Eizo CG2700S or BenQ SW321C

smr

smr

Messages
2,047
Name
Joel
Edit My Images
No
These two monitors are well respected. The Eizo build quality and customer support sounds tremendous. The BenQ is highly regarded and ImageScience did a comprehensive test and evaluation stating how good it is. But I am wondering which would be better. The main difference is the size, the Eizo is 27" and the BenQ 32"...

The built in calibration of the Eizo sounds great I must say. The BenQ is slightly cheaper and more screen.

One thing I am a bit weary of is the build quality with BenQ, however I'm not sure that's justified but a noticed a couple of reviews on Wex about the panels developing faults outside of warranty - I haven't heard any such thing with Eizo monitors.

Has anyone got the BenQ as a long time user and have you had any problems, what do you think to yours etc.?
 
I have just checked and I bought my SW270C in July 2020

I have been very happy with it and key points;-

It will hardware calibrate and you can store 3 off custom calibration profiles in the monitor, used with the connected puck I can switch profiles (NB I rarely have found the need) as required.
It came with a hood

By default the profiles selectable with the puck are sRGB, aRGB and B&W

BenQ updated their calibration software for doing the hardware calibrations to PMU Pallette Master Ultimate. The earlier PM Elements was based on the xRite i1 Profiler software but they built their own.

The screen shot of its setting page shows the models that are compatible with it
PMU.jpg


At the time I was looking to replace my old Dell 22 inch I looked at Eizo but found it very hard to justify the cost, however the BenQ cost me £675 and I had take a deep breath before hitting the 'buy' button.

In use, I have found I get prints very very close to what I see on the screen....both what I print on my Epson ET-8550 and printed commercially by @Tradecanvasprint.

I hope that is of some help.

PS I do like the idea of a built-in calibrator but wonder if it goes wrong would it be possible to calibrate with a plug in one or would such a fault, if repairable, mean you would be without it for some time???
 
Last edited:
In case this of any interest....Art is Right is or was a BenQ ambassador and guru type.

Various monitor reviews and other useful videos e.g. about the aforementioned PMU software and at the time of the introduction of PMU an interview with the developer of PMU.


www.youtube.com

ArtIsRight

Art, the brain behind ArtIsRight. A professional photographer & video creative, who transcends international borders. He is an educator, technologist, consultant, color management expert, and network engineer based in Los Angeles, California. He is BenQ first Global Ambassador for their...
www.youtube.com www.youtube.com
 
I have used an Eizo Coloredge for a while (can't remember the reference, a CG something I think... 24 inch) and it is really a premium device. Color quality is amazing all across the surface and the built-in calibration makes periodic adjustment a breeze —the monitor itself remembers when it needs to recalibrate. I couldn't recommend the Eizo products enough. You may need to change computers regularly, but a good monitor will remain with you for a very long time —a bit like a good tripod. :)
 
From what I have read the best 4K monitor on the market for photographers is the Eizo CG2700X and the best 2K one is the CG2700S.

That's backed up by Prad, ImageScience etc. where they comprehensively test every single aspect of each monitor with extensive tests measuring every single factor that goes into the screen, technology etc.

BenQ make seriously good monitors but there is a reason why the CG2700X 27" 4K monitor is £2,500 and the 32" 4K BenQ is £1,600, and it's not just the utterly incredible automatic built in hardware calibration.

The uniformity, colour accuracy and build quality is just superior. The question is, is it worth the extra money and how does the BenQ 32 panel stack up in terms of longeivity and real world usage. I want a monitor which will last for at least 10 years, which the Eizo I am sure will.... I'm not so sure about the BenQ.
 
Last edited:
smr said:
Are you seriously suggesting Eizo monitors are inferior to BenQ?
Click to expand...
No, I hope Eizo have better, more up to date models in their lineup

but since you were so specific it is only fair. Not having 4k today is about as bad as buying a car on 3 wheels. 27" is also quite an odd size which really requires 5K to be set at 200%. I absolutely don't care about brand name when at least some of the spec is pure rubbish particularly for the price. We had decent monitors of this spec in 2008 and this is literally frozen in time. But you know what... your money, not mine
 
smr said:
I want a monitor which will last for at least 10 years, which the Eizo I am sure will.
Click to expand...
Hope for the best but plan for the worst and ensure you get an enforceable LOOOOONNNG warranty term.
A few years ago in a moment of madness I was looking at used Eizo monitors. Yes, this brand specifically. They were a few years old, 2.5K, etc. All had very serious defect like clusters of dead pixels, and even worse. So clearly they can go wrong just like any other IPS monitor. It is not like they make their own panels.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
No, I hope Eizo have better, more up to date models in their lineup

but since you were so specific it is only fair. Not having 4k today is about as bad as buying a car on 3 wheels. 27" is also quite an odd size which really requires 5K to be set at 200%. I absolutely don't care about brand name when at least some of the spec is pure rubbish particularly for the price. We had decent monitors of this spec in 2008 and this is literally frozen in time. But you know what... your money, not mine
Click to expand...
Not sure why you think 4K is compulsory. Photography has existed for hundreds of years before 4K resolution appeared.

