Product Reviews

In the last monitor Labs in issue 55, Eizo impressed us with its 21in FlexScan T960, which used a Sony Trinitron tube. It's unusual therefore that Eizo has decided not to produce a similar aperture-grille model at the more competitive 17in end of the market. The F520 is based around a shadow-mask tube. Traditionally, shadow-mask tubes aren't as geometrically accurate or bright as the more expensive aperture-grille models, but do offer better colour accuracy.

This tradition is upheld by the F520, which scores 32 points in the suite of DisplayMate tests, making it the highest-scoring shadow-mask monitor this month. A close examination however, does reveal a number of shortcomings. One of the most obvious is the poor anti-glare coating on the glass, making dark images difficult to see. However, as with most shadow-mask monitors, colour accuracy was good, as demonstrated

ADVERTISEMENT

by the distinction scored in the colour scales test. We were also impressed by the superb power regulation of the F520 - a regular failing of many 17in monitors.

Other than the aforementioned tests, we weren't that impressed with the FlexScan F520. There isn't anything particularly wrong with it, it's just that image quality is nothing special compared to the tough competition. However, we were concerned with the variable quantity of moirÚ displayed, changing between very poor and extremely good between the three separate moirÚ tests. The feature set of the FlexScan F520 is likewise nothing to write home about, with a distinct lack of advanced features. Although the D-SUB signal cable isn't of the captive variety, there are no BNC inputs or USB hub, and the viewable area is a mere 15.6in. The OSD also lacks any advanced controls for adjusting the linearity or convergence of the gun.

If the two fine lines visible on all aperture-grille monitors really do annoy you, the Eizo FlexScan F520 is definitely worth checking out. However, although image quality is above average, there are far superior monitors on test this month. The comparatively high price also makes it poor value for money when compared to the similarly equipped shadow-mask Hitachi CM650ET. Eizo should return to what it does best: producing good-quality, high-end monitors, rather than trying to put together shadow-mask monitors where price is the main differential.