If you had the choice, would you want to move to the 27" LED Cinema Display?

I had a 27" iMac and disliked the 27" display. The density was too much and made my eyes sore. I tried lowering the resolution but then I was using non-native resolutions so then the text wasn't as crisp. I could turn it all the way down from 2560 x 1440 to 1280 x 720 to get a "native" resolution (OSX just doubled the pixels) but then the desktop and what not was too big. I ended up getting rid of it and went with 3 - 23" 1080P displays which seems to be easier on my eyes. Now if I could get a "retina" 23" display (3840 x 2160) I would be all over it, but so far any super high pixel density displays are expensive...

This was just my opinion.

glossy screens are a nonstarter for me

Definitely yes for me. I have been using two 27" ACDs for a little over a year. My feeling is that they are gorgeous displays for ordinary users!

prvt.donut said:

So you don't like the hi res screen, but would love a retina SUPER hi res screen...

I'm looking for more experience with Illustrator design work, desktop work space, color reproduction, and productivity advantages of the extra workspace to see if it is a worthwhile investment.

Click to expand...

Yes have you read how the new Macbook Retina Display works? Then you would understand that the way OSX handles High Rez displays is that it doubles the pixel count to give you a better image. The actual desktop "space" is not increased. That is what I want. 1080P image, but with super clarity.

paulrbeers said:

Yes have you read how the new Macbook Retina Display works? Then you would understand that the way OSX handles High Rez displays is that it doubles the pixel count to give you a better image. The actual desktop "space" is not increased. That is what I want. 1080P image, but with super clarity.

Click to expand...

You want higher ppi, rather than higher resolution. I get what you're saying but I still think that 27" is great for so many things. I'd automatically choose it over any 1080p display.

Also glossy displays are much clearer and sharper.

paulrbeers said:

Yes have you read how the new Macbook Retina Display works? Then you would understand that the way OSX handles High Rez displays is that it doubles the pixel count to give you a better image. The actual desktop "space" is not increased. That is what I want. 1080P image, but with super clarity.

Click to expand...

The pixel density AND resolution was not your problem with the 27" then as you stated. You are contradicting yourself. You want zoomed in doubled pixels. You are in the minority. Most users like extra workspace. The H-IPS 27" panels have fairly large pixel pitch. LED is the main problem with the Apple 27" for color work. The glass is only a factor to users who think you need matte to have a color accurate display. Which is absolutely false. It is a preference. Calibrated dE on a matte vs a glossy can be identical.

I use a 24" Cinema Display. I absolutely love it, the color are awesome.
I'm a student and I earn my money with doing some graphic design stuff next to studying.
In my case, going from a 24" to a 27" is not necessary, but you will love the bigger workspace if you are used to a 20".
You will see, your actual workspace in PS, AI, AE and so on will increase.

In your case, I wouldn't sell the 20". Keep it as a secondary screen. I use the 15" of my MBP as a little secondary screen where I keep all my toolbars and stuff. Working in Adobe CS with 2 screens is much more pleasant!

derbothaus said:

The pixel density AND resolution was not your problem with the 27" then as you stated. You are contradicting yourself. You want zoomed in doubled pixels. You are in the minority. Most users like extra workspace. The H-IPS 27" panels have fairly large pixel pitch. LED is the main problem with the Apple 27" for color work. The glass is only a factor to users who think you need matte to have a color accurate display. Which is absolutely false. It is a preference. Calibrated dE on a matte vs a glossy can be identical.

Click to expand...

Actually the 27" has the highest DPI of common desktop LCD size/resolutions (109 DPI). Only notebooks have higher and they are typically used much closer to the user than a desktop LCD.

No. If I was spending that much money on a screen, I'd spend it on the equiv. Dell Ultrasharp.

I really can't stand the glossy screen when it's large. I was excited when I started my new job at an all Mac office and they gave me an iMac but after the first week of having to deal with the glare and eye strain I brought in my own monitor from home. Now I use the iMac screen as a mirror to see what's going on behind me!

No way!

Apple monitors seem to degrade in reliability as the hardware they were developed for get older. My 20" ACD just started freaking out after a system update one day and never worked well going forward. I field stripped the monitor and could find nothing wrong. The firmware was tracked down to be the culprit.

An old BENQ 19" display I bought before the 20" ACD still works today. The Apple discussion forums are full of customers who are dealing with Apple display issues. Apple displays are just not reliable.

