More evidence of inferior displays on new iMacs


anim8or

macrumors 65816
Aug 16, 2006
1,362
9
Scotland, UK
It seems as the displays get thinner the quality drops......

There is a noticable difference even when going from the ever so slightly thinner MBP form the previous PowerBook.....

I don't know if that the way it goes in the display industry or if it is just too expensive to have both a thin and really high quality display....

This i jsut my opinion based on my experience with notebooks but i think it wouls also apply to iMacs.
 

maestrokev

macrumors 6502a
Apr 23, 2007
874
8
Canada
I think companies, including Apple, are cutting corners wherever they can. They dropped the price on the 24", something had to give. They just don't build them like they used to ...

The key point from Uwe's report is that the majority of people won't see the difference (Apple's betting on it), these are technical differences you need a Colorimeter to point out.

It is unfortunate though for those of us who do graphics/photography and want to use a MBP or iMac without having to go to a separate ACD display. All this stuff in the news about Apple using dithering ...
 

aliquis-

macrumors 6502a
May 20, 2007
680
0
An interesting thread over at DPReview asserting that the new 20" and 24" displays are markedly inferior those in their white predecessors. What a shame.
Uhm, was the last gen 20" ips? I don't think he says that it's much more inferior, he says it's hard to calibrate in a light room because the glass makes it hard, which isn't that weird.
Calibrating in a dark room seemed to have solved it and I guess another solution would be to lift the glass of while calibrating it.

Then he goes on by saying that the 24" is better but not as good as a 23" ACD. What panel is in the 23" ACD? Maybe the ACD is IPS and the 24" is PVA. Still better than TN but not the best.
 

mkrishnan

Moderator emeritus
Jan 9, 2004
29,641
12
Grand Rapids, MI, USA
I don't think he says that it's much more inferior

...

Then he goes on by saying that the 24" is better but not as good as a 23" ACD.
Erm...

uwe_r@DPReview said:
20" model
For professional (pre-press, wider gamut colour space photo editing, fine art printing, video editing for reverse telecine, etc.) graphics use the 20" is clearly out without using an external display

24" model
Better, but not great and clearly worse than the previous 24" model
I'm pretty sure the person on DPReview is less than pleased with the displays....
 

urbanskywalker

macrumors 6502
Apr 30, 2007
255
0
One thing about photographers-I spend a lot oft time on dpreview-they are generally a very picky bunch. If you think the nit picking is bad over here then spend some time in the Canon forum at dpreview.
 

CBAviator

macrumors 6502
Jun 10, 2007
299
0
Nederland
Is the general consensus, however, that the 24" iMac is better for photo editing than the 20" or will the typical hobbiest not even notice it?

The one thing that annoys me is the current color shift on my laptop when looking from different angles.
 

aliquis-

macrumors 6502a
May 20, 2007
680
0
Is the general consensus, however, that the 24" iMac is better for photo editing than the 20" or will the typical hobbiest not even notice it?

The one thing that annoys me is the current color shift on my laptop when looking from different angles.
Since the 20" are TN you will still have it.

Also still yes he don't like the 20" for professionals, but where do he say that it's worth than the old one? He says the 24" are thought.
 

Schtumple

macrumors 601
Jun 13, 2007
4,904
131
benkadams.com
Is apples QC seriously slipping that bad??

I'm actually disappointed, I wish I'd bought my mac a few years ago when apple really did look good and had decent products.
 

rogersmj

macrumors 68020
Sep 10, 2006
2,158
0
Indianapolis, IN
I have the new 20" and when I brought it home on Friday I set it up side-by-side with my previous-gen 20". The display on the new one is noticeably brighter and richer, and, as far as I can tell, does not oversaturate the colors. It seems perfectly balanced, and is one of the brightest and most vivid displays I've ever used. I still have my 20" Dell 2007wfp, which has the same IPS panel as the old iMac, in case I need to check my design colors on it too, but I honestly love the new iMac's display. I'm not an uber-photographer, but I am a web interface designer and I have no problems using it, and I'm usually quite picky about my displays. The one thing you do have to be careful about is the viewing angle, particularly the vertical...if you're not looking at it straight-on, the colors may vary slightly. But I do look at mine straight-on, so that's not a problem.
 

atari1356

macrumors 68000
Feb 27, 2004
1,586
32
Is the general consensus, however, that the 24" iMac is better for photo editing than the 20" or will the typical hobbiest not even notice it?

The one thing that annoys me is the current color shift on my laptop when looking from different angles.
The 24" screen is definitely better than the 20" screen in terms of color shift when viewed from different angles.

I had a look at the new models at the Apple store today... the 20" screen isn't bad (aside from the glossiness) when you look at it straight on. So, it should be fine for most people.

I'm still annoyed there's no option for a matte screen, but may end up buying the 24" anyways because it's the closest match to my needs. (probably not worth the extra $1000 or so for a Mac Pro + decent external monitor)
 

Turkish

macrumors 6502
Jan 12, 2007
358
0
This has everything to do with the fact that the iMac's glass screen is not close to the actual LED screen - there's a gap.

The calibrator cannot get an accurate read due to this distance.
 

Alloye

macrumors 6502a
Apr 11, 2007
657
0
Rocklin, CA
This has everything to do with the fact that the iMac's glass screen is not close to the actual LED screen - there's a gap.

The calibrator cannot get an accurate read due to this distance.
Not true. The new iMac can be calibrated just fine. I did mine yesterday and posted the resulting profile here. The screen looks great!
 

craig1410

macrumors 65816
Mar 22, 2007
1,121
838
Scotland
Hi,
Very interesting to see the test results but as has been said, the instruments won't work properly through the glass which seems to be 5 or 6mm away from the LCD surface. I used to work in an LCD repair facility so I am familiar with the use of these instruments.

As a recent owner of the new iMac 24" I can only say that in practice (forget theory for a monent) the screen is gorgeous! I haven't compared it side by side with the older 24" screen but it certainly gave me an even bigger wow factor when I first saw it. Subjective I know but very real to me all the same. In my computer room here at home I have a south facing window over my right shoulder and the reflections, although they are there if you look for them, don't cause any problems for me.

As has been mentioned before - if you are an exacting photographer who must have the very best colour accuracy etc, wouldn't you be using an expensive CRT monitor anyway? LCD's are getting better all the time but still can't match the gamut of a CRT.

I don't want to get into an argument about this but when I'm sitting in front of this wonderful screen reading about people criticising it I just can't help but respond.

Cheers,
Craig.