YouTuber Compares Apple Pro Display XDR to $43K Sony Reference Monitor, Says It's a 'No Go' for Professional Colorists

[theluggage]

If Apple released a supercar for $380,000 that only goes 300 mph it would be the best supercar in the world even though the Bugatti Chiron goes 304 mph. Price is a component of what makes something the best.

Not at that end of the market. If you're paying the price of a nice house for a supercar, you don't want the best value for money, you want the fastest and that 4 mph could be critical.

In any case, there's no rational reason for buying either unless you've got a business plan to hire it out for track days or events/movies/promos, in which case its down to which one makes you the most money. As for non-rational reasons - for heaven's sake dude, you don't want to be driving the second fastest car in the country club parking lot, do you?

hey didn’t claim to have the most accurate color, or the fastest response time, or the most uniform display - they claimed overall it was the best.

When Apple launched the XDR they could have compared it to the $1200 LG ultrafine, the ~$4000 RRP Dell 8k display or various other "pro" (not "reference") displays. They didn't - they compared it to a $40k Sony reference display. That's completely binary: it can either replace a reference display (with individually dimmable pixels) or it can't.

 

[zhenya]

When Apple launched the XDR they could have compared it to the $1200 LG ultrafine, the ~$4000 RRP Dell 8k display or various other "pro" (not "reference") displays. They didn't - they compared it to a $40k Sony reference display. That's completely binary: it can either replace a reference display (with individually dimmable pixels) or it can't.

It's not at all binary. The number of people who work with a $40k display as their main display all day every day is infinitesimally small. However there are a significant number of professionals who want something between what Dell, Samsung, LG, etc. offer out of the box (4k, reasonable calibration, etc. but not great color, etc.) and those $40k displays. That's the market this is monitor is going after. 6k resolution, very high end (but not reference) color calibration, etc, in a design you would use 40+ hours per week.

Again, there is nearly zero other competition in the space this competes in.

 

[waterfta]

LOL

What is missing the point? The Dual Layer LCD panel technology first used in Reference Monitor do get filtered down to other products. Not to mention only a few of the F1 R&D get filter down to consumer. They are tuned to look *exactly* the same in every reference monitor. And keep the difference to absolute minimum.

Your question is not technical, but you cant understand the "value". There is no point in a Ferrari if there is a Lexus, which is already better than your consumer Toyota. After all your car will be limited on 80 MPH high way anyway.

The top 1%, if not 0.1% will always be exponentially higher in cost in almost all catagories. Go and look up Studio Speakers, why paid 10 times higher when most consumer cant hear the difference. Because it matters.

Edit: Here is the Pantone Reference Library. Nearly $2000. https://store.pantone.com/uk/en/reference-library.html

my point here is that there is a difference between luxury goods used by consumers and luxury goods used by professionals. If you're at the top 1%, yes, a Ferrari is nice to have, similar to a luxury watch or other goods that are not purchased by the 99% of us. However, I doubt many rich people are investing in Sony Reference monitors to watch TV on. They are more likely to buy something like that LG OLED that rolls into the stand. So, yes, I was struggling to understand the value of something from a business perspective, didn't seem that relevant. A few others were able to chime in and mention that it may be relevant when these films are shot in professionally calibrated cinemas, which I can see making a bit of sense.

Your Pantone Reference Colors are a better example for your argument as it is something marketed towards working professionals. I don't think rich people are buying them just for fun when choosing which color to paint their walls at home, but I'm sure someone is benefiting from them in a business somewhere.

 

[RedWeasel]

Random person on YouTube. Let’s hold of for real reviews.

And a "real review" would be defined as ... ?

 

[waterfta]

It's not at all binary. The number of people who work with a $40k display as their main display all day every day is infinitesimally small. However there are a significant number of professionals who want something between what Dell, Samsung, LG, etc. offer out of the box (4k, reasonable calibration, etc. but not great color, etc.) and those $40k displays. That's the market this is monitor is going after. 6k resolution, very high end (but not reference) color calibration, etc, in a design you would use 40+ hours per week.