I will never, ever, ever buy another Apple display product. I use 2 HP 2509 displays for my development work and I'm quite satisfied with them. HP also has monitors with IPS panels if color matching is an issue.

charliex5 said:

I really can't stand the glossy screen when it's large.

Click to expand...

I suspect this is always going to be a personal preference thing - it also depends a bit on your environment and type of work.

The advantage of glossy screens is that they reflect most of the incident light away from you, whereas matte screens scatter it in all directions, so some of it will always be visible. Provided you can arrange things so that your screen isn't reflecting a light or window directly at you, it should be better than matte.

I work with my screen at about 45 deg to a window - when it was sunny, my previous matte screen was completely washed out whereas the 27" Cinema display is still usable in those circumstances. I find it easier to ignore reflections (you can 'focus them out') than to work around bits of the screen that you simply can't see. They might, however, be more noticable if you were doing phot editing, with large areas of dark colours.

Of course, if you're trying to do serious, colour-accurate graphics work with a bright light or sunlit window shining on the screen then you're doing it wrong regardless of how shiny your screen is. There's a reason why pro displays (often costing 2x as much as the 'expensive' Apple display) have hoods.

Personally, the dealbreaker for me with the ACD/ATD is that it only has a single input, which is DisplayPort-only (ACD) or Thunderbolt-only (ATD) - I use an ACD at work where that isn't an issue, but i've not succumbed to one at home, where I have various other systems with DVI, VGA, HDMI that I want to plug in from time-to-time.

Otherwise, its the nicest display I've ever used.

(I'd also hold fire just in case it get updated when the new iMacs come out - retina is unlikely, but it might at least get USB3).

I was not a fan of LED displays until I went to a large TV retailer and got hands on wit the controls....Short story is I left the store with a new Sony Bravia 46" 3D LED.

You can tame the colour issues with tweaking, and a 27" LED iMac or even a stand alone display for a MP would be fine

That's what I use... they are pretty expensive though.

Look into the catleaps. Same panel but for 1/3 the price as Apple's 27".

I personally don't like the glossy so I'm sticking with my 23" ACDs.

OrangeSVTguy said:

Look into the catleaps. Same panel but for 1/3 the price as Apple's 27".

I personally don't like the glossy so I'm sticking with my 23" ACDs.

Click to expand...

Except that they use the left over panels after the likes of Dell and Apple had their pick, figuratively speaking. (A- panels versus A+ panels)

We did have a one bright pixel, but were literally straining our eyes to see it, as it was only visible in white. Unless the one you buy is a “pixel perfect” version, it’s going to take either more than 5 bright/dead pixels or 1 non-functioning pixel in the center area to merit a defective unit. Anything less and you’ll just have to deal with it. Remember, these are A- panels, not the A+ ones found in the likes of Apple Thunderbolt displays. We did find some sellers that would make sure the units weren’t defective before shipping them out, which is comforting.

Click to expand...

theSeb said:

Except that they use the left over panels after the likes of Dell and Apple had their pick, figuratively speaking. (A- panels versus A+ panels)

Click to expand...

You can pay a bit more for no dead/stuck pixel guarantee from a number of sellers.

Anyway I had a 27" ACD and a 27" PCBank. The PCBank was a bit lacking (comparatively) in backlight uniformity. The ACD wasn't that amazing in that regard either but was nonetheless better. 3x the price better...probably not. I didn't keep either but if I were to keep the ACD it would be because of 1) it looks nicer and 2) easier to use with my MBP.

No, I am not a fan of Apple monitors. I just don't see the value, don't care about its physical appearance.

I have 2. I don't recommend them.
Here's why:

- glossy. i have my computer in my basement office, so it's not a problem for me, but they are pretty much useless in a room with lights/windows. Trust me on this one.
- 16:9 aspect ratio. Give me 16:10!
- LED backlit. CCFL is better for professional use (wider colour gamut)

I only have them because i don't want to spend 200 dollars on adapters to use 2 Apple 30-inch monitors.

No, because it would be a step down...

30" Cinema Display here.

kaputsport said:

No, because it would be a step down...

30" Cinema Display here.

Click to expand...

Same here. I have a 24" Dell 2407 as my secondary. Thinking of replacing it with 27" NEC. Non-glossy and pivoting right out of the box. With the 30" ACD running in landscape, it's a perfect Lightroom setup.