Depends which one. A CG3146 would be one you should look at.How many nits is your Eizo display capable of?
I don’t actually own an Eizo. I’ve just been selling professional colour accurate monitors for 16 years.
Depends which one. A CG3146 would be one you should look at.How many nits is your Eizo display capable of?
Do you feel nits is an important barometer for a photography monitor? If so, your XDR wins, as my Eizo is 500 max. I can't think of many situations where I'd personally want to work at 500 (I typically do 120 cd/m2) but I suppose it depends on your use case. Maybe HDR stuff I suppose?How many nits is your Eizo display capable of?
For photography 80-120 nits is what is required. Anything more (for photography) is pointless.Do you feel nits is an important barometer for a photography monitor? If so, your XDR wins, as my Eizo is 500 max. I can't think of many situations where I'd personally want to work at 500 (I typically do 120 cd/m2) but I suppose it depends on your use case. Maybe HDR stuff I suppose?
So apart from photography I would say it’s fine for your user case.This monitor is my home personal hobbyist monitor:
Traditional Photography
Basic website stuff
And
Entertainment- streaming services like Apple +, Netflix, etc . 4k HDR
Plus, I desire to take my astrophotography to the next level;
with 4K HDR Timelapse/ other
The Eizo I mentioned above would blow it out of the water if you are lucky enough to use one.Pro Display XDR was worth every penny I paid. Studio Display (which I have right next to the XDR) is certainly nice, but they're not in the same league, especially regarding black levels/uniformity.
27" 4K monitors, I still see pixels and don't like the scaling. No thanks.The Eizo I mentioned above would blow it out of the water if you are lucky enough to use one.
It wasn’t a 27 inch monitor I mentioned. But there you go. Each to there own.27" 4K monitors, I still see pixels and don't like the scaling. No thanks.
You definitely mentioned a 27" monitor but I didn't realize this was a guessing game.It wasn’t a 27 inch monitor I mentioned. But there you go. Each to there own.
All monitors need calibrating as they drift over time. We sell the successor to the X-rite device you posted. You will need to purchase the Calibrite software if you run the latest OS as X-rite are not updating theirs any longer. They still build the devices for us. The latest HL (high luminance) devices would probably be a wise choice for your monitor.In addition to the above .. the specs of the XDR display truly seem first rate all the way....
View attachment 2329782
View attachment 2329785
And reading on the calibration of the monitor ... seems the jury is out does the tech even need it or not ...
XDR Displays & Calibration
Is there anyone who uses Apple XDR displays as reference for printing? Do you calibrate them? I always used to calibrate my displays, until I purchased my first Apple XDR Pro Display. That was seemed very well factory calibrated, so I gave it a try that way. I set it in a Design & Print mode ...www.l-camera-forum.com
It's been a few years since I've use this for a computer monitor, I do use it to calibrate my basement JVC NX7 HT projector.
View attachment 2329786
Hi mtbdudex,Pure photography and no HDR is a different monitor solution that someone who does both photography and HDR medium stuff.
Me, I’m the latter, caveat a hobbyist I’m not doing this for income, and settled on the $$$ solution.
If one's deliverables are for print or antenna TV then 120-nits would suffice, however, the OP is working with (read: capturing, processing and looking to deliver) content that, clearly, requires HDR600-or-greater specs.For photography 80-120 nits is what is required. Anything more (for photography) is pointless.
For gaming or video there are different requirements.
If one's deliverables are for print or antenna TV then 120-nits would suffice, however, the OP is working with (read: capturing, processing and looking to deliver) content that, clearly, requires HDR600-or-greater specs.
But as this was posted in the photography sub section my points were valid. I have nothing against Apple displays. I just wouldn’t spend my money on one when there are better options out there for photography. I have no interest in gaming, videography or tv watching on my monitors. That’s not what I bought them for.If one's deliverables are for print or antenna TV then 120-nits would suffice, however, the OP is working with (read: capturing, processing and looking to deliver) content that, clearly, requires HDR600-or-greater specs.
It would be nice to see highly color-accurate, calibration-capable HDR1000 reference monitors drop out of the $25k+ price range. It would also be nice to see photography-based HDR content not look like a Thomas Kincaid painting or Trey Ratcliff photographs and I still see too much of that. HDR doesn’t mean “extreme”. Too, it’s skill capturing content that can take advantage of the dynamic range. It will be interesting to see how all of that shakes out.If one's deliverables are for print or antenna TV then 120-nits would suffice, however, the OP is working with (read: capturing, processing and looking to deliver) content that, clearly, requires HDR600-or-greater specs.
I read that vinyl sales are at their highest since the 90’s just today.Just thoughts ..
11 years ago I gave up on vinyl, having burned them to digital ..
My 21 year old daughter is part of the vinyl resurgence.. I got her the stuff below for her college graduation gift / apartment gift .
I did get rid of my 400 CD mega changer and the discs
So many of my fellow HT enthusiasts have moved from printed to digital ..
FWIW, I still print occasional big prints for myself.. but I am open to tech and not gimmicky but truly good photo displays, like Micro LED, come 2028 or so .
There, HDR will matter.