Last weekend, I just received an EIZO CG241W. I had two Samsung's 19in. LCD before until one died after 5 years of constant duty. The difference was stunning. The monitor was very bright with stunning colors. There's a huge notice to reduce the intensity to protect your eyes in the delivery box.
The monitor has a automatic dimming switch. I have set to 65% in a dim room. Much kinder to my eyes and it assure's a constant level viewing. But there again, I can't say for sure, if I am doing this right. The EIZO documentation is very poor some written in Japanese.
Yes, I my view there is a noticible difference between aRGB and sRGB. I find it easier to view the minute modifications in Lightroom and Photoshop compared to old sRGB Samsung's (1000$ units) particularly for soft proofing.
The difference was minute between the printing calibration and the Web. But with the Eizo, this has changed quite a bit. There is a difference and should be. The Gamut are different particularly more so if you work on a PC. The IE7 does not take the sRGB Gamut into consideration.
It seems to be a well kept secret. I am still searching for articles from the Gurus on the subject. This said, I am not so sure of my printing calibration of the new screen. Yes, I know have two setting's one for sRGB (no calibration) and aRGB calibration for printing until the Web move's up to aRGB Gamut.
After such an affirmation, it's time to point out that I am not positive that my calibration is right.
Eizo documention suggest D65 120 cd/m2.
I used Gretag McBeth Eye-One Match with a Eye On Display 2 to calibrate my old monitors without complaints, life was good with minute differences.
With the EIZO, I tried the Eye-One Match, ColorNavigator CE (Comes with the Eizo) and Color Eyes. Color Eyes responds far better. I have tried calibrating as suggested D65 120/cd L* but with a distinct red cast. A calibration of D50, L*, 110 cd/m seems a better match for my Epson 3800.
If I repeat back to back calibration with the same values they dont come out the same, close but not the same. I am still trying to get it right. I sure would like to see a screen shot of a ColorEyes calibration done on a CG241W to confirm the calibration. The screen is new and I should way till it stabilize. I would like to point out that support questions set to Eizo have yet to materialise.
I would also to point out that I am not condoning a product but just stating what I am observing and do not want to start a calibrating war. The support of ColorEyes is exemplary. The new screen and new Gamut just forced me to move up to a new level of understanding of Color Management. I have yet to be confortable and assimilated the new material.
Yes, to answer Nick's question, on my part, I do notice a difference the two Gamuts and in my view I should if not, what a waste of money.
The question on the table: are others observing this also ?