PCMag Tests Apple's Pro Display XDR Color Accuracy and Brightness, Says It 'Does Exactly What It Sets Out To'

[NBAasDOGG]

You can get the LG32Ul950 for $1200 with 98% DCI P3 and better grey uniformity than Apple’s.
HDR does 720Nits peak with 18 local dimming zones. Excellent monitor if you’re not into HDR.

 

[high heaven]

I expected a better review and yet that's a poor quality of the review. How come they didn't compare it with Eizo or other professional monitors instead of gaming monitors?

What about uniformity?

 

[BootsWalking]

Which of course is saving people $24K from spending the $30K.

If you think those in the TV and film industry would qualify a segmented-backlight monitor as a production-class reference monitor then you're clearly misinformed about what a reference monitor is. They reserve those for the low-wage grunts who do peripheral production work. Top-tier editors pay $30k+ for OLED reference monitors for a reason.

 

[yurc]

AS @ksec mentioned it, everyone who looking at XDR capability in depth review described here

I wonder Apple touted this as reference monitor, is impossible to get proper reference display at five grands (not counting stand), but compared to non reference monitor it still tough to sell. (for me at least)

PCMag comparison crap. They should compare with professional grade display like Asus ProArt, BenQ PhotoVue, etc

 

[I7guy]

If you think those in the TV and film industry would qualify a segmented-backlight monitor as a production-class reference monitor then you're clearly misinformed about what a reference monitor is. They reserve those for the low-wage grunts who do peripheral production work. Top-tier editors pay $30k+ for OLED reference monitors for a reason.

So you’re saying apple misread its target market and produced a monitor nobody wants?

 

[citysnaps]

AS @ksec mentioned it, everyone who looking at XDR capability in depth review described here

I didn't see an XDR Display in-depth review there. Wrong link?

 

[GadgetBen]

So according to this, we should all buy a Dell - which is how much?

 

[ksec]

Don‘t have any skin in this game, but the display on the right is smaller, has a lower sustained peak brightness (1,000 nits), and costs $35,000. So I guess it depends on one’s needs.

I appreciate the comparison, and it is certainly useful alongside the narrow focus of PCMag's, but it warrants a reminder that the monitor on the right is SEVEN TIMES THE PRICE of the monitor on the left. Surely there are cases when a Mercedes, rather than a Ferrari, will suffice?

That is not an accurate analogy. To put it in a Car Perspective. BMW Announce their new Car and compares it to F1 in their marketing that it is even F1 spec at only 1/5 of the price. People then realise it is not F1 compliant as all.

It is either a F1 Car or it isn't. It is either a Reference Monitor or it isn't. The price comes in LATER part of the equation. If all the pre/assumption before hand is not true, then nothing else matters.

It would be better to compare it against other "Pro" Monitor. Which there is actually a market segment for it. And PC Mag did't even bother testing those out.

Something that John Siracusa pointed out in talking about his Pro XDR (on Accidental Tech Podcast) was that in the crazily expensive reference monitors (like the $50k ones), they'll have an additional LCD layer between the backlight array and the "color" LCD, that's entirely in charge of just letting light from the LED backlights through or not, so you can compartmentalize the light from the hundreds of "locally dimmable" LED backlights down into substantially smaller areas. The images you show suggest something like that at work.

I'm unlikely to ever spend $6k on a monitor. But I'm never ever going to spend $50k on a monitor. But it's still interesting to see what they can do.
[automerge]1580865211[/automerge]
They do make (really great) displays "for the rest of us", they're just inconveniently (depending on your needs) attached to all-in-one computers, and called iMacs. Yeah, I'm not particularly thrilled with the situation either.

Dual Layer for LCD are basically standard for Reference Monitor. It allows OLED like dimming where every pixel can be turned on and off. And for those who keeps yelling about OLED every time screen technology is discussed, even Sony backed off from using OLED as Reference. Apple has a patents for Dual Layer LCD, and that was what causes the excitement. Even though most wouldn't "really" expect it to be Reference Monitor Grade at that price point, it would have been great if it was very close. But it is not.

