Can any owner of the first generation iMac 5K that got the new 2015 one compare the screens? Out of all the improvements, the screen is the only one that interests me, so I am curious. Is the difference noticeable? I know it's important for photo professionals, but can it be seen in day to day work?
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.
iMac 5K screen 2014 vs 2015
- Thread starter aevan
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I seriously doubt you will notice anything in day to day work. If you think about it, probably almost all images you see on the web are sRGB anyways so they will look the same on both monitors. It is only useful if you are outputting to a wider colour gamut and want to see how it will look while editing a movie or RAW file on the screen. But even for photographers, we usually output to sRGB for most print labs and for web uploads so having the wider gamut isn't a huge benefit either. If the screen is all you are interested in, I'd stick with the older model.
Thanks! I figured as much - the new screens must be nice but are probably not a good reason to upgrade alone. Unless it is critical for your work, of course.
So, after reading the reviews - a lot of people mention how the orange and green colors pop on the new iMac, etc. I still haven't been able to see one, so, was anyone able to compare the old and new 5K screens in a store/at home/etc? I know photographers will see the difference in their RAW photos, as arbitrage said above, but I'm curious if the difference is noticeable in everyday use. And how big is it - for example, is it similar to the difference between a 2nd/3rd gen iPad Mini screen vs iPad Air or smaller/bigger? Thanks.
Last edited by a moderator:
It is not important for photo professionals because they don´t use the P3 color space. Photo Pros using calibrated Adobe RGB display like the ones from EIZO or NEC with 99% Adobe RGB support. These are still far ahead of the glossy iMac P3 display which only gives you 79% of the Adobe RGB color space.
Are you sure this is correct? From what I understand, the P3 displays also cover around 99%, but cover a different segment of the Adobe RGB space. It loses a bit of the cyans, but gains a bit of yellows.
https://creativepro.com/how-do-p3-displays-affect-your-workflow/
Notice that the sRGB color space is smaller, in every dimension than either of the two gamuts.
some more diagrams here, and imagery too:
http://www.astramael.com
Notice that the sRGB color space is smaller, in every dimension than either of the two gamuts.
some more diagrams here, and imagery too:
http://www.astramael.com
Last edited:
Correct, but AlexJoda's comment was that the EIZO and NEC monitors cover 99% of the Adobe RGB space... not that they are sRGB monitors. They're better than sRGB because they cover far more than the sRGB space, but it appeared like he made an error in that he was confusing the sRGB space as the P3 gamut.
The 2014 and 2015 both have a very common problem where they develop image retention. Avoid both of them like the plague. Search for forum for "image retention" and "imac image retention" to see what I mean. It's a huge disaster.
I don't own a 2017 so I cant say but I haven't seen people complain as much about the 2017 having retention. I would research it more first though. It's definitely a problem you don't want.
It was more of a problem on the Late 2014 for me, went through several different LCD panels and they all worsened to the point that it was noticeable. My current Late 2015 has a slight case but hard to notice and doesn't seem to be getting any worse.
My LG Ultrafine 5K has a mild case of it too. If it were a case of burn-in, it'd be a big issue, but it's some light image retention that is hard to notice except against the right type of solid background. In my case, it only seems to happen against dark backgrounds, mainly blue and black. It just looks like window transparency that allows you to see through windows on your desktop.
It could be annoying to some people, but a disaster... not really.
Last edited: