Not only does it rotate to portrait, it automatically detects rotation so you don't even have to manually switch.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Here's What the Studio Display's Webcam Looks Like After 15.5 Beta Firmware Update
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Barely better, maybe. I honestly couldn't tell that big a difference. At 1600$ it was already overpriced, but for this camera quality in addition to it being overpriced, I'd say slice the price in half and sell it for 800$. No way I'm paying 1600$ for this. It's just an iMac without the computer part in it, how can they charge so much for it?
It is better but nowhere near enough of an improvement for me to stop using Camo. Which means I wouldn't ever use the webcam built into the display - and I wouldn't benefit at all from all the expense Apple added to the product for that camera (the A13 SOC, 64GB Storage, full clone of iOS, etc).
The other issue is I prefer to work with multiple displays (at least two, prefer three), and certainly don't need multiple webcams (or even any at all, since I'm quite happy with Camo), and I regularly work at two desks (home office and work office) so the additional cost associated with this ****** camera is multiplied several times over and is not even close to what I'm willing to spend on each of my displays. Surely removing the camera, the A13, the 64GB of storage, having simple firmware instead of iOS, would cut about $500 from the price? Times that by five displays.
We asked for a standalone display with the same panel as the iMac... and what they gave us is basically an iMac with less ports and that doesn't run MacOS.
The other issue is I prefer to work with multiple displays (at least two, prefer three), and certainly don't need multiple webcams (or even any at all, since I'm quite happy with Camo), and I regularly work at two desks (home office and work office) so the additional cost associated with this ****** camera is multiplied several times over and is not even close to what I'm willing to spend on each of my displays. Surely removing the camera, the A13, the 64GB of storage, having simple firmware instead of iOS, would cut about $500 from the price? Times that by five displays.
We asked for a standalone display with the same panel as the iMac... and what they gave us is basically an iMac with less ports and that doesn't run MacOS.
Last edited:
To be perfectly honest if it was a blind test I'd have said the original was better,
The new version seems to have more blur/smoothing applied to his face.
Looking at the very edges of the hair I'd say with original was a little better at defining it.
Just my thoughts of this example.
The new version seems to have more blur/smoothing applied to his face.
Looking at the very edges of the hair I'd say with original was a little better at defining it.
Just my thoughts of this example.
I think the real point is a bit different, and the mistake everyone is doing is to consider the wrong perspective.
it’s absolutely clear that a 1080p camera in a 5k screen does not look good.
But the camera in the display is not meant to be used to look at yourself. It’s there in order to make videoconferences with others, so the question should be: how does it look watching from an IPad on the other side, for example?
ok, you may argue that we can use the camera to self register videos. The point is still the same: how would this video look on a smaller screen? It’s clear that on a 5k screen it would not look nice.
I don’t see this perspective in the article and in the comments I read so far (I did not read them all).
it’s absolutely clear that a 1080p camera in a 5k screen does not look good.
But the camera in the display is not meant to be used to look at yourself. It’s there in order to make videoconferences with others, so the question should be: how does it look watching from an IPad on the other side, for example?
ok, you may argue that we can use the camera to self register videos. The point is still the same: how would this video look on a smaller screen? It’s clear that on a 5k screen it would not look nice.
I don’t see this perspective in the article and in the comments I read so far (I did not read them all).
I agree.
And while Center stage is fun, i think it‘s more a nice to have feature for an iPad (or even iPhone) for casual use with a device you hold in your hand and less of a thing in a display intended for professional use Where you’re mostly going to use it sitting behind a desk.
They should have stuck with the something like the 24” iMac webcam / 14” MBP webcam or no webcam at all
I really think this was supposed to be a 27” iMac and they changed their mind later in development and decided on a halfway house quasi-monitor. It’s too complicated and too expensive for its own good. I understand there’s a market and of course it’s great if people own one and love it, but personally at this image quality tier I’d rather settle for a Dell UltraSharp and let the thousand dollars in my pocket comfort me for the loss of pixels, brightness and webcam. Each to their own but I think I’d rather go all out and buy the XDR than this franken-computer.
Last edited:
Ok point me to a monitor whic really compares to this one: full 10Gbit USB-C, 5K and no 4K since advanced user wants the correct ppi to use 2,5K user space rendered in 5K without scaling, webcam good or bad, alluminium or at least not bad plastic that dance on the desk, 600nits and not fake HDR, Studio Display has EDR support which render very good better than most cheap HDR displays. Sure you can find many cheaper and still very good display but if you want all of these there are very few solutions on the market, at least for now. This display is very criticized because is made by Apple.
It is improved! For fifteen hundred dollars though, the camera shouldn't need an update six months after release. Profits first, quality second. Companies that get it right know that those two things are reversed.
If I want to rotate the screen into vertical position, will the camera be used as a portrait mode similar to cell phones' camera?
Personally I don't really care all that much about webcam quality as long as it's not completely potato quality like Dell XPS's 480p webcams in the past. Anything after the 2020 MBP/MBA looks fine, and the video would have been compressed anyways when used for remote meetings. That being said, I'm still a little disappointed that Apple didn't go for a much better webcam that is at least in line with the new 14/16 inch MBP given how little the webcam part probably costs in comparison to the whole monitor.
The camera is not a 1st gen problem, since Apple has been putting cameras in displays for decades. It's Apple-didn't-think-people-would-care-that-much problem. It's actually better than iMac's camera, but my 27" iMac's camera is just not very good.
It also appears to be a huge regression from the 2017 iMac Pro's camera, which is considerably better than my 2017 iMac's camera.
Look into my eyes, look into my eyes, the eyes, the eyes, not around the eyes, don't look around my eyes, look into my eyes, you're under….You will see a visual difference in this webcam even though it is still absolute crap, 3..2.1… and your back in the room…..WOW thats an amazing improvement !
Not much of an improvement. Still to be corrected. Maybe a future update can improve some more.
look, the camera in the Studio Display pretty much just stinks. next...
The (retired) iMac Pro also has a 5K 27" display, and the webcam is much better than this.
Which means I'll be hanging onto my 2 year old LG UltraFine 5k a good while longer.