LaCie 321 vs. Eizo Gamuts, Quality, etc.

I hope this is not off topic but I’m wondering if anyone has actually gotten their hands on and tested/calibrated one of the new 10-bit LaCie LCDs as of yet and if so, what are your impressions compared to an Eizo LCD, an Artisan, a LaCie CRT, any old monitor, cave drawings, etc? :slight_smile:

Rumor has it that the LaCie 321 has pretty much the same guts as the new (larger) Eizo and whether true or not, 10 bits at roughly half the price for slightly less screen real estate is quite tempting.

I’d be thrilled to get an Eizo but my budget is saying LaCie. Help?

Thanks in advance,

David

The good news is that I finally found one eval of the new LaCie 321 LCD:

robgalbraith.com/ubbthreads/ … ain=291827

The bad news, is that based on this review alone, the 321 does not appear to be a viable (read less expensive but quality) alternative to the Eizo CG monitors for critical color work.

Ah well, back to restocking the piggy bank for a future CG-21 purchase. :unamused:

I have a customer that is getting one later in the month and will be glad to
share my option on it when I get my hands on it.

On 1/13/05 3:34 AM, “David” ds@sheffieldstudio.com wrote:

The good news is that I finally found one eval of the new LaCie 321 LCD:

robgalbraith.com/ubbthreads/ … 01&Main=29
1827

The bad news, is that based on this review alone, the 321 does not appear to
be a viable (read less expensive but quality) alternative to the Eizo CG
monitors for critical color work.

Ah well, back to restocking the piggy bank for a future CG-21 purchase. :unamused:


Sent from colorforums.com To start new topics, do not reply to this message.
Cut and paste the forum address into a new email. Return to
www.colorforums.com for subscription administration ©2004-5 CHROMiX, Inc.

Post generated from email list

The LaCie 321 is really good. For all practical purpse as good as the CG210. We just did a fairly comprehensive evealuation of the LaCie, Eizo and our Artisan. Were money no object we would have chosen the Eizo CG210. But the CG210 is $1200 more and definitely doesn’t provide $1200 more accuracy.

We got really good (not perfect) calibrations out of both monitors. The detail on either is staggering. Both also produced excellent gradations. We thought that the Eizo would have the edge here because of its 14 bits vs the LaCie’s 10. But, the LaCie actually edged out the Eizo in this regard. The Eizo was slightly less prone to color shift and uniformity issues. But neither monitor was very good in this regard. It’s VERY annoying to have yellow, cyan and magenta color casts on different areas of your monitor when you’re paying this much. To have the light areas on your image shift in color depending on where you place it on your screen is unacceptable. Will anyone ever fix this?

The hardware rotation on the Eizo is darned cool. Much better than a software rotation solution on the LaCie. The monitor hood on the LaCie is brain-dead. You have to completely take it off calibration and it definitely won’t stay on during rotation. The LaCie casing is a grey/blue color that looks pleasing, but a neutral color would make more sense. The LaCie doesn’t use a USB cable to talk to the computer so there’s a little less cable clutter.

Ultimately, in our comparison, both monitors were good. Both were clearly more accurate than our Artisan. The LaCie barely edged out the Eizo for gradations, but the Eizo had that cool hardware rotation. Were both monitores the same cost we might have chosen the Eizo. But, given the price difference, we returned the Eizo and ordered four more LaCies.

On a side note, we also tested the Eizo L997 with an Eye-one. The software calibration couldn’t touch the hardware calibration. The results were drastically inferior. We came to the conclusion that a nice, capable LCD with a good puck and software isn’t enough. You MUST have true hardware calibration.