Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Why does the M1-M4 iMac Display feel a bit disappointing?

T

tornado99

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jul 28, 2013
484
465
I've owned a M1 iMac for a year now, and still can't work out why the display itself feels disappointing.

I measured it with a Colorimeter: 510 nits, 1150:1 contrast ratio, 100% P3 Color. These are great specs, although I suppose the contrast ratio is not amazing given most IPS laptop displays hit 1500:1 or 1700:1 these days.

Yet my eyes don't enjoy the iMac as much as my older 21.5" Retina iMac. Even my 4K Ultrafine with its 'not quite retina' 185 ppi feels better to me.

Anyone else think the same? Is there some corner Apple has cut with quality on these screens perhaps...I do notice that the front glass does make the LCD panel feel a bit 'inset'. Perhaps they had to thicken up the glass now that the display borders are so narrow.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brainsalad11 and turbineseaplane
I’ve never felt that way with my M1 iMac. Of course, I think everyone sees the screen a little bit differently because of their eyesight. It looked like the best display I’ve ever seen short of maybe the fancy $6000 display Apple sells.

Perhaps it’s a color or resolution setting that you changed? Go and turn everything to default and see if you notice a difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arefbe and ignatius345
Nope. It just feels less vibrant, less contrasty than other high resolution displays I own.

I note that in the press release for intel iMacs in 2012 Apple said

"It’s called plasma deposition, and it involves coating the glass with layers of silicon dioxide and niobium pentoxide so precise and so thin they’re measured in atoms. The result: an astounding 75 percent reduction in reflectivity"

and they also used a "super thin LCD panel", and "friction stir welding"

All these exotic manufacturing processes cost money, and maybe they didn't translate over to the apple silicon iMacs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: turbineseaplane
I'm OK with the screen, but I came from a base mid '11 (added SSD) and was expecting a sizmic bump in speed and performance (M3) but it's just incremental which is OK as it's just a entertainment device for me.
 
tornado99 said:
Yet my eyes don't enjoy the iMac as much as my older 21.5" Retina iMac.
Click to expand...

Seems like you prefer the super shiny screen of older iMacs. More liable to reflections, but (to some eyes) there is more "pop" in the look.

I can see what you mean when I compare my 2019 27" iMac with my wife's M4 24" iMac. To me both look good, but different.

I don't think this is a question of relative quality, rather design choices. An iMac is frequently located in a family room or corner of a lounge room. Both locations are very liable to reflections from lights in the room and, in this case, the change is good overall.

You would probably be better off with a Mac mini and your own choice of screen.
 
gilby101 said:
Seems like you prefer the super shiny screen of older iMacs. More liable to reflections, but (to some eyes) there is more "pop" in the look.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure this is accurate.

iMacs have had advanced AR coating using plasma deposition since 2012, it's the generation before that which were shiny and reflective.

I've seen no mention that the M1 series improved the AR properties.
 
  • Like
Reactions: alvindarkness
I've used many Apple displays, old and new. I love the iMac display. The only displays I like better are my M3 Pro 14" MacBook Pro and perhaps the 27" Studio display and 27" 5k iMac 2017.
 
tornado99 said:
I'm not sure this is accurate.

iMacs have had advanced AR coating using plasma deposition since 2012, it's the generation before that which were shiny and reflective.

I've seen no mention that the M1 series improved the AR properties.
Click to expand...
"In addition, the 4.5K Retina display on the new iMac has an industry-leading anti-reflective coating for greater comfort and readability." in https://www.apple.com/au/newsroom/2...ibrant-colors-m1-chip-and-45k-retina-display/

I think the less reflective coating was a US$300 extra on 27" iMacs. I don't know if the 24" iMac uses that technology. It is certainly different to the standard 27" iMac and, I assume, 21.5" iMac.

I can certainly understand that you might not like the change.
 
Last edited:
What does "industry-leading" mean though? That's just marketing speak. They haven't said the new iMac has "30% less reflections than before", or anything like that.

The $300 was for the nano-etched "matte" surface, which is not what we're talking about here.
 
I completely agree! I think it has to do with poor contrast at off dead centre viewing angles. Try looking at a dark image in low ambient lighting then move your head around. The display is so large that it can be hard to even position you eyes in a spot where there isn't some part of the display that does not appear to be washed out.

I know this is, to some degree, a characteristic of all LCD panels. However, it seems much more prominent here compared to any other LCD display in recent memory, to the point that the poor contrast distracts me when working in dark mode or watching a full-screen video.

I dropped off the M4 for my parents, though, who I don't think will notice, particularly since they're upgrading from a ~2007 Dell E178FPV.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tornado99 and alvindarkness
Because its not much better than previous iMacs while our phones and other such devices have significantly higher contrast OLED screens that can make any 1200:1 contrast LCD look bland.

MacBook Air screens look really weak to me compared to the screen on the Pro because of that. I feel like standard backlit LCD just doesn't really impress anymore. It looks pretty good with brighter vibrant content for sure, but anything dark or high contrast looks bland.
 
  • Like
Reactions: throAU
True, but what puzzles me is that the previous 21.5" iMac LCD looks noticeably better despite having similar specs.

brainsalad11 said:
I think it has to do with poor contrast at off dead centre viewing angles
Click to expand...

Perhaps this is it. The 27" and 21.5" Intel iMacs for sure have amazing viewing angles.
 
