Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

16" Brightness discussion [merged]

MacRumors needs to pick this story up as a front page story and reach out to Apple to ensure they are aware of it, if they are not currently, so that something can/will have to be done.
[automerge]1574710667[/automerge]
Ma2k5 said:
Good news is that notebookcheck measured over 500 nits on their model (been hunting for this for like a week now) - which means this doesn’t affect every model. But if you’re is affected, this might mean a faulty display rather than a software glitch?

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Just-...6-with-Core-i9-Radeon-Pro-5500M.443889.0.html
Click to expand...

So they got 500 in 1/9th of the screen? I'd expect it in at least 5/9 for Apple to be able to make that claim.
 
  • Like
Reactions: impulse462
Please pick this up on front page. Side by side my 2016 MBP is noticeably brighter.
Yes have tripled check the 2019 16” is on max brightness.

Both rated 500 nits but at 400nits (what reviews are suggesting) is a huge difference! 20% less brightness is absurd.
 
Lifequest said:
Please pick this up on front page. Side by side my 2016 MBP is noticeably brighter.
Yes have tripled check the 2019 16” is on max brightness.

Both rated 500 nits but at 400nits (what reviews are suggesting) is a huge difference! 20% less brightness is absurd.
Click to expand...
yeah i've noticed the same compared to my 2017 15". As a point of comparison, here is notebookchecks distribution of brightness on that computer:
Screen Shot 2019-11-27 at 2.32.03 PM.png
 
Nacho98 said:
MacRumors needs to pick this story up as a front page story and reach out to Apple to ensure they are aware of it, if they are not currently, so that something can/will have to be done.
[automerge]1574710667[/automerge]


So they got 500 in 1/9th of the screen? I'd expect it in at least 5/9 for Apple to be able to make that claim.
Click to expand...
True. What is funny is that the 400 nit rated XPS15 OLED has been measured at over 600 nits :eek: - crazy considering backlit LCD displays are generally easier to make brighter than OLED.
 
Just got my 16 incher yesterday. Same issue here, screen is not very bright. Compared to my old 13" 2013 it is just a tiny bit brighter. As I think of buying a Spyder anyway, I was wondering if one of the cheaper models (Spyder X Pro) will do to measure max screen brightness.
 
Have you switched of - ”automatically adjust brightness. With that setting on I got a max of 300 nits, with it off I got 475.
 
Yes, auto brightness off, Truetone off, reduction of screen brightness on battery power off.
 
Ma2k5 said:
You might not be able to utilise all your RAM too but if you’re paying for it, you’d hope to have it right? Why pay for a 500nit screen only to end up with a 400 nit screen.
Click to expand...
This is an illogical argument. A reduction in RAM is actually going to be a problem. A reduction in NITS is actually going to be helpful if I intend to keep the brightness setting on full.

I'm betting that most of these folks would never have known about the reduction in NITS if someone hadn't brought it to their attention. Power of suggestion is powerful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ascender
The brightness is perfect for me. Compared to my 15" 2015 the brightness I use it at is virtually the same. It's on about 75% now and that's perfect for me.
 
revmacian said:
This is an illogical argument. A reduction in RAM is actually going to be a problem. A reduction in NITS is actually going to be helpful if I intend to keep the brightness setting on full.

I'm betting that most of these folks would never have known about the reduction in NITS if someone hadn't brought it to their attention. Power of suggestion is powerful.
Click to expand...

You contradicted yourself - a lot of people wouldn’t notice a slight decrease in RAM unless they regularly maxed it which 99% of people don’t. Also you don’t make sense, if you keep it on brightest setting how does it help if it isn’t bright enough due to the environment? Totally bizarre statement.

Meanwhile, the screen differences are completely visible in store - or if you compare them to another laptop side by side, which I had the displeasure when I originally bought the Air and noticed it was worse than the laptop I was replacing.

It is interesting you are defending these screens similar to to those who were defending the Air screens of 2018 which for no apparent reason were worse than older ones - and guess what? Apple applied a fix to add 100 nits of brightness to them.

So your comments are pretty much 0% relevant or useful to this discussion. We might actually either get better panels or a software fix by mentioning the issue. Does that really hurt your perfect vision of Apple as a company or something?
 
matram said:
For the photography work I do I calibrate the screen for 100 nits. For development I tend to be about 50% brightness which is about 100 - 120 nits. Why would I want to work at maximum brightness for these applications?
Click to expand...

