NEC PA242W vs EIZO CG246 ?

[whatsnwsisyphus]

Did anyone have the chance to compare the new NEC and the new but not quite new EIZO displays? I am thinking of buying one or the other, and they are the same price in England so it's really about how they perform.

[ThDo]

Hm? - > http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=83147.0

[whatsnwsisyphus]

Unfortunately, that thread has been derailed by some who brought in 241, which is a totally different monitor, there isn't any information in there but that eizo has a fan

[afx]

The English PRAD report for the CG is already available: http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/review/2012/review-eizo-cg246.html

Unfortunately, the PA review is currently only available in German: http://www.prad.de/new/monitore/test/2013/test-nec-pa242w-bk.html

Both are rated very good.

cheers
afx

[Scott Martin]

Does anyone really want to buy a display today right as the 4K display market is starting to explode?

[digitaldog]

Does anyone really want to buy a display today right as the 4K display market is starting to explode?

Based on the price, the maturity of the technology at this stage, what we need to drive it (and do we really need it for a lot of work)? Absolutely. Like the new MacPro I'd probably need, I'll pass for awhile. Let others live on the bleeding edge first.

[whatsnwsisyphus]

I don't need 4k, not many people do.

[Scott Martin]

Oh come on - you're a bleeding edge kind of guy right? :-)

I like a little punishment. With bad 4K displays at $500 and decent ones under $1000, I can't overlook this.

I'm a high res, big print person and I'm finding a lot of value in seeing my images onscreen in higher resolution. In some ways I prefer looking at my retina MBP display rather than the NEC. I can't help but think we'll one day wonder how we did without 4K displays.

[Scott Martin]

I don't need 4k, not many people do.

That's what everybody said about the retina screen on the iPhone and iPad when they came out. But Images looks so much better on these Hi-Rez displays that now every manufacturer has a retina display on their tablets and phones. Have you worked on a desktop computer with a 4K display to see this for yourself? I have, and it's amazing and I think you'll find a lot of value in it.

[digitaldog]

Oh come on - you're a bleeding edge kind of guy right? :-)

Generally with OPM (Other People's Money)

[Tim Lookingbill]

That's what everybody said about the retina screen on the iPhone and iPad when they came out. But Images looks so much better on these Hi-Rez displays that now every manufacturer has a retina display on their tablets and phones. Have you worked on a desktop computer with a 4K display to see this for yourself? I have, and it's amazing and I think you'll find a lot of value in it.

How big was that 4K desktop display and how close were you? That has a huge effect on how useful it is.

iPad and iPhone displays require hi rez to render all those tiny ads and GUI icon detail roughly within the area the size of a deck of cards or 8x10-(iPad) in order to navigate within arm's reach.

A 32" 4K desktop display has to be comfortably viewed at or a bit beyond arm's reach. I mean right now I'm viewing at arm's length my 1920x1080 filling 13.25 inches vertically measured pixel grid LG 27" with 1.5x magnification reading glasses and I still can't see the grid. If I move in within a foot I can.

From what I could see of the 4K HDtv's at Best Buy it appears they've implemented the very same pixel grid fineness on my LG 27" to fill a 55" diagonal area. I can stand to watch that display only from 3 feet just to get the entire screen within line of sight so I don't have to turn my head left to right to take it all in at once.

[Scott Martin]

Generally with OPM (Other People's Money)

Sure, I like that too, but sometimes you've got to put your money where your month is. Taking the plunge so that you can advise others knowledgeably - excellence is made from this right?

I'd say there's a huge shift going on that most people haven't seen for themselves and don't realize what a big deal it is. I think the kind of people that buy nice displays will appreciate seeing their images with 4x the number of pixels. Exciting times.

[Shutterbug2006]

None of the supposed 4k monitors under $1000 are worth investing in, if you are a photographer. Wait a couple of years, and they might be.

As it is, most photographers I think want a wide gamut monitor and they want to be able to calibrate them.

None of the 4k monitors under $1000 offer either of those possibilities.

[Scott Martin]

Strong words! Shutterbug, are you speaking from experience or speculation? Which do you have hands-on experience with?

[afx]

You can't even get a decent hardware calibrateable 2560x1440 screen for under 1000€, so why should you be able to get a decent 4K screen in that range.
Keep on dreaming.

cheers
afx

[Scott Martin]

I'm not dreaming. I know we'll eventually have a hardware calibrate-able 4K display and that will be nice. My point is multifaceted. For one, the consumer 4K displays are more affordable than one would have thought a few months ago and I think we may see relatively affordable hardware calibrate-able 4K displays sooner than one might think. For another, the visual quality of working on a high res screen is incredibly valuable, IMO. Which is more important - being able to see more image detail or being able to calibrate it down to the last 3%? I think people should get some hands-on and decide this for themselves. For some, it might be smart to wait for the hardware calibrate-able 4K model to come out. Kinda like it sucks to buy Photoshop CS6 two months before CC comes out....

[TonyW]

A question about scaling on 4K displays in particular for applications such as LR and PS? 

I know that you can resize and scale text and icons reasonably easily but AFAIK not all applications scale correctly with the higher pixel densities we are now looking at and therefore potentially you could be looking at an ugly UI although the image view should be fine? 

For instance I have heard that PS does not scale particularly well but no idea if this is true as no personal experience and am usually suspect of such throw away comments unless from a trusted source

[Scott Martin]

A question about scaling on 4K displays in particular for applications such as LR and PS? I know that you can resize and scale text and icons reasonably easily but AFAIK not all applications scale correctly with the higher pixel densities we are now looking at and therefore potentially you could be looking at an ugly UI although the image view should be fine?

Any Mac apps that support "Retina" or "HiDPI" displays will show the entire interface at the correct size with beautiful clarity automatically. LR 5 and PSCC both support retina displays.  I'm not sure what the equivalent is on Windows.

[D Fosse]

The Windows situation is that LR is doing fine, but PS has some particular problem with the APIs. In other words it doesn't work. This is the subject of many heated threads on the Adobe PS forum, although half the posts are from people who are perfectly happy just scaling the whole thing up in one go. It would seem a high-resolution display is wasted on these people anyway.

According to Chris Cox, senior engineer and forum regular, they're "working with Microsoft" to resolve it, no reason to doubt that, but no timeline promised.

[TonyW]

Scott and D Fosse thanks for the info I am a Windows user also CS6 extended and therefore by the sound of things I should wait before plunging in