This is exactly the opposite of what I've seen in comparing DMT's mono vs. EZE-Lap's poly. For their rated grit, the DMTs have been finer in finish than the EZE-Lap hones. The most striking & obvious difference to me, was comparing EZE-Lap's 1200 and DMT's 600, of which the DMT seemed to leave a more refined edge and scratch pattern.
Poly is said to (eventually) become finer with use, but I haven't seen it yet in the EZE-Lap hones, at least not to the degree that gets the '1200' EZE-Lap anywhere near as fine as DMT's 600, much less DMT's 1200 EF hone.
May be some confusion factor introduced in how poly grit is actually rated for size, as to whether the spec'd grit rating represents the 'before' or 'after' size, or some nominal/average value in between, of the breaking down/fracturing behavior characteristic of poly diamond. At least for now, I'd have to assume my EZE-Lap hones are performing at a level much coarser than what's rated for them, if relying on DMT's or another's grit standard for comparison. And that raises yet another question mark, if each type is rated according to different scales or criteria. If so, a 'mono brand A' vs. 'poly brand B' comparison of similar grit numbers may just be apples vs. oranges anyway, and essentially meaningless. A more meaningful comparison would include actual micron sizes of the poly's grit, both before and after it gradually breaks down. But I haven't seen any published values for size in microns, from EZE-Lap.
David