Eizo CG221 Monitor ?

[zhelong]

Hi All... I'm looking for a new monitor to do a digital imaging job. I've searched all EIZO CG Monitor and I found that the most expensive one is CG221. Can anyone explain to me what makes CG221 be the most expensive than any other CG type even with the bigger screen one such as CG241? and also I notice CG211 is also has a higher price than CG241. Does it means CG241 isn't good enough? or what?


Thanks.. I hope I could get an explanation about this


Regards,

Zhelong

[TommyO]

Price among the CG models is more dependent on supply & demand, as they are very similar in their specifications. Whereas the 221 was traditionally the leader in sales, there is a need to manufacture and market more of the larger displays today. Hence, their prices are dropping to make that happen. The 221's are not being manufactured as much and often carry the price from many months back when they were manufactured. Rest assured the newer and larger models are every bit as good. Compare their specifications here.

[stopa]

I had the same dilemma, but when I finally got cash, and went to shop, the choice was only one: CG211. The quality of this monitor is so out-standing that you can not even think that you will spend your money on larger size, but less-quality. Visit Eizo, and make your concious decision by your own.
In my opinion the CG211 and CG221 are the best monitors ever build. Worth every cent spend on it.

[zhelong]

Thanks for the explanation Tommy
I also ever used a CG221 for about one and half years before I move to my new office. And for sure I really loved it ! Now.. in my new office, they asked me what type of monitor I can work with, so I search for Eizo again on the web, but I find the price gap which I mentioned before. CG221 is not on the budget so I should search another type. I love to try it before I buy something, but the problem is, here in Indonesia there's no seller that provided that. and also it is not easy to find Eizo monitor here in Indonesia, I should buy it from other country so I couldn't try it. All I can do is to find someone that can explain what makes the gap in the prices.


@ Stopa: Can you tell me what makes you did your choice to CG211? What is the main difference with the other? is there any color problem or something wrong with the other? Can you describe what is "larger size, but less-quality" you mean for?



Thanks,

Zhelong

[stopa]

When I compare CG241 to CG211 - I notice that 211 was evenly back lighted. The image look more silky on CG211, but also more sharp!
CG241 is superb for designers, but for retouch purposes... only 221 or 211.
Ask your boss, why do not spend some more bucks - belive me, now I don't need to make proofs - my soft proof is now more reliable than most Canon, or Epson prints. It makes really savings of money.

[TommyO]

I am not sure why Stopa would have seen a difference in the 241 vs the 211, as they both contain the same technology internally. I can only suppose that the 241 was either out of calibration or sitting in such a way that ambient light was affecting the image.

[stopa]

TommyO - you are wrong.
monitor CG211 -> CG241
contrast: 550 -> 880 ::1
brightnes: 225 -> 300 dc/m

[TommyO]

I was not referring to specifications related to luminosity, but rather the actual hardware inside the LCD related to both their ASIC chip sets, slightly larger LUT, proprietary algorithms (like their Color Uniformity Compensation) and the patented physical composition of their polarizers and diffusers. This is basically the same across all sizes of the CG series.

On a calibrated display, the contrast ratio and brightness levels play a relatively small part in our perception. After calibration we generally run a much lower brightness level to achieve accurate color representation (and of course lower eye strain). This affects both our perceived contrast ratio and, of course, brightness. So, while we should still purchase displays with high values (why wouldn't you), those high values are generally only valuable for longer distance viewing, as in when we use the display for other reasons like viewing movies. Newer displays (as in Eizo's larger displays came out after the 211) will tend to have better and better spec's regarding CR and B.

I'm not sure those are the right values for the Eizo displays mentioned. I see the following on their website:
CQ211: CR=400:1, B=200.
CQ241: CR=850:1, B=300.

Again, newer displays tend to have higher values, which is normal.
But, don't use just these values in determining a displays merit. Look at the physical technology inside. Eizo's CG series certainly shows an exceptional commitment to providing a superior display to serious graphic artists and retouchers.