That's great to hear. The price difference was too much for me but it seems really nice.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple's Studio Display vs. LG's UltraFine 5K Display
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That's great to hear. The price difference was too much for me but it seems really nice.
As a photographer I care about display resolution and color accuracy/gamut width
Tell me how Alienware's QD-OLED would bury (bury? is the usage of that word as I remember it from high school?) the Apple Studio Display, with specifics. Which color spaces does it support?
"For that you will get an infinitely better experience and that’s just sad, to think people would buy this at that price, just because Apple made it!"
Tell me how I would realize an infinitely better experience processing my photos. With specifics, please.
That doesn't change the original point - there are no true 5k panels on the market with refresh rates over 60Hz. Even if Apple contracted a panel manufacturer to make a custom panel the cost would be prohibitive for the already inflated price point of the Studio Display.
All I know is that a 4k (or 5k) OLED of some kind is my next desktop monitor.
I know from the TV experience that once I go OLED on the desktop, I won't want anything else.
The color space coverage, richness of it all and the perfect blacks --- so great.
Only thing holding me off that Alienware 34" QD-QLED is the particular form factor and lack of pixels.
I'm not a huge fan of ultrawides for my particular desktop usages -- and I want a bit more vertical resolution
In the meantime I'll keep riding my beloved 30" 16:10 1600p Dell monitor
I know from the TV experience that once I go OLED on the desktop, I won't want anything else.
The color space coverage, richness of it all and the perfect blacks --- so great.
Only thing holding me off that Alienware 34" QD-QLED is the particular form factor and lack of pixels.
I'm not a huge fan of ultrawides for my particular desktop usages -- and I want a bit more vertical resolution
In the meantime I'll keep riding my beloved 30" 16:10 1600p Dell monitor
You said:
You directly connected the lack of "true 5k 120hz screens" to your claimed lack of connections standards.
That's factually inaccurate.
There are connections that work just fine, right now (DSC)
Apple themselves are using that tech as we speak!
No, it is replaceable. You can’t reuse one that has been removed in that manner.
Do you stare at the edges and border of the display or concentrate on the content of the display?
The LG suffers from ghosting, not so much traditional burn-in. It showed up within the first hour or two of use on all the LGs I have (4) and has continued since.
The report of no ghosting or burn-in visible after testing is already a significant improvement over the LG Ultrafine 5k.
Yeah small companies like Apple can only make products that already exist in the market
Apple doesn't make display panels. Sure, they could commission LG or Samsung to make one, but it would likely be prohibitively expensive.
Dann, today I tried the new studio display: this thing lacks some of the polish of eg the retired iMac Intel iMac line.
Some parts of the design don’t look like 1600-2000 $/€.
Some parts of the design don’t look like 1600-2000 $/€.
500 vs 600 nits you arent going to notice unless you really need it as its at some window with loads of sun. This is the typical 'there is nothing comparable so its a good bargain" nonsense thats always said.
In case anyone is looking for an alternative to the Studio Display this one has, in my opinion, more space to work on than a 5K.
3840x2560 pixels, 3:2 ratio, 165 ppi.
forums.macrumors.com
And before anyone says "it's not Retina", the reason Apple choose 220 ppi was simply that it was double standard monitors so their UI would appear the same size with 2x scaling. The real biological "Retina" for a desktop monitor is actually somewhere from 160-180 ppi depending on your eyes.
3840x2560 pixels, 3:2 ratio, 165 ppi.
mini paired with Hauwei's new 4.5K 3:2 monitor = iMac killer?
So what's the easiest way to get one of these in the US? Amazon.co.uk is sold out.
forums.macrumors.com
And before anyone says "it's not Retina", the reason Apple choose 220 ppi was simply that it was double standard monitors so their UI would appear the same size with 2x scaling. The real biological "Retina" for a desktop monitor is actually somewhere from 160-180 ppi depending on your eyes.
Correct. Aesthetics and design matter. It's like asking people why does it matter what color their car is or the architectural style of their house or office building is if all they are going to do is sit inside and look out the window? Some people really don't care, but it's important for enough for it to matter and it matters enough to warrant a premium over a basic, utilitarian design.
You sure will notice a difference as shown in the recent MR review.
As an aside having nothing to do with displays...Would you notice a difference in your paycheck with a 20% raise?
The mic on the Studio Display sounded orders of magnitude better than the the mic on the LG. You kept dissing the web cam on the Studio Display, but at least in the little clip you shot, the Studio Display's web cam also looked WAY WAY WAY better than the LGs.
I have a Dell 38" 21:9 and it’s great for desktop (non multimedia) usage.
I can have different screen setup but the one I use the most is my main window in the center, around 1900 px width, one at the left, around 1200, And there is still some space left on the right part of the screen, I use this space for a finder, sublime (notepad) or similar.
Before I had 2x22" monitor and this is a better setup.
Aesthetics and build quality mean quite a lot. The LG Ultrafine and most of their other models are plastic and wobbly and just feel cheap.
There are no 5k monitors other than the LG on the market. If you want 5k these are your two choices. All plastic, wobbly and poor speakers or sturdy, aluminum and glass with speakers that will have you questioning your need for external speakers.
5k 120hz monitors just don’t exist yet. As to the power cord, the pins may be shorter and thinner than a regular plug due to the monitors thickness, hence the need for a more permanent connection. The plug in the LG connects at the thickest part of the monitor.
The pile on to knock the monitor for what it isn’t, instead of truly examining what it offers is silly. The camera issue is legit and needs to be fixed. Quality should at least match that in the 24” iMac.
Trouble is, what it isn’t includes:
- It isn’t a compelling upgrade - paired with a M1 Mini - for current owners of entry-to-mid level 5k iMacs, which previously offered a far better “bundle price” for comparable display specs. Top-end iMacs, which previously cost much the same as a Studio Max plus Studio Display, ar3 not such a problem.
- It isn’t convincing as a 5+ year “investment” that could outlive any Mac you buy it with, being a warmed-over version of tech that is already at least 5 years old and likely to be rapidly superseded by mini-led, higher refresh rates etc.
- It isn’t of much interest whatsoever if you aren’t committed to 5k, which has become a niche, Mac-only and hence expensive option.
- It is not a budget-by-Apple-standards ”prosumer” display - $1600 for a 27” is not budget by any standard.
- It is not a “more affordable” version of the XDR Pro, offering neither a higher resolution, larger screen or HDR c.f. what has been available in the iMac or LG for years.
…meanwhile, that optional stand better be the Best Stand Ever, cure male baldness and save a baby seal every time you use it to justify not including it as standard. Haven’t seen a review of the stand yet - wonder how that compares with the LG for wobbliness. Also, I can’t understand people who rave about design, but don’t throw up in their mouths a little bit every time they think of that fixed power cord.