AndreasOberg
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2011
- Messages
- 1,674
- Reaction score
- 31
- Points
- 48
- Location
- Leicestershire, United Kingdom
- Website
- www.obergwildlife.com
Thanks for the insight Jeff. You gave us something to think of. My wife especially liked that you mentioned the part of a nice dinner (or in her case tons of art and photography books!).
It sounds like we should get a better calibrator!! I'm so sick of strange color casts! So what calibrator would you recommend exactly?
I must say that HDR monitors sounds exciting but I have a feeling we need to wait until next year to see more good ones.
Sadly I have not had a chance to actually see these monitors so I have to listen to what internet says, but I never found internet to be that useful for monitor reviews. Here are some of the notes I have made from various places. If they are correct is of course hard to tell, first hand experience like what you have is of course much better.
The other monitors I compared with are BenQ SW320, various Dells, Nec.
- Colors. Eizo 99% of the Adobe RGB, HP’s Z27x (87%) or the Apple 5K iMac 78%
- Uniform color. Most colors have 5% color variation, "CG318-4K’s average Delta-E was 0.62 and the maximum was 1.04 – exceptional when compared to the Z27x, which had an impressive average of 0.9 but a max of 3.9. The 5K iMac’s average Delta-E was 1.66 – higher than the CG318-4K’s maximum – with its own maximum being 5.0."
- Uniform Luminance. NEC has 1 stop less light in the corners, iMac has 50% less in corners (1 stop) Some of the other monitors hae 20% less lights in the coners. The Eizo is very uniform.
- Contrast measure is about 1200 for Eizo. If I rememeber correctly most of the others are around 800.
- Blacks. If I remember the Eizo has about 5x less light in the blacks than the others (Toms Hardware).
- Eizo startup takes 3 minutes to get the right colors, while others around 30 minute.
- Sample variation. From what I read people are sending monitors back multiple times to find a sample that is not uneven in colors. Eizo seems better here at least.
This was a fairly old glowing review of Eizo:
https://luminous-landscape.com/eizo-cg318-4k-review-the-cutting-edge-of-high-end-graphic-displays/
But yes, maybe what we should do is get a new WORKING calibrator. Possibly wait for better screens later, seems like lots is happening with HDR at the moment. Most of our color work at the moment is for photography for fun so may not be worth pumping in money into right now. Or possibly get a cheaper 4k monitor. The LG sounds interesting but we have a PC so don't think we can use TB3 at all. We have TB1 on our Supermicro motherboard.
Best!
Andreas
It sounds like we should get a better calibrator!! I'm so sick of strange color casts! So what calibrator would you recommend exactly?
I must say that HDR monitors sounds exciting but I have a feeling we need to wait until next year to see more good ones.
Sadly I have not had a chance to actually see these monitors so I have to listen to what internet says, but I never found internet to be that useful for monitor reviews. Here are some of the notes I have made from various places. If they are correct is of course hard to tell, first hand experience like what you have is of course much better.
The other monitors I compared with are BenQ SW320, various Dells, Nec.
- Colors. Eizo 99% of the Adobe RGB, HP’s Z27x (87%) or the Apple 5K iMac 78%
- Uniform color. Most colors have 5% color variation, "CG318-4K’s average Delta-E was 0.62 and the maximum was 1.04 – exceptional when compared to the Z27x, which had an impressive average of 0.9 but a max of 3.9. The 5K iMac’s average Delta-E was 1.66 – higher than the CG318-4K’s maximum – with its own maximum being 5.0."
- Uniform Luminance. NEC has 1 stop less light in the corners, iMac has 50% less in corners (1 stop) Some of the other monitors hae 20% less lights in the coners. The Eizo is very uniform.
- Contrast measure is about 1200 for Eizo. If I rememeber correctly most of the others are around 800.
- Blacks. If I remember the Eizo has about 5x less light in the blacks than the others (Toms Hardware).
- Eizo startup takes 3 minutes to get the right colors, while others around 30 minute.
- Sample variation. From what I read people are sending monitors back multiple times to find a sample that is not uneven in colors. Eizo seems better here at least.
This was a fairly old glowing review of Eizo:
https://luminous-landscape.com/eizo-cg318-4k-review-the-cutting-edge-of-high-end-graphic-displays/
But yes, maybe what we should do is get a new WORKING calibrator. Possibly wait for better screens later, seems like lots is happening with HDR at the moment. Most of our color work at the moment is for photography for fun so may not be worth pumping in money into right now. Or possibly get a cheaper 4k monitor. The LG sounds interesting but we have a PC so don't think we can use TB3 at all. We have TB1 on our Supermicro motherboard.
Best!
Andreas
