Eizo FlexScan L885

[blix9]

Why isn't there any talk about EIZO monitors. Eizo make far superior monitors either CRTs and LCDs with a lot tighter QC. I know they concentrate on professional graphics display and response time suffers. Not to mention the price. But that doesn't mean we gaming guru-alikes can't benefit from their offering.

Look at FlexScan L885(http://www.eizo.com/products/lcd/l885/index.asp). It has 20ms Response time which is between that of Viewsonic VP201b and Samsung 213T. I heard many saying that the ghosting of the Samsung is not too bad/ almost negligeable. Eizo's ghosting will be hardly noticeable when the Viewsonic(16ms) exhibits absolutely no ghosting if people say about it here is true. And I am sure the Eizo's picture quality will blow away any LCDs talked about in this forum, hands down. It's Nanao(former Eizo) for god's sake. Have you ever seen their high end CRTs or LCDs? They are simply stunning.

I was really eyeballing the FlexScan L885 but I could not find any reassuring reviews or raving comments about it. I only found one review at ZDNet.(I don't really trust though). Then I got tired of researching about it.
Yes, I have serious decision making disorder. I need to witness tons of positive review or something like that about the product I want to buy. When it's whopping $1,500 decision it gets more serious. Yeah, call me stupid. That's just me.
Now I stumbled upon this forum. The HP's 23 wide screen monitors seems to be getting mixed reviews. I am also attracted to its 16:9 aspect ratio but reading of people getting replacements.... Argggg. Clearly, their quality control is a big disappointment. It almost sounds like a gamble with approx. $1,500.

There. I just wanted to share my despearate views on the large LCD monitor products of which I am looking for one. Anyone ahd any experience with the Eizo or any opinions?
BTW, I really appreciate sandman's mini review of the Viewsonic VP201s. It was on my short list for a new LCD monitor but could not find any specific info about it. His review and the thread helped me to look at the product closely. Thanks, sandman and all the good folks in here

 

[canislupy]

If I was going to talk about Eizo, all that would need to be said is CG21.

I want that monitor so bad.

 

[TheGameguru]

Eizo like many others doesnt manufacture their own Panels... this significantly levels the playing field when it comes to performance between manufacturers.

At this point if Eizo made a 23" WideScreen 16ms LCD whoes panel do you think they'd use?

See?

That being said...I'm sure they could add a few features or increase Quality control to offer some difference.. but it would be up to you if that would be worth the added costs associated with that.

A fair number of defects in (especially large panels) show up during shipping.. these are delicate panels and having them come in freight from Taiwan or China or wherever by boat on large pallets can cause a great deal of randomization in what eventually shows up at your door.

 

[blix9]

The CG21's response time is rated at 50ms. Unless you plan to use it only for working with static images I'd steer clear. I'm sure It must be one fine panel though.

Well, I know only few actual panel manufacturer are supplying many other brand name companies. (I've been reading in this forum a lot lately. Very informative.) But I think the implementation to make the final products also comes into play a lot. Remember those CRT monitors with the same trinitron tubes or diamondtron tubes? Across the major brands names, they exhibited noticeable differences of visual quality. At least to me and my coleagues. (I know this is all subjective though)

Even if they all come off the shipment from overseas bearing the risk of going bad some name brand has relatively and noticeably more RMA rate than others. Some just filter the batch not too carefully. Actually, what we talk about in this entire Hard OCP forum, I think, those hardware parts/components mostly come off from oversea shipment for that matter. Don't they bear all the same risk? Some are as sophisticateda and fragile as LCD panel. Yet, their RMA rates and performance of the products vary by the different companies. Companies that put out the final products with the same component inside.
Isn't that one of the reasons why we have our own preferences over all those brands?

I just hope Eizo does what they used to do and keep bringing out an outstanding monitors. Not that I'm buying that pricy thing if they make such thing you mentioned. Coming from Eizo, it's gonna be well over $2500 for 23" display. For now, I just want to know how FlexScan L885 actually competes with other popular panels. If it is as good as I expect I would go for it over the very-tempting wide screen HP's 23" for the same price. Yes, I have hots for Eizo. For a long time, their display products gave us unmatched and very lasting impression. Often times I and my colleagues could actully tell the visual differences compared to those from other brands.
I wish someone do a mini reviews for FlexScan L885.

