Cinema Displays

Discussion in 'Buying Tips, Advice and Discussion (archive)' started by Smileyguy, Jan 23, 2005.

  1. Smileyguy macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2004
    #1
    Hello,

    As some of you may have seen I've been asking alot of questions lately. :D
    But I want to be sure about things before departing with this amount of money.

    Anyway, someone suggested on this board earlier that there was a school of thought that said that the older Apple cinema displays are better than the newer ones. Has anyone heard this before? I originally had my heart set one of the older models, but I decided to save a bit extra and go for one of the newer ones because I'm getting into photography and want colour accuracy. But if the older ones are better (and cheaper and better looking...) then it's perfect!

    I know people will tell me not to buy an Apple display, but I have my heart set on one and don't want to consider much else, unless it's a Formac.

    Also, I'm willing to spend alot on a good colour calibrator in a few months, though I don't understand much about how these work. Even if I were to buy a slightly 'worse' monitor, would I be able to get maximum colour results by simply buying a good calibrator?

    Thanks. :)
     
  2. Daveway macrumors 68040

    Daveway

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Location:
    New Orleans / Lafayette, La
    #2
    Compared side by side the newer cinemas are MUCH brighter than the older white ones. However, some of the alu. displays may have a pink tint but I believe this problem has been resolved.
     
  3. dsharits macrumors 68000

    dsharits

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2004
    Location:
    The People's Republic of America
    #3
    I don't think there's much difference in the LCD's themselves, only the frame and the interface. I'd say to just go for the one that you like better, as far as looks and price. You won't be disappointed.

    Daniel
     
  4. Smileyguy thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2004
    #4
    I like the first one alot better, and I can get it quite cheaper. I am a little worried about colour quality though, but I'd sleep easy If I knew a good calibrator would do the trick.
     
  5. cmvsm macrumors 6502a

    cmvsm

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2004
    #5
    I have the older 20" and it is fantastic. I'm not sure how much brighter you can get as I have to turn the brightness down on my monitor in order to keep my eyes from glazing over. Asthetically, I for one also think that the old monitors are better looking than the new. These monitors stand out from the crowd so to speak, even from the backside, as the current model may blend a bit into the sea of displays. The only downside, if you want to call it that, is that it has an ADC connector and not DVI like the new ones. This is remedied very easily by the DVI/ADC adaptor should you ever decide to get another video card that doesn't have ADC. The new ATI cards do such as the X800, so I really wouldn't worry about it much.

    Not that the new monitor isn't nice, because it is, but the duckfoot can't replace the acrylic....IMHO. The price is great as well. For $799, you just can't beat it.

    Whatever you choose, I'm sure you will be very pleased!
     
  6. Smileyguy thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2004
    #6
    I agree that the last one is alot better looking. In fact, it's stunning.What I' be really interested in hearing is from people who have used both, or for people who have used either for colour-accurate work.

    If I buy a good calibrator, will the old one be colour-accurate enough? By the way, how do the resolutions compare?
     
  7. cmvsm macrumors 6502a

    cmvsm

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2004
    #7
    I believe that the resolutions are the same in both 20" models. In terms of color accuracy, the previous generation of displays only went out of service a few months ago, and I don't think you are going to find much of a difference if any to speak of.
     
  8. wPod macrumors 68000

    wPod

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2003
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #8
    Aren't the old 20" HD and the new ones are not? If so, what is the difference b/w HD and not HD? I know on TV monitors its a better resolution but if the old and new have the same resolution what makes HD?
     
  9. MrSugar macrumors 6502a

    MrSugar

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    #9
    If you are interested in getting an old display and want color accurary, you should STRONGLY consider that option.

    Color consitancy problems

    Apple Discussion Forums

    Both of these links will provide you with information about the 23" color problems and consitency. While the 20" and the 30" are reportedly better they still have some complaints from users.

    In my honest opinion, if you are looking for really good color accuracy stick with the older displays. Otherwise get a 20" new display, unless you have money for the 30". I have dual 23" Apple cinema displays, they do look really good, but the color consistancy has been a huge problem. My 2nd display is now being sent in for a 3rd time to be repaired.

    Really if you liked the old ones I would go that route.

    my 2 cents
     
  10. cmvsm macrumors 6502a

    cmvsm

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2004
    #10
    In terms of the 20" comparison in resolution, I would think that they would be the same in every capacity, HD or otherwise.
     
  11. Smileyguy thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2004
    #11
    Excellent, so nobody can see any particular advantages for chosing the new ones over the old ones?
     
  12. bigjay macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2005
    Location:
    Arizona
    #12
    Just a thought (and wish) iMac HD

    What do you think about having HD displays for the iMac now that ole Steve Jobs said this is the year of HD? With iMovie now able to edit HD video, this brings all 3 video editing apps up to the HD level. If Apple is giving the consumer HD capabilities with iMovie, why not give us HD abilities with our iMac monitors. Any thoughts or rumors on this???
     
  13. spacepower7 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    May 6, 2004
    #13
    I have 2 of the older 20 inch displays. They are awesone! Mine are very concsistent in color. Also I got lucky with no dead pixels.

    As far as brightness, these old ones offer plenty. If you are going to to use the computer for more than 30 minutes, you'll want to turn the brightness way down. I usually set my brightness level at about 30% since I am usual in front of the cpu for more than an hour at a time. The one exception is working in Photoshop, then I turn the brightness to 2/3 (66%) on the slider.

    bigjay:
    Technically, the 20in and 17 in iMacs are already HD since HD can be 1280x720 or 1920x1080. If you have a JVC HDV (1280x720)camera, you can see all the HD pixels while editing while using a 20in or 17in iMac. The Sony HDV is 1920x1080, so that video would have to be scaled down to edit on the 20in or 17in iMac.
     
  14. bigjay macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2005
    Location:
    Arizona
    #14
    Thank you for the reply spacepower7. I thought it might be because of the resolution that they could be HD however on Apple's site, they claim that only the 23 in and 30 in Cinema displays are HD, not the 20. I didn't know what the difference would be besides the size (obviously)
     
  15. Smileyguy thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2004
    #15
    So, let me get this right. The older, white framed 20' Cinema Displays are HD? Is this correct?
     
  16. Y-knot? macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2004
    Location:
    London
    #16
    No only the 23" was HD.
     
  17. devman macrumors 65816

    devman

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    Location:
    AU
    #17
    They're using the HD tag only for displays that can do 1080 pixels of height. Thus only the 23" and 30".

    It's also true, as said above, that HDTV can be 1080i or 720p. Many though (de facto) don't think it's HD unless it's 1080.
     

Share This Page