Using a LED TV as display?

Discussion in 'Mac Accessories' started by danrco., Dec 23, 2013.

  1. danrco. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2013
    #1
  2. barkmonster macrumors 68020

    barkmonster

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2001
    Location:
    Lancashire
    #2
    I have a 1080p LED TV and it displays it's native 1920x1080 resolution just fine with my older G4 so any mac via DVI or HDMI will too. It's so much sharper than the LCD I have on my Mac it's untrue.
     
  3. paulrbeers macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    #3
    That's a 720P television. You will actually have less space to work with (since you are downgrading from 1080P to 720P in resolution) and it means everything will be super magnified.

    What are you looking for? Just larger images, or are you actually looking for more "desktop" space?
     
  4. robgendreau macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2008
    #4
    paulrbeers is right: we need to know what it's for.

    You see as in many things bigger is not necessarily better.

    If you get a 32" 16:9 aspect HDTV at 1920x1080, that's the SAME resolution as your current monitor, just bigger. As if you projected it a few inches onto a screen from a projector a few feet away.

    That could be great, if your plan is to recline back and watch movies. If you are word processing on both screens, it's sort of a wash...and maybe even worse, since you'll get an effect like being in the first row of the theater (or theatre, since I guess you're in UK).

    The other direction to go is sorta like having an iPad: no matter how close you get it doesn't go all pixellated.

    It's about the density: a 46" HDTV at 1920x1080 almost four times LESS pixel density than an iPad. One's good for close up; t'other for across the room.

    If you want really sharp, and a good compromise, IMHO look at the iMac screens at 27". Their are tons of cheap IPS 2560x1440 monitors out with the clarity of that screen; monoprice for example has a couple of good ones depending on the connector you need.

    cheers,
    Rob
     
  5. danrco. thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2013
    #5
    Thanks for the replies chaps.

    I see, I am after more desktop space as opposed to larger images. I am a graphic designer so need more space to work on.

    Unfortunately an iMac is out of price-range for the time being so trying to make do with what I have.
     
  6. barkmonster, Dec 24, 2013
    Last edited: Dec 24, 2013

    barkmonster macrumors 68020

    barkmonster

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2001
    Location:
    Lancashire
    #6
    This sort of monitor could be a compromise.

    http://www.lg.com/uk/ipsmonitor/V1_...+lg +monitor&gclid=COemsqbGyLsCFfPItAod33YA8Q

    There's also a TV/Monitor version which unlike some of their TV/Monitors, actually has a headphone out so you can hook it up to a sound system.

    http://www.lg.com/uk/monitors/lg-29MA73

    They both have a 2560x1080 resolution, lots of inputs and they're under £400 online.

    The only way of getting a 32" screen that does offer higher than HD is to get one of the Sharp 4K displays Apple are now selling to go with the Mac Pro but they're over £3,400 and you need a 2013 Mac Pro to use them.
     
  7. VI™ macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2010
    Location:
    Shepherdsturd, WV
    #7
    Isn't the newest rMBP 4K capable?

    Also, the "older" 30" monitors ran at 2560x1600.
     
  8. Gav2k, Dec 24, 2013
    Last edited: Dec 24, 2013

    Gav2k macrumors G3

    Gav2k

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    #8
    Yes the rmbp is and it's on the compatibility list.
     
  9. barkmonster, Dec 24, 2013
    Last edited: Dec 24, 2013

    barkmonster macrumors 68020

    barkmonster

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2001
    Location:
    Lancashire
    #9
    You pay a LOT more for those extra rows of pixels and a 4K display is incredibly expensive.

    The Sharp 4K display is £2,499 and the 30" Apple display was a bargain in 2005 at £2,495 :)
     
  10. VI™ macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2010
    Location:
    Shepherdsturd, WV
    #10
    But a 30" monitor can probably be found for under $1,000 now. The difference between my 30" HP and a 30" LCD 1080p TV is night and day.
     
  11. paulrbeers macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    #11
    Another option would be one of the 27" 2560x1440 panels (such as used by the Thunderbolt display). You can get 27" 1440P monitors fairly reasonably. Just make sure you get one with Displayport to easily use it with a Mac.
     
  12. robgendreau macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2008
    #12
    Again, look at all those Korean 2560x1440 monitors. They are as good in many cases as the iMac's, and you can get them for <$500 easily. They'll give you more room and the color fidelity and image are quite nice. There are bazillions of review out there about them; popular with gamers. Just make sure to get the right connection and that your Mac can run it. The 21:9 monitor someone mentioned by LG has this same resolution.
     
  13. barkmonster macrumors 68020

    barkmonster

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2001
    Location:
    Lancashire
    #13
    True, but that's the price of progress and for those extra 3" over an Apple Thunderbolt display you're losing DPI while gaining no extra screen real estate and losing the Thunderbolt hub too. I expect Apple will eventually release a Thunderbolt display that's full 4K resolution and the Sharp 4K screen is simply Apple's only option of offering a 4K screen with the new Mac Pro. If the GPUs in the recent Retina Macbook Pros can drive a 4K too, once they update the Mac Mini with Haswell, I imagine their entire range of 2013 and later systems will be ready for 4K. HDMI on the current Mac Mini is limited to HD but if a future iMac and Mac Mini get HDMI 1.4 like the Mac Pro, their whole range will be ready for 4K.
     

Share This Page