Sorry if I sounded like flaming someone. Hope it doesn't bring unwelcoming responses in this forum. hehe

 

[TheGameguru]

Doenst matter about percieved quality control... especially based on this forum..

Fact is its all about percentages.. if HP ships 10 times the amount of panels than Eizo and has 10 times the amount of RMA's Eizo has their failure rate is still the same.

i.e. the more popular a particular part for a particular vendor the more "horror" stories you'll read about.

 

[Ice Czar]

Ive an Eizo Flexscan F930 Invar Shadowmask 21" CRT

and Im very very happy with it
of course I should be cosidering how much it cost me
(4 years ago)

Eizo is very limited in the US market
try looking for reviews originating in Europe where they are a much bigger player

 

[oddlycalm]

Why isn't there any talk about EIZO monitors. Eizo make far superior monitors either CRTs and LCDs with a lot tighter QC.

Mostly because this isn't a forum dominated by graphics professionals and 50yr old purchasing managers for brokerage houses. The focus is gaming, which means better pixel response time is more important that 2D image quality which is the exact opposite of the Eizo approach . Also, there are a lot of younger people here that simply don't have the money, and if they did they would aspire to something like an HP L2335 not a 20" Eizo.

While I agree in general with Gameguru's statements regarding the reason we see so many issues with the most popular models like the Dell 2001fp and few if any with similar models like the Viewsonic VP201, I would not agree that Eizo doesn't achieve higher quiality standards than the monitors BenQ private labels to Dell at a very low negotiated price point. Their market niche is corporate customers with high expectations with regard to quality and most particularly reliability. If you have ever been to a trading floor in an exchange or a brokerage you will understand how high the stakes are.

We purchased a number of Eizo L885 for our engineering section in Germany, and we have had zero failures or problems. The image quality is as good as any I have seen, and everything from the build qaulity to the packaging is first rate. Eizo has to source the panels out, which means that there are other monitors with the potential for equally good imaging, but they use their own topology for scaling and image processing.

This last fact is one that is often overlooked. While it may be true that some characteristics are endemic to the panel iteslf, others are not. A good example is the HP L2335 and the BenQ FP231W which uses the same LG Philips panel. The BenQ has a different scaling chip however and indeed in a side by side comparison it does have slightly better image quality at lower resolutions just as the Dell 2001fp scales better than the Viewsonic VP201. On the other hand the HP has far superior ergonomics to the BenQ in my opinion.

If you want the best image quality you can buy, don't care about price and don't care about ghosting during motion, you will be happy with the L885. Otherwise, look elsewhere.

oc

 

[punkitup]

I own an Eizo L-365 that has never given me a lick of trouble, and I still consider its image to be top notch some 3-4 years on. Their quality control, fit and finish is outstanding. I have a Sony SDM-HS94P (which I love), but if Eizo made a 19-inch, 12ms display I would have bought it sight unseen. I can remember when I got my L-365, I called Eizo to inquire about a DVI cable (they weren’t readily available locally back then) I was told that was an option that did not ship with the display; but “option” to Eizo meant that they FedEx me a cable overnight at absolutely no cost.

 

[BillR]

Mostly because this isn't a forum dominated by graphics professionals and 50yr old purchasing managers for brokerage houses. The focus is gaming, which means better pixel response time is more important that 2D image quality which is the exact opposite of the Eizo approach . Also, there are a lot of younger people here that simply don't have the money, and if they did they would aspire to something like an HP L2335 not a 20" Eizo.

While I agree in general with Gameguru's statements regarding the reason we see so many issues with the most popular models like the Dell 2001fp and few if any with similar models like the Viewsonic VP201, I would not agree that Eizo doesn't achieve higher quiality standards than the monitors BenQ private labels to Dell at a very low negotiated price point. Their market niche is corporate customers with high expectations with regard to quality and most particularly reliability. If you have ever been to a trading floor in an exchange or a brokerage you will understand how high the stakes are.

We purchased a number of Eizo L885 for our engineering section in Germany, and we have had zero failures or problems. The image quality is as good as any I have seen, and everything from the build qaulity to the packaging is first rate. Eizo has to source the panels out, which means that there are other monitors with the potential for equally good imaging, but they use their own topology for scaling and image processing.

