Hmm. I have an IQ180, I have an Eizo CG275W, I have an iPad.Quality of display on the iPad is the same as the back of the camera. Which means (for those who have seen an IQ back) nearly identical (possibly even a bit better) than a standard laptop display, and not that far from a dedicated Eizo.
I'm intrigued by your statement.
You say that the quality of the display on an iPad is the same as that on the back, and therefore, "not far from" an Eizo. Implying, that the screen on the back is "not far from" an Eizo.
I'd love to see an objective, empirical, comparison between the quality of the display on an IQ back, and that on a Eizo. Got a link?
/cynical hat off
These new backs have plenty of impressive features that raise them above both the competition, and their predecessors. I'm not sure you're doing them any favours by making such claims. Why not just concentrate on the facts?
(For reference - http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ipad-3-benchmark-retina-display,3157-2.html claims that the iPad retina screen covers 66.1% of AdobeRGB1998. Here, http://www.eizo.com/global/products/coloredge/cg275w/index.html , Eizo claim 97%. I couldn't find anything for the IQ screens...)