I ordered my lambo and I can only get up to 80mph and it’s really only 160 horses but that’s ok cause I tend to drive the speed limit and don’t have a heavy foot.

PFFFT. Ok dude.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NeroAugustus
vemac575 said:
I ordered my lambo and I can only get up to 80mph and it’s really only 160 horses but that’s ok cause I tend to drive the speed limit and don’t have a heavy foot.

PFFFT. Ok dude.
Click to expand...

Sometimes people are so emotionally invested in a company or a product they bought they are happy to pretend a problem doesn’t exist.

There was an Nvidia gpu once which only allowed 3.5GB of the 4GB video ram and some defended it on the basis of “My gaming doesn’t need that much” due to bias too. Luckily I think there was a resolution to that issue in the en.d.
 
  • Like
Reactions: burgman
so when is Macrumors going to pick this up as a front page story and ask apple for a comment if for no other reason to have apple at least look into it? that would be a lot more effective than leaving feedback that probably goes to the junior software developers
 
  • Like
Reactions: NeroAugustus
Nacho98 said:
so when is Macrumors going to pick this up as a front page story and ask apple for a comment if for no other reason to have apple at least look into it? that would be a lot more effective than leaving feedback that probably goes to the junior software developers
Click to expand...
Maybe when there's evidence from credible sources that it's news. Right now it's mostly scattered anecdote and measurements from different sources that may not use the same methods.

Notebook Check measured 477 nits average for the 16", 492 for the 2018 15", 525 for the 2017 15", and 465, 532, 401 for three 2016 15"ers. 477 would be in the middle range.

Laptop Magazine measured 429 for the 16", but only 403 for the 2019 15", 354 (!) for the 2018 15", 460 for the 2017 15", and 440 for the 2016 15".

Hard to say what causes that much variability (maybe different people doing the reviews, maybe settings, maybe real differences), but the current screen appears to be in the midrange of recent MBP screens.
 
I thought I was going crazy, I noticed the screen of my 16" would not get as bright as my late 2016 13" MBP, it really annoys me, I've watched Tally Ho Tech's review on YT, he has gone through 3 16 inches and each registers different levels of screen brightness ranging from 470 to 515 nits. I'm wondering if I should return mine, but if the issue is faulty displays that may only make matters worse. This is annoying Apple needs to figure this out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pepe4life
Kamk101 said:
I've watched Tally Ho Tech's review on YT, he has gone through 3 16 inches and each registers different levels of screen brightness ranging from 470 to 515 nits.
Click to expand...
So between 94% and 103% of what's promised. That's pretty much how it's been since Apple went to the 500-nit screens. Notebook Check measurements:

2019 16": 477
2018 15": 492
2017 15": 523
2016 15": 465
2016 15": 532
2016 15": 401

Edit: looks like I already said that! These merged threads with new titles ...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kamk101 and ascender
I was comparing the displays of the 16” next to the 13” MBP side by side today in John Lewis and the screen on the 16” was disappointingly dimmer(I set them both at full brightness and True Tone off) Apple really needs to sort this out. This is the only and I do mean only reason I’m not getting the 16 incher. Very disappointed and annoyed frankly.
 
waquzy said:
I was comparing the displays of the 16” next to the 13” MBP side by side today in John Lewis and the screen on the 16” was disappointingly dimmer(I set them both at full brightness and True Tone off) Apple really needs to sort this out. This is the only and I do mean only reason I’m not getting the 16 incher. Very disappointed and annoyed frankly.
Click to expand...
Can confirm that my 16” is dimmer.
 
For what it's worth, Notebook Check measured the brightness of the 2019 13" and the 16" as almost the same, 480 vs 477 nits.

To compare, it helps if the screens have the same color. Bluer screens tend to look brighter to me.
 
My 2014 13” MBP is brighter than my 16”. Went to the store to exchange it until I saw all the display models being dimmer than the one I have. Sad!
 
Sanpete said:
For what it's worth, Notebook Check measured the brightness of the 2019 13" and the 16" as almost the same, 480 vs 477 nits.

To compare, it helps if the screens have the same color. Bluer screens tend to look brighter to me.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, it doesn't mean a lot, due to the fact that the displays differ enormously depending on your luck. I'm not willing to pay two and a half grand to play the display lottery, especially knowing my luck.
 
My 16" is slightly dimmer than my 2015 15" was but I still don't use it at 100% brightness. Around 75-80% brightness is perfect for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back