This last fact is one that is often overlooked. While it may be true that some characteristics are endemic to the panel iteslf, others are not. A good example is the HP L2335 and the BenQ FP231W which uses the same LG Philips panel. The BenQ has a different scaling chip however and indeed in a side by side comparison it does have slightly better image quality at lower resolutions just as the Dell 2001fp scales better than the Viewsonic VP201. On the other hand the HP has far superior ergonomics to the BenQ in my opinion.
If you want the best image quality you can buy, don't care about price and don't care about ghosting during motion, you will be happy with the L885. Otherwise, look elsewhere.

oc

Oddlycalm has hit on the one most important fact almost everyone seems to overlook. Although three or four monitors from different manufactures might share the same panel with the same specs it’s the insides (electronics) that can make a huge difference.

A fast panel is useless without the proper/better driver boards to take advantage of that particular panel’s attributes. The same holds true for the backlight. A cheaper less dense backlight will not yield very good results compared to a much more dense unit that doesn’t leave dark and bright spots on your display.

I remember a while back everyone having problems with the Dell 2001FP with the so called ‘Screen door effect”. That effect usually didn’t include the whole screen, only parts of it. That was a result of bad “op amps” on the monitor board. The electronics inside that monitor were specked by Dell which is why other manufactures using that same panel seemed to have no issues, or at least different issues.

Same holds true with CRT based monitors. Lot’s of companies use the Sony tube, but reading down the forum we see very different results from those manufactures as well.

Throw away the specs guys, they don’t mean a thing and in a very real sense and thus are not a valid means for comparisons.

You might not like PC Mag’s reviews, but, they do calibrate the test units and use Display Mate to test all their monitors which means the testing is objective, not subjective. A much better starting point then an opinion page.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

Oddlycalm has hit on the one most important fact almost everyone seems to overlook. Although three or four monitors from different manufactures might share the same panel with the same specs it’s the insides (electronics) that can make a huge difference.

A fast panel is useless without the proper/better driver boards to take advantage of that particular panel’s attributes. The same holds true for the backlight. A cheaper less dense backlight will not yield very good results compared to a much more dense unit that doesn’t leave dark and bright spots on your display.

I remember a while back everyone having problems with the Dell 2001FP with the so called ‘Screen door effect”. That effect usually didn’t include the whole screen, only parts of it. That was a result of bad “op amps” on the monitor board. The electronics inside that monitor were specked by Dell which is why other manufactures using that same panel seemed to have no issues, or at least different issues.

Same holds true with CRT based monitors. Lot’s of companies use the Sony tube, but reading down the forum we see very different results from those manufactures as well.

Throw away the specs guys, they don’t mean a thing and in a very real sense and thus are not a valid means for comparisons.

You might not like PC Mag’s reviews, but, they do calibrate the test units and use Display Mate to test all their monitors which means the testing is objective, not subjective. A much better starting point then an opinion page.

Well said. Ever seen a CTX Trinitron? Want to compare that to a Sony with the same tube? Yeah right. Same goes for Viewsonic recently with CRT's, and there are countless others that a good scan of the forum will reveal.

 

[emorphien]

Eizo has provided support for better colormanagement with built in calibration curves. Gamers don't need this, but professional graphics people do. These are indeed better displays than Apples, HPs, Dells or others, but not necessary for many people.

Kind of like how a Barco Reference monitor is overkill for many. So is the price tag.

 

[BillR]

Eizo has provided support for better colormanagement with built in calibration curves. Gamers don't need this, but professional graphics people do. These are indeed better displays than Apples, HPs, Dells or others, but not necessary for many people.

Kind of like how a Barco Reference monitor is overkill for many. So is the price tag.

Very true, and when you look at how many gamers there are compared to the rest of the customers for monitors it's a wonder the good LCDs have come as far and as fast as they have. We ultra fussy folk are but a drop in the big world bucket

 

[oddlycalm]

Very true, and when you look at how many gamers there are compared to the rest of the customers for monitors it's a wonder the good LCDs have come as far and as fast as they have. We ultra fussy folk are but a drop in the big world bucket

Actually, gamers are a small drop in the bucket when compared to the government, corporate and commercial markets. Graphics and other demanding users is simply a smaller drop in that same bucket. It wan't coincidental that slower LCD panels with good image quality came first. That's what the big accounts want. In general, those same accounts have no used for a panel that will do 85fps (12ms pixel response) and yet only give 6 bit color depth. It's nice business when you get a shipment of 50 fast monitors and sell all of them in a week to gamers, but it's nothing like getting a contract from the GSA to supply thousands of monitors, which is not an uncommon occurrence.

oc