In the summer of 2019 I was using a late 2009 iMac 27 that I'd been using since early in 2010. I replaced it with a 2019 iMac 5K and immediately thought the colors were washed out, plus it didn't seem to have as much contrast. I thought about sending it back to Apple, but after fooling around with it and adding color filters in Accessibility I finally decided to keep the machine.

Last month I replaced that 2019 iMac 5K with an iMac M4, and I think the new screen is about like the old one: not great.

I think bryo is correct in that we are all used to looking at our iPhones where the screens are much better.

I do know on the new iMac the viewing angle is not as wide as the old one. And it's the same way with the OLED Samsung TV I bought a couple of years ago. Dead straight on with 4K programing and it looks great. Stand up and look down at it and the image just falls apart.

I have a 21.5 iMac that I bought in 2013 and replaced it in 2023 when I bought my wife an iMac M3. One of these days I'm going to pull it out, put an OS on it and see how it compares to what I'm using now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tornado99
tornado99 said:
I've owned a M1 iMac for a year now, and still can't work out why the display itself feels disappointing.

I measured it with a Colorimeter: 510 nits, 1150:1 contrast ratio, 100% P3 Color. These are great specs, although I suppose the contrast ratio is not amazing given most IPS laptop displays hit 1500:1 or 1700:1 these days.

Yet my eyes don't enjoy the iMac as much as my older 21.5" Retina iMac. Even my 4K Ultrafine with its 'not quite retina' 185 ppi feels better to me.

Anyone else think the same? Is there some corner Apple has cut with quality on these screens perhaps...I do notice that the front glass does make the LCD panel feel a bit 'inset'. Perhaps they had to thicken up the glass now that the display borders are so narrow.
Click to expand...
As soon as any new display comes out I check the specs. And if I don’t see “OLED” or “mini LED”, I think ah so it’s the same screen as my old iPhone 7. Pass. Hard pass.
 
tornado99 said:
I've owned a M1 iMac for a year now, and still can't work out why the display itself feels disappointing.

I measured it with a Colorimeter: 510 nits, 1150:1 contrast ratio, 100% P3 Color. These are great specs, although I suppose the contrast ratio is not amazing given most IPS laptop displays hit 1500:1 or 1700:1 these days.

Yet my eyes don't enjoy the iMac as much as my older 21.5" Retina iMac. Even my 4K Ultrafine with its 'not quite retina' 185 ppi feels better to me.

Anyone else think the same? Is there some corner Apple has cut with quality on these screens perhaps...I do notice that the front glass does make the LCD panel feel a bit 'inset'. Perhaps they had to thicken up the glass now that the display borders are so narrow.
Click to expand...
Can't say I agree. I had a 2014 iMac 5K, then an iMac M1 and now an iMac M4 and qualitatively they have all felt about the same to me. I have found them all bright and razor sharp. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

AlanBeyond said:
Indeed, doesn't support HDR because the brightness is too low, and the bezels are so thick!
Click to expand...
Oh no, not bezels! Honestly I never notice them. I'm just looking at the content on the display. I sort of get the obsessing over this on a laptop where space is at a premium -- but on a desktop? Couldn't care less.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3Rock
I think it's related to brightness, I recently bought an M3 iMac and still keep my 21" 4k retina (2017) iMac. I immediately noticed difference in light output from the new display, for a week I had them side by side, comparing anything. With the same ambient light the new one (M3) had lot less punch and when comparing screen settings you see the old one has more brightness remaining from the slider on screen settings. My room has lot of ambient light, the old one is always about half setting but the M3 is always near max, so I am concerned about hardware failure in the future. About colors, the old one is more blueish and the M3 is more accurate, due to having additional "true tone" setting which adjusts color temperature with the built-in light sensor (top left corner). Both displays are really great, but I still prefer the old one, marginally more contrast due to the reflective glass and much more backlight output.
 
It's fine. I had an M1 iMac, a Studio Display and a top end Dell 27" 4k next to each other. The iMac and the Studio Display are entirely comparable apart from max brightness (not usually an issue). The Dell was awful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ignatius345 and mvdrl
Perhaps you ended up with a flawed version? Or perhaps, as some others have posited, you’re just so used to looking at the great screens on the iPhone or iPad Pro that the decade old tech in the iMac display no longer matches up well.

My experience with it (my in-laws have an M1 iMac and I run “support”) has been positive. I do not notice a difference to the level you’re mentioning between it and my own Mac displays: I had the 27” 5K iMac and now have the Studio Display.
 
leifp said:
Perhaps you ended up with a flawed version? Or perhaps, as some others have posited, you’re just so used to looking at the great screens on the iPhone or iPad Pro that the decade old tech in the iMac display no longer matches up well.

My experience with it (my in-laws have an M1 iMac and I run “support”) has been positive. I do not notice a difference to the level you’re mentioning between it and my own Mac displays: I had the 27” 5K iMac and now have the Studio Display.
Click to expand...
How does your Studio Display compare to your iMac 5K?

I had a 2019 iMac 5K I just replaced with loaded iMac M4. I thought long and hard about going with a Mini and the Studio Display. But doing a Mini to match the specs of the iMac M4 and then adding the Studio Display resulted in a price difference of about $1,100, a bridge too far at this point in my life. Other than size, of course, but when I ran the iMac 5K next to the iMac M4, I could not tell much of a difference--or that's what I tell myself, anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: leifp
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back