Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Advice required please: Eizo CG223 vs Flexscan SX2462W  (Read 6309 times)
mpjx
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« on: March 07, 2011, 11:56:39 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi all,

I've been speaking to a Colour Management/Monitor Sales company about a new screen and calibration setup. There seem to be 2 setups which fit my budget and requirements but I can't get a straight answer as to which screen is will produce the better picture.

I'm not worried about difference in resolution or difference in viewing angle between IPS and VA panels - just picture quality.

Setup 1: CG223W internally calibrated using Colormunki and Color Navigator Software
Setup 2: SX2462W internally calibrated using the EasyPix 2 bundle of software and hardware

I would have thought as the CG223W is in the Colour Edge range it would provide better image quality but the specialist company just wouldn't give me a straight answer. We need to buy the Colormunki anyway for our other screens and this week can get the CG223 for 590 ex VAT or the SX2462W with EasyPix 2 bundle for 652 ex VAT - so there won't be a price difference.

Does anyone have experience of these 2 monitors? Is there a big quality difference or not? Thanks in advance for any advice.
Logged
stevereid
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #1 on: March 10, 2011, 09:22:23 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi, I'm in exactly the same scenario.. And cant get a straight answer also! And there are no local stockists so I can compare the then side by side.

I already have a Spyder 3 elite & 4 software, so the calibration HW is not needed.

These are the specs and conversations with Eizo and stockists that I have compared.

CG223 - Spoke to Eizo and they say for colour critical work you should be using a Colour Edge display, they do say the flexscan are nearly as good but the srceens for CG are hand picked from production line to ensure the most even and best. I think they said that the flexscan SX screens are the same as CG screens but the CG ones have been selected for being the best manufactured out of the batch.
I think essentially what you are paying more for is a slightly more uniform screen and the colour edge calibration software, and a 5yr warranty is used below 100-120cds.
The CG is VA screen which will show some colour shifting on viewing angle. Now I havent been able to see any products, but I gather there is a fair bit of colour shift in VA screens on even slight angles which I think could be annoying. Though Eizo said that they can display more tones in near blacks that some people fine more useful. But I feel the slight colour shift would be more annoying than anything, as from what I've heard it can shift from even slightly shifting your head and central viewing position.

SX2462 - IPS screen (newer technology than VA) which will definitely be nicer to view at more angles, very good if you are sitting with clients & ADs. Also the 24" extra real estate and 1900x1200 will be a bit nicer to work with, and may have slightly more crisper and contrasty feel (even when calibrated perfectly).

I guess the main factor is colour accuracy and tonal range, from the specs it appears that the newer IPS flexscans could actually show a wider colour range  - SX specs say 98% adobe RGB and CG VA screens to be 95% which is confusing me (though the IPS CG are 98%)

I have also spoken to a supplier who told me that the CG software is pretty basic and the Spyder software should be a little better. He reccomended that an IPS SX using my spyder elite & software should be just as good, which had been my feeling. But I am stilled swayed by Eizos statement, which ive spoken to a couple of times now and all they will say is to be 100% confident ur using the best display for colour work then it should be a CG. But they did day the Flexscans are very good. I do get the slight feeling that they are putting that statement to lean on the CG premium series a bit.
I was also put off a Lacie as was told they are nothing like the Eizos in terms of solidness and finish quality.

In terms of colour criticalness I'm also slightly warey. I'm a photographer & retoucher and very seldom need to match pantone swatches, to me its more about tonal quality and general colour correctiveness as buy the time images go to print its often wildly different which is out of my control.

If I had a little more budget I would get the CG243W which is IPS and looks to be exactly the same specs as the Flexscan SX2462 (My guess is its the same panel config but one that has been hand picked for its uniformity)

If there are any other Photographers & retouchers using a SX242W that have also used a CG223 or similar CG VA screen - could you give you experiences and opinions please?

Regards
Steve

Logged
mpjx
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #2 on: March 10, 2011, 09:50:38 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Steve

Glad to know I'm not the only one in this situation but I do pity you as it sounds like you're having as much trouble as me!

I'm still no nearer to an answer at the moment but interesting what you say about the CG range being essentially the same panels but hand picked for uniformity. I always thought uniformity was a function of the backlight rather than the panel, so thanks. Also re the VA panel technology - I knew viewing angles are smaller than IPS panels but I didn't know VA viewing angles were as bad as that!

One point which you should bear in mind Steve about colour calibration before you buy any kit. The general consensus is that Eizos ColorNavigator software which is supplied as standard with the CG range is the thing to use - it will work with most/all calibrators and has the advantage that it calibrates to the displays internal LUT. ColorEyes Pro and BasICColor will also calibrate a CG monitor internally. Eizo's EasyPics 2 software/calibrator bundle does exactly the same thing for the SX range.

You'd best check how the Spyder software works. Basically any calibration software/hardware/monitor setup which modifies your computer video card's LUT is essentially reducing the colour gamut of the video signal before it reaches your monitor - bad for your tonal gradations. I've simplified the explanation a fair bit and to be honest I don't understand the really technical arguments but the basic rule of thumb is:

calibration setup which modifies the monitors internal LUT is better than calibration setup which modifies the video card LUT

Hope this helps
Logged
stevereid
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #3 on: March 11, 2011, 12:56:44 PM »
ReplyReply

After some more discussions with tech sales people I went for the CG223W. It seems there will be some contrast differences in viewing angles compared to an IPS screen but the hardware calibration as you pointed out in previous post was a main factor. (The SX does have easy pix for hardware calibration but it is quite simple and recommended for amature use and not pro work)
And my thoughts are even with the possible colour and contrast shifts from off centre viewing it is still a better screen for colour critical work and I'll just have to see how I find it - If it was that bad then I reckon Eizo wouldn't have it as a CG product anyway so maybe I am being over caucious , but I will let you know my findings next week when I get it.
Also I'm thinking that it gets me on the Eizo CG line for a modest price and I will be probably looking to get the IPS G243W later in the year, and then can use the CG223 for home or location use with a macbook pro.
Logged
stevereid
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #4 on: March 14, 2011, 08:44:40 AM »
ReplyReply

I have just received my Colour Edge CG223W and here's my impressions - I was worried that 22" might feel a little small but it doesn't, the only thing that will take a wee bit to get used to is the resolution, feels a little backwards going from 1920x1200 to 1680 x1050 purely in terms of desktop icons looking larger and prog menus / website fonts looking a bit larger, if there is way to show icons smaller that would be nicer as it feels a bit like OS 9 at the moment! All of this isnt a problem when purely working in PS on images.

Colours are super pure but flat, and impressed with it so far. The viewing angle is pretty good also, much better than I was expecting, though near blacks do shift lighter or darker at angles to to judge these its best to work in the central part of monitor. But nothing as shifting as my MBP (matt) 2007 screen.

So basically really happy, though if I had the budget I would go for the 24" to get more on the screen but I knew I was compromising on colour accuracy for retouching vs general real estate. If I was doing after effects or FCP then I would find this a bit restricting, but I'm predominantly a retoucher so most of my work is working on images full screen with menus hidden.

I reckon I might be a bit more wow'd with flexscan 24" for the bigger screen & resolution but I'd still be feeling slightly uncertain in terms of accuracy which is what I need more.

Hope this help you or anyone else, still a shame I couldn't test them side by side to see the difference.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad