$350 for used Apple Cinema Display. Good deal?

Discussion in 'Mac Accessories' started by bigpoppamac31, Jun 1, 2014.

  1. bigpoppamac31 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #1
  2. IlikeMacsSoMuch macrumors 6502

    IlikeMacsSoMuch

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Location:
    Blainville, Province of Quebec
    #2
    If it's in great condition then yes it is but I wouldn't go higher then 300$ myself since there are still other alternative out there that are IMO better, Dell's for exemple.
     
  3. bigpoppamac31 thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #3
    Well I guess I just like the look of the Apple Cinema Display. But what Dell monitor would you recommend? How about Asus monitors?
     
  4. Boyd01 macrumors 68040

    Boyd01

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2012
    Location:
    New Jersey Pine Barrens
    #4
    I believe there are several versions of these made at different times. That photo looks like mine, which I believe I purchased in 2005. It is still going strong, I use it everyday with my MacBook Air and a miniDisplayport to DVI adapter.

    This was a really expensive display when I got it, something like $1600 IIRC. But the image has always been just beautiful. A number of years ago Matrox introduced a product called the MXO which allowed you to connect one of these to your computer and get studio monitor quality HD video. I remember attentending NAB and people were amazed that it looked as good as $8000 studio monitors. So it's a real classic.

    However that was then and this is now. As much as I like mine, there is no way I'd pay that much money for a monitor of this age. Also note that it uses the older LCD baklight technology instead of LED and it takes a minute to warm up and reach full brightness.
     
  5. bigpoppamac31 thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #5
    Well to be honest $350 is certainly out of my price range. I've just always wanted one of those Apple Displays cause it matches so well with the MBP.

    How about one of these?
    http://www.amazon.com/Asus-VS247H-P..._sim_pc_1?ie=UTF8&refRID=04ARDQ3PM2AMW3X6Z9HZ

    Or these?
    http://www.amazon.com/Dell-293M3-IP...8&qid=1401651839&sr=8-1&keywords=dell+monitor

    Would be nice if affordable monitors went higher than 1920 x 1080.
     
  6. IlikeMacsSoMuch, Jun 1, 2014
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2014

    IlikeMacsSoMuch macrumors 6502

    IlikeMacsSoMuch

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Location:
    Blainville, Province of Quebec
    #6


    I don't know asus displays but the Dell's ips led display uses a similar technology then apple displays and besides, if you buy new you'll get a warranty. Just my 2 cents.

    You might find monitors with higher definitions in the same price range but you would certainly loose in quality.


    This one is nice, great warranty and multiple inputs, it's future proof:
    http://accessories.dell.com/sna/products/Accessoires_de_jeux/productdetail.aspx?c=ca&l=fr&s=dhs&cs=cadhs1&sku=860-BBCG
     
  7. bigpoppamac31, Jun 1, 2014
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2014

    bigpoppamac31 thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #7
    Why would I lose in quality? Wouldn't a higher resolution mean a higher density of pixels and therefore a sharper image? Apple's 27" iMac and TB Display is 2560-by-1440 yet this dell 27" is only 1920 by 1080. Why would that be?? http://www.amazon.com/Dell-927M9-IP...id=1401651977&sr=8-1&keywords=dell+monitor+27
     
  8. IlikeMacsSoMuch macrumors 6502

    IlikeMacsSoMuch

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Location:
    Blainville, Province of Quebec
    #8
    Yes but the display itself might be of a lesser quality, higher price doesn't necessary means higher quality but I think the other way around is usually true. For instance, there are pc that for the same price or even lower price offer higher specs than macs but they are usually built cheaper. Unless you build your pc yourself that is.

    The TB display and iMac are a lot more expensive, around 1K for the TB. You get what you pay for but, with the TB you can't use anything other than a mac equipped with TB or the very rare pc equipped with the TB port. But if unlike me all you use is a mac, than it's a match made in heaven! Does your mac have a thunderbolt port?
     
  9. bigpoppamac31 thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #9
    yeah I guess that's true. But what about this? The Apple's 27" iMac and TB Display is 2560-by-1440 yet this dell 27" is only 1920 by 1080. Why would that be?? http://www.amazon.com/Dell-927M9-IP...id=1401651977&sr=8-1&keywords=dell+monitor+27
     
  10. IlikeMacsSoMuch macrumors 6502

    IlikeMacsSoMuch

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Location:
    Blainville, Province of Quebec
    #10
  11. bigpoppamac31 thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #11
    What about a DVI display? Those have higher resolution right?
     
  12. IlikeMacsSoMuch macrumors 6502

    IlikeMacsSoMuch

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Location:
    Blainville, Province of Quebec
    #12
    Not always in itself dvi is HDMI without audio, to have higher definition I might be wrong but I believe you would need dual liaison DVI
     
  13. bigpoppamac31 thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #13
    Well I'm on a MBP 2011 15". it's display is the "hi-res" 1680 by 1050. I have it on a stand right now as pictured here. http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=474436&stc=1&d=1401652986 I just think a bigger display would be nice. Something like 23-24 inch would be good. But my thought is that the higher one goes in display size the more easy it is to notice the pixels if they're all 1920 by 1080. Like on the 21" iMac I can easily see each pixel at a normal distance away.
     
  14. IlikeMacsSoMuch macrumors 6502

    IlikeMacsSoMuch

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Location:
    Blainville, Province of Quebec
    #14
    If you can see the pixels you are sitting to close! With that macbook pro you can use a thunderbolt display your graphic card should handle it just fine. So if it can handle a TB display it can handle anything! The Dell display you mentioned would be nice with your setup.

    Here's my setup:

    IMG_0574.jpg

    My Dell is the U2713H, it's awesome!
     
  15. bigpoppamac31 thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #15
    Your display is 2560 by 1440. That's what I would like. How much was your display? I brought up the iMac cause I was checking them out at the Apple Store. Maybe they will put retina displays in the next version. The iMac display doesn't seem so crisp anymore. Were you referring to the 23" or 27" Dell I mentioned? Either way it would be nice to have a bigger display. I've connected my Mac to my 40" HDTV a few times but all considering the image is horrible. Watching movies was okay like ones downloaded from iTunes. But viewing the desktop and text was not so good.
     
  16. COrocket macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2012
    #16
    I have two of these on my desk and I love them. The color on the IPS panel is great. However, they are glossy so it is easy to get glare. My room is fairly dark so overall I would highly recommend them. There is also a S2240M which is a 21" display that is the same resolution. The apple display is an older technology, so if you can do without the matching aesthetics, I think that there are other current options that are a better value.

    The thing about monitors is you have to pay attention to pixel density - usually in pixels per inch (PPI). A 21" iMac display that is 1920x1080 has a PPI of 102. A 27" iMac 2560x1440 is only slightly better at 109. So larger monitors have more pixels spread out over a larger area, resulting in the same pixel size, and is therefore equally noticeable if you look really closely at the screen.

    You would have to get a 4k display which are still very expensive to get a desktop monitor with a higher PPI.
     
  17. bigpoppamac31 thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #17
    Hmm I'd rather a matte screen over a glossy screen. I think the Asus I mentioned is a matte screen.
     
  18. IlikeMacsSoMuch macrumors 6502

    IlikeMacsSoMuch

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Location:
    Blainville, Province of Quebec
    #18
    It was about the same price then a tb display. I wanted something with a maté display and multiple inputs. I was refering to thé 27 inches monitor. It is normal that thé picture seems horrible on thé tv because as good as it might be it has a lesser def then your mac's. iTunes videos are 1080p the same as your tv. The 27 inches iMac has the same image quality then a tb display (2560 by 1440). I think that the next tb monitor and high end iMac Will have 4k, not retina.
     
  19. bigpoppamac31 thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #19
    How does my HDTV have less definition then my Mac. It's 1920 by 1080 whereas my MBP is 1680 by 1050. My Mac has less pixels then my TV.
     
  20. IlikeMacsSoMuch macrumors 6502

    IlikeMacsSoMuch

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Location:
    Blainville, Province of Quebec
    #20
    my mistake, the problem is the size of the screen, the bigger it is the more pixelated. for exemple, compare the image quality of a retina display ipad to your mac, your mac has a lot more pixels yet the image is better on the ipad because the pixels on the ipad are concentrated in a smaller space
     
  21. bigpoppamac31 thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #21
    Actually the iPad Air has much more pixels then my "hi-res" MBP. The iPad has a resolution of 2048 by 1536 (according to the Apple website). My MBP is 1680 by 1050. Add in that the iPad is a smaller screen with many more pixels and it's clear why it's a better display. Even both the 13" and 15" Retina MBP has more pixels at 2560 by 1600 and 2880 by 1800 respectively then my MBP or any "HD" display. It would be nice to have a bigger display but with only a touch more pixels at 1920 by 1080 on say a 24" display I'll notice the pixels pretty easily at a normal sitting distance. You'd think by now that "retina" type monitors would be more common at affordable prices.
     
  22. brentsg macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    #22
    Displays at "retina" pixel densities are still relatively new. The reason that you need greater pixel density on an iPad or iPhone is that you view them from a much closer distance.

    When you consider screen resolution you have to take into account viewing distance, resolution, and screen size. All of these have an impact on your ability to see, or not see pixels.

    4K desktop displays are still relatively new and they're just now beginning to mature.
     
  23. bigpoppamac31 thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #23
    I don't care about 4K. Apple displays have had resolutions higher than 1920 by 1080 for a long time. But why don't those higher resolutions come in monitors that the average joe can actually afford??
     
  24. brentsg macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    #24
    This thread is a moving target, but I guess we're back where we started.
     
  25. glenthompson macrumors 68000

    glenthompson

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Location:
    Virginia
    #25
    I bought a 23" ACD from Craigslist for $140 so this price seems a little high to me. I've been really happy with it.
     

Share This Page