ASUS has its ProArt Series that is Similar if not slightly better in some areas than Pro XDR. And the previous generation cost $3999. There are also many other "Pro" Monitor priced higher and worst than Apple's Pro XDR. Had they actually marketed it as a Pro Monitor from the start and not compare it to Reference Monitor, then it would have been OK.

 

[dumastudetto]

Very impressive. My take on this is Apple has gone for exceptional across all categories, and nailed every single one. Other monitors are good in some of the review categories, but very average in others.

The Pro Display XDR is clearly in a league of its own, and actually costs as much as $24,000 less than comparable products. If you're in the market for a reference monitor, you need to consider the Pro Display XDR.

Apple really did smash the ball out of the park continuously last year. I can't think of any product they launched that was a strike out. I know some have a few complaints about software quality last year, but the hardware teams are doing an incredible job.

 

[Substance90]

This is the perfect monitor for YouTubers with too much money. For actual video and photo professionals who need accurate colors? Not so much.

 

[iPadified]

I surprised that anyone can see a difference if the screen lacks 1.3% out of 16 million colours. I would not.

Low volume, well built products are always costly. Can Apple scale to a higher volume product? Not likely, unless they create an iMac version of the screen.

There are too many under engineered cheap monitor stand solutions out there. I would love to have the stand solution on iMacs.

 

[BvizioN]

Exactly. I was at least expecting it to be used as Apple TV+ or Netflix Mastering quality.

Here is another one. ( Images not mine )

View attachment 892476

The accuracy of these images posted here are very questionable. Anyone who does photography understands the stuff you can do to images after you have taken them, to serve e certain purpose. I have seen the XDR monitor in person and there is no freaking out it looks that blue when displaying a black background. It seems some people have far too much time on their hands.

 

[aleksander]

Still waiting for a respectable display professional to review the XDR and compare it to similar monitors (like ASUS ProArt or new BenQ graphic line). The PCMag article is useless.

 

[JesperA]

Not too sure how PC Mag explain that as "Does Exactly What It Sets Out To"

Not Really the "Reference" Monitor most people or video professionals refers to. Honestly I dont think anyone even expect it to be, but many expect it to be close, and it is not. But still a damn good Monitor.

Edit: ( Images not mine )

View attachment 892472

Exactly. I was at least expecting it to be used as Apple TV+ or Netflix Mastering quality.

Here is another one. ( Images not mine )

View attachment 892476

Those pictures where taken before the 10.15.3 in which Apple greatly reduced that very issue and will continue improve it in the future:

Compare the scenes from "Gravity" in this video that shows the scene before and after the update

1:37 vs 2:32

The difference is pretty big

 

[shaunp]

Weird review. They need to compare it to other monitors intended for high-end video work, not mid-range photo/gaming monitors. And if you are going to compare it to a photo monitor then at least compare it to the high-end models from Eizo, NEC, etc. No point comparing this to a gaming monitor unless that cheap gaming monitor beats it in every single test.

 

[nylonsteel]

it does what it does good enough
but at a very steep price

 

[theluggage]

Hopefully there will be lesser (separate) displays. I’d like to see a 27”, it wouldn’t be difficult.

... and hopefully, there will be lesser modular desktops to plug those into. I'd like to see an i7/i9/Ryzen headless system with a PCIe GPU slot. It wouldn't be difficult... Somehow, I'm not holding my breath. If Apple don't see a market for midrange modulars then maybe they don't see a need for the displays...

LG wouldn’t be happy;

There's a good chance they'd still be making the innards (haven't seen any teardowns of the XDR yet - who actually makes the panel, or has Apple actually bought a LCD factory?)

(The LG Ultrafine displays still look to me like planned 'Apple Thunderbolt/LED Cinema Display IIs' that Apple decided wasn't worth producing an expensive unibody aluminium-and-glass case for. The "forehead" could have been disguised by a better case design. The limited I/O (USB-C and no other video inputs) is unlike any other LG 'prosumer' display, but just like every other Apple display ever. There was even an EM shielding problem with early models almost as if they'd originally planned to have it in a metal case... Hmm.
[automerge]1580905593[/automerge]

32-inch (diagonal) IPS LCD display with oxide TFT technology

Yes, its an LCD computer display rather than an LCD watch or an LCD TV or an LCD sound system (oh, wait, no, that's a band).

