Looking for a great 27-inch display

Discussion in 'Mac Accessories' started by *LTD*, Jun 13, 2010.

  1. *LTD* macrumors G4

    *LTD*

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #1
    So I'm quite happy with my Sammy 24-inch TOC display, driven by my 15-inch MBP. It's simply a lovely display, especially the design.

    I'm looking to trade up, however. I barely use my HDTV anymore, just for movies and little else, really. So if I'm going to make even greater use of my Mac for my entertainment needs I might as well max out the display size and therefore the screen real estate.

    27-inch monitors. Not a lot of them. Even fewer that are larger size, and it seems the larger you go, the worse the specs and design. You get a lot of Hannspree and I-Inc stuff. No thanks! If you do happen to chance upon a quality display at extreme sizes, however, it'll cost you a small fortune. I'm looking to keep this at a sub-$1000 level, though I'm thinking that if I really want quality I'd better prepare to pay for it.

    As of now, it's a toss-up between the LG 27-inch (the largest one they've got), or the 27-inch model from the Dell UltraSharp series. I'll throw Apple into the mix because of the rumours of a 27-inch LED Cinema Display, so I might have to wait.

    There's no a lot of choice at this level. If Samsung made anything larger then 24-inches I'd jump at it, but they don't. Even some of the 27-inch displays out there boast only 1920x1080 res. I already have 1920x1200 with my Samsung, so I'd appreciate greater resolution - something in the 2000+ range.

    I wouldn't mind an LED display at this point, but I have no idea who makes one in that size.

    Any advice?
     
  2. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #2
    Do you want 1920x1080 or 2560x1440? AFAIK, only Dell has one with greater resolution (uses the same panel as 27" iMac) and it costs ~1100$. Ones with 1080p can be had for ~500$ but they are pretty much the same as 21.5" with 1080p
     
  3. *LTD* thread starter macrumors G4

    *LTD*

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #3
    Seems you're right. I'm looking for more than 1920x1200.

    I hate to say it, because I'm not a Dell guy, and because it's not that sexy of a design, but it looks like an UltraSharp will probably be the winner this time around. It's getting rave reviews. If Apple doesn't release a 27-inch Cinema Display any time soon (at the right res), I'll very likely spring for the Dell. Yeah, it's pricey, but if I have to be looking at the damn thing on a regular basis, I'm willing to pay up.

    Damn you Samsung for stopping at 24-inches. :(

    Here's the link:

    http://accessories.dell.com/sna/pro...l.aspx?c=ca&l=en&s=dhs&cs=cadhs1&sku=224-8284
     
  4. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #4
    If you have a Mac with Mini DisplayPort, pay 200$ more and get 27" iMac from refurb store ;)

    http://store.apple.com/us/product/FB952LL/A?cid=AOS-US-AFF-FEED
     
  5. *LTD* thread starter macrumors G4

    *LTD*

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #5
  6. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #6
    Ahh, then it's not that good although you could use ScreenRecycler but it's bit laggy. Bear in mind that 27" ACD will likely have DisplayPort so it may not bee so good for your MBP thus the Dell one seems to be the best
     
  7. *LTD* thread starter macrumors G4

    *LTD*

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #7
    I'm still trying to figure out the difference . . .

    The LG 27" has 1920x1080 res
    My 24" has 1920x1200 res

    So which is actually more screen space? Which is better? Maybe my math is off but I'm a little confused here.

    Slightly lower res on a physically bigger screen, or . . . slightly higher res on a physically smaller screen.
     
  8. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #8
    The 24" has more. The computer only sees the pixels, not the size of the display. Even 15" MBP can display more than 55" 720p TV. More pixels = more space to work on. Of course if you're getting the 27" for TV use mainly, then 1080p is fine but if you're going to use it as a display, then the pixels matter. 21.5" and 27" with same resolution can display the same amount of stuff. It's all about the pixels ;)
     
  9. *LTD* thread starter macrumors G4

    *LTD*

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #9
    Ah, yes! So with the 27-inch LG, I'd actually be trading down a notch.

    So a physically bigger display is only part of the requirement. The resolution needs to be accordingly higher as well.

    This is all pretty basic stuff, but my mind was going blank on it for some reason.

    I'm thinking of 1024x768 on a 15-inch vs. a 24-inch, for example. Both will display the same amount of stuff, but on the 24-inch it'll just look disproportionately bigger.
     
  10. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #10
    Yeah, physically bigger display only means that each pixel is bigger thus the picture isn't as sharp as it is in smaller screen. Currently, there is only one 27" with better than 1080p reso, that's the Dell. You would have to go for 30" to get one with similar resolution (2560x1600).
     

Share This Page