For me colour accuracy is more important than the resolution of a monitor, along with build quality.

The 321C for instance is lower contrast than the 2700 panels, more prone to IPS glow and uneven uniformity. Its also 8+2 bit for the 10 bit colour deployment whereas both Eizo panels are true 10 bit with true black, none of the BenQ models are.

Eizo is Japanese and regarded as the gold standard by graphic designers on all of the colour fidelity sub reddits there are as far as I can see.
 
Don't get me wrong but this reads like from a time capsule from 2014,

The world has moved on.... we have OLEDs and micro LEDs entering the scene. Your smartphone has higher resolution than the legacy eizo model. I would be crying my days out with one until 2035 when the rest of the world is perhaps on 8K OLEDS!!!! It is your money at the end of the day.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
Don't get me wrong but this reads like from a time capsule from 2014,

The world has moved on.... we have OLEDs and micro LEDs entering the scene. Your smartphone has higher resolution than the legacy eizo model. I would be crying my days out with one until 2035 when the rest of the world is perhaps on 8K OLEDS!!!! It is your money at the end of the day.
Click to expand...
Again, you haven't explained why 4K is compulsory.
 
www.prad.de

Top 10 Bestenliste 27 Zoll Grafikmonitore - Prad.de

In unserer Top 10 Bestenliste nennen wir die besten Grafik-Monitore, welche für die Elektronische Bildverarbeitung (EBV) besonders gut geeignet sind.
www.prad.de www.prad.de

Top 10 27" Monitor for Photographers.

1 - 4 Eizo. The first BenQ monitor is 5th place.

And ImageScience's review of the 2k resolution CG2700S...

"We've really looked at the use of this monitor in our primary context - for still image editing work, primarily for fine art print. And really, the executive summary is that there is simply no better tool for our fine art printing work than these new Eizo CG monitors. Whether it's photographic work, art reproduction, or illustrative/graphic design work, these are simply the best there is - no compromise solutions to those difficult problems. We trust our most difficult work only to Eizo CG monitors because, as yet, no one has come close to the accuracy, repeatability, and totally well thought out experience that an Eizo ColorEdge CG monitor provides."
 
Last edited:
And on the 4K debate... I think this sums things up perfectly...

"This will be no surprise for a monitor in this class, but even to a highly trained and sensitive eye it is immediately clear the colour reproduction - even just in the factory preset modes - is excellent.

I do notice the lack of 4K. I have been spending a lot of time with 4K monitors, and it is slightly jarring to go back to a non 4K monitor. It makes very little difference with image work - indeed, there it is barely noticeable - but it's definitely noticeable when browsing, emailing etc. Text is just not as crisp and as page like. If you simply can't live with this trade off (for the exquisite colour accuracy), then you need to look at either the CS2740 (my evaluation here), or the CG2700X.

Until recently, though, I have had a 2.5K model like this at home (CG279X), and a 4K on my desk (CS2740) - swapping between them daily. and honestly, in practise I barely noticed the difference and have worked comfortably with them both for a couple of years now. I could have put in a 4K at home - we have several spare options - but for me the colour quality is the critical thing, so I was quite happy to have the 2.5K at home, knowing that all my photo work would be in very safe hands. And I am genuinely picky about this sort of thing - so I am confident that if I can deal with that compromise, then most other people could too.

Uniformity is superb. No one does this better than Eizo, or indeed really comes to the same level. It just makes you forget that uniformity can ever be an issue with screens."
 
As a photographer, Joel, and from my perspective as a daily user, I can only confirm what you say and quote.
 
  • Like
Reactions: smr
Blue439 said:
As a photographer, Joel, and from my perspective as a daily user, I can only confirm what you say and quote.
Click to expand...

Thanks for affirming what I have read and indeed what these comprehensive evaluations have produced. Independent verifiable tests like these where they measure every single metric of a monitor panel are invaluable for people like myself making monitor purchasing decisions involving several hundreds of pounds.

I'm not dismissive of BenQ though - I'd love a 4K 32" panel, and Eizo don't offer that. Perhaps it's because 32" panels are inherently more difficult to get excellent uniformity with compared to the 27" or smaller models. The bigger the screen size, the less accurate uniformity generally is.