How about "LCD monitor" - but then, in this context, 'monitor' is a synonym for 'display'.

Now, if an Apple store put several of them in a glass case, would that be a
"Liquid Crystal Display display display"...?

 

[theluggage]

So you’re saying apple misread its target market and produced a monitor nobody wants?

I think Apple's target market is people who've just dropped $20k on a Mac Pro (maybe including $400 wheels and the $80 PCIe power cable kit) and are thinking 'in for a penny, in for a pound'.

...and the target markets for the Mac Pro are (a) professionals who are so committed to MacOS that it's more cost-effective to pay whatever Apple asks than change their workload and (b) youtubers (who seem to have got all the review models).

I'm not going to armchair quarterback the needs of the first but they are the same people who've stuck with Apple through a decade with no credible Mac Pro so they're not just a bit committed.

Problem is, that may be good for a few quarters while everybody upgrades, but long-term its a pool which is only going to shrink unless they can convert existing PC users. Seriously - look at the benchmark comparisons on Apple's own website: yup, the $30k+ Mac Pro configuration sure thrashes the discredited 2013 Trashcan and the significantly cheaper all-in-one iMac Pro...

Edit: more seriously, the killer use case for the 6k display seems to be the real estate for 1:1 4k video editing with space left over for palettes, tools, graphs etc. However it was Apple (as cited in the PC Mag review) who led with the comparison to $40k reference displays - something that the review simply didn't test - so fair game.

 

[manu chao]

You can get the LG32Ul950 for $1200 with 98% DCI P3 and better grey uniformity than Apple’s.
HDR does 720Nits peak with 18 local dimming zones. Excellent monitor if you’re not into HDR.

Though there is also the minor difference between 4K and 6K.

 

[mazz0]

I appreciate the comparison, and it is certainly useful alongside the narrow focus of PCMag's, but it warrants a reminder that the monitor on the right is SEVEN TIMES THE PRICE of the monitor on the left. Surely there are cases when a Mercedes, rather than a Ferrari, will suffice?

But how much cheaper are the monitors the XDR is better than? I'm not sure who the XDR is best for.

 

[mazz0]

How about Liquid Crystal Device? LCD display. Sort of like PDF which was originally Portable Document File and then became Portable Document Format. It is funny though it took me a moment to spot the issue, despite the highlight, as I do not even think of it as an acronym any more. Nice catch.

That's not an acronym.

 

[theluggage]

Though there is also the minor difference between 4K and 6K.

I'd have though the optimum system would be to have one display for editing and a separate display for "serious" preview with (a) no distractions and (b) the exact refresh rate and resolution of the target format.

Of course, if they're selling to Hollywood or San Fran then the real real estate occupied by a second display is probably worth more than $7000...

 

[fathergll]

I find the 576 full array local dimming zones too low for any mastering work for films and television. Ive seen some examples with black scenes with bright objects and the ghosting is too much for any colorist to work with. I don't see it to get a Netflix certification for mastering.

On the brightside Uncle Tim himself just gave it AppleTV certification for mastering.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

They reserve those for the low-wage grunts who do peripheral production work.

Which is still not bad. I’d rather buy a new $6000 monitor for my contractors to use, and save the new (and even used) $30,000 ones for my full time folks. Especially if it means that in most cases my full time folks don’t have to redo as much of the work the contractors do.

I have seen the XDR monitor in person and there is no freaking out it looks that blue when displaying a black background.

I was thinking much the same thing when the example images shown were of the same type. Scenes that don’t show up often in most movies... except maybe Tron?

 

[fathergll]

I don’t have any thoughts on this monitor, as I’m not in the target market. I will say, though, that people wouldn’t be so bent out of shape about the price if Apple also offered various display options for professionals who happen not to be video or photo professionals. Why not an Apple-branded competitor to Dell’s 34” display offerings, for example?

Apple has been barely invested in the desktop business. There isn't a demand to compete with Dell's 34" display when you're barely in the desktop market yourself.

If Apple can’t bring itself to make displays for “the rest of us,” how about at least coming up with an Apple-recommended list of third-party displays that work well with Macs.

They'll simply tell you to purchase the 4k or 5k LG display on Apple.com