not measured one of these pucks, so no direct experience.

A drawback to NEC panels in general is that they use a proprietary communication protocol rather than following the DDC standard. This means that you are stuck with NEC's calibration and profiling software for controlling the monitor hardware. NEC' s head is buried in the same sand as the digital camera manufacturers who refuse to support open standards for RAW file encoding. The hardware is good, but the software is not up to the level available from third party vendors. We saw better results in terms of neutrality, smoothness, and lack of banding by first running NEC's software to calibrate the display and then building a profile using ColorEyes than by using only NEC's software.

[digitaldog]

A drawback to NEC panels in general is that they use a proprietary communication protocol rather than following the DDC standard. This means that you are stuck with NEC's calibration and profiling software for controlling the monitor hardware. NEC' s head is buried in the same sand as the digital camera manufacturers who refuse to support open standards for RAW file encoding.

I see your point here but think its a poor analogy. First off, their software is dirt cheap and in fact, bundled with an instrument is a pretty good deal. We could say the same about Barco, Pressview, Artisan in terms of a proprietary software driving a smart monitor. And DDC is often iffy in terms of working as well as everyone would like. But in terms of comparing it to raw proprietary files, I think that’s a stretch. Worst case sceneries, and one I’ve had the misfortune to experience is having raw files (or PhotoCD image packs) and no software to get to my data. I’m far more screwed in this case compared to having a display system which I might work with for 3-5 years and must use vendors calibration software. I can live with that. Having years of captures that are now only useful as drink coasters is a far worse situation IMHO.