That said I may be perfectly happy with the BenQ 321C. I'm sure the colour accuracy is excellent. But from the tests I have read, Eizo is said to be the gold standard in colour accuracy - when it comes to editing photos to printing that is by far the most important aspect. I'm actually happy enough with 1080P on my current years old Asus Monitor. I don't need 4K. A photo's sharpness is generated by lens, camera and photographer.

For £1,600 the BenQ panel sounds great on paper, 32" and 4k and the screen glare sounds excellent - a very representable print looking matt surface for instance, but what I'm not prepared to do is spend that money on a monitor which develops a fault within 5 years and outside of warranty.

6 reviews on Wex and 2 of which have significant panel faults just outside of the warranty.

The ideal monitor for me would be a 32" 4K Eizo but that would cost £4,000. That said I may be happy with a BenQ monitor. I'm going to continue researching.

It would be helpful if there are any BenQ users with that particular panel and have had it for several years and could comment on how the monitor is but I can't seem to find any long term reviews.
 
Finding individual reviews may not be the easiest thing to do for specific models.....

However, Google shows this list


And of note, Keith Cooper has his review and his printer reviews are very good....as on knows his stuff. If there are "cons" outweighing "pros" he says as he finds. I have found him very approachable for insights.

It could not hurt to email him and ask about his user experience of BenQ bearing in mind he is a professional photographer too.
 
Last edited:
smr said:
Again, you haven't explained why 4K is compulsory.
Click to expand...
Cars have 4 wheels these days, we ideally ieat with a knife and a fork. No need to explain something this obvious
 
smr said:
I'm curious now. Which monitor do you own?
Click to expand...
what I own is on par with benq on your list, and at 6 years old it is failing because IPS layers are coming apart in the edges and light bleed is getting insane. So no more IPS for me.

next up 32" Samsung OLED by the looks of it. Just waiting for decent offers. You may want to check the gamut in these if you consider the old Eizo a miracle
 
My old Eizo has died, and I'm not sure I'll replace it with another one. There are quite a few great monitors to choose from at the moment, but I tend to agree with LLP that Eizo is trading on its past innovations.
 
TimHughes said:
My old Eizo has died, and I'm not sure I'll replace it with another one. There are quite a few great monitors to choose from at the moment, but I tend to agree with LLP that Eizo is trading on its past innovations.
Click to expand...

If it ain't broke don't fix it. If you ask any serious graphic designer what the best photography monitor bar none is right now they'll tell you it's the CG2700X Eizo 27" 4K panel released in 2022. From what I have read, for colour uniformity and accuracy there simply is no better.

That said this is what I have read from various websites where in house evaluation and extreme lengths of comprehensiveness have been the course for review and analysis.

If anyone has any literature to show that the Eizo CG2700X and 2700S aren't the best for colour accuracy, which is MUCH more important to me than resolution, then do put it forth.

I'm not brand biased. I'm just reading what the results are.
 
smr said:
If it ain't broke don't fix it. If you ask any serious graphic designer what the best photography monitor bar none is right now they'll tell you it's the CG2700X Eizo 27" 4K panel released in 2022. From what I have read, for colour uniformity and accuracy there simply is no better.

That said this is what I have read from various websites where in house evaluation and extreme lengths of comprehensiveness have been the course for review and analysis.

If anyone has any literature to show that the Eizo CG2700X and 2700S aren't the best for colour accuracy, which is MUCH more important to me than resolution, then do put it forth.

I'm not brand biased. I'm just reading what the results are.
Click to expand...
Hi Joel, I work on photos and videos, not graphic design. The Eizo was really good, lasted a long time and I'm looking into potential cost of repair. The CG2700X maybe the replacement however as I look around it looks like the competition from a color accuracy point of view is much closer than is was 5 or 10 years ago. The price gap looks to be closing as a result too. Eizo still has a premium, and I'm questioning, maybe clumsily if, it is still worth it? Maybe it is, checking the prices today CG2700X for CHF 2100 does look too bad.
 
I have always used Eizo for last 17-20 years as a studio manager, assistant & digital operator to high end advertising photographers and for myself as an retoucher and photographer at home, currently have a ColorEdge CG275W 27inch widescreen with self calibration etc...still absolutely mint, and under 3,000 hours!!
 
I have just “replaced” an Eizo monitor that’s 16 years old and still working (leaving as a second monitor) and bought a new CG2700X - absolute bargain at £1400 from Eizo at the NEC Photo show last week - very pleased! The old monitor has clocked 4760 hours so far.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top