Again, there is nearly zero other competition in the space this competes in.

This is probably the most accurate. I feel like the people that are working with $40k displays aren't looking at this anyway. I wish there was data to show who is purchasing the majority of these displays. My money is on the Youtubers/Content Creators making six figures that use Macs and just want to feel they have the best option available to work on their content. Even if the reality is their content is more or less identical, dropping a few grand on a nice monitor won't affect their bottom line too much.

 

[mail4asim]

A monitor that costs 9x more is better? Wow.

Watch the video my friend. It's was Apple who originally compared their monitor to the 43,000 Sony monitor saying theirs was better. This guy tested the two side by side and presents what he found.

 

[gnipgnop]

Watch the video my friend. It's was Apple who originally compared their monitor to the 43,000 Sony monitor saying theirs was better. This guy tested the two side by side and presents what he found.

At the same time, he's comparing a 4K monitor (Sony) to a 6K monitor (Apple).

 

[DEMinSoCAL]

At the same time, he's Apple's comparing a 4K monitor (Sony) to a 6K monitor (Apple).

Let me fix that for you.

 

[I7guy]

Way to change your point. This entire thread You have been saying that Apple never compared their monitor to the Sony.
Clearly they did. Stop being pedantic. No that it was proven to you that Apple did compare the two, you change your point.

It’s called discussion. And for the most part Apple does its homework, when it released products. I am not in the target market for this type of equipment, but know people who are and how much they spend on higher-end stuff.

 

[citysnaps]

And a "real review" would be defined as ... ?

For me it would be a review by someone who with years of experience works daily for a production company and for a living engages in high-res video editing, grading, and production or in visual effects.

It wouldn't be a guy who sets up television sets for best picture in people's homes for a living.

 

[Jury]

No doubt, it's not very comparable to Sony reference monitor and perform worse than a reference monitor. it's absolutely ridiculous because Apple need stops overpriced the product that used to cost less than $1999 and Tim Cook time's up.

 

[Camarillo Brillo]

For me it would be a review by someone who with years of experience works daily for a production company and for a living engages in high-res video editing, grading, and production or in visual effects.

It wouldn't be a guy who sets up television sets for best picture in people's homes for a living.

🙄

uhh ok. Guy seems to know what he’s talking about and provides visual proof of his claims about the XDRs shortcomings

 

[AppelGeenyus]

1) You have not produced proof regarding price and value to support what you said. You cited one available 4K monitor which is less expensive than the 6K XDR. That doesn’t prove “Fact is it's the most overpriced worst value display in history.”

2) I never said anything about “4K monitors not being suitable as pro displays”. What I said was that the one available display you tried to use as proof of your claim about the XDR—“Fact is it's the most overpriced worst value display in history”—would be a poor value for use with the Mac Pro. At $4,000, it’s indeed a very poor value compared to the XDR.

If you don’t understand why a pro editor or cgi/vfx artist would rather have a 32” 6K display rather than a 32” 4K display, you’re beyond my help. Your one sad data point doesn’t support your (non)fact.

3) Pros say that at its price it’s a game changer. AppelGeenyus says it costs too much. Thanks, but yeah that’s ok. I’ll believe the pros. No offense AppelGeenyus.

1)Yeah, it does, though. And I listed a bunch of other competing monitors coming out over the next few months. And the fact that OLED TV's get thrown into the mix depending on your workflow. By spending the same as 1 XDR you could get any combination of two of those. But your brain simply refuses to address any of that because being wrong is apparently the end of the world.

2) You said 4k displays: "has a pixel density only suitable for a 21.5” monitor. GUI elements would be too large, text would we jaggy and there would be no room for anything else on the display except the 4K frame.". I really did have a good laugh at this. I mean seriously, what a total bunch of nonsensical rubbish. So now you're saying when connecting that monitor to a PC it's totally acceptable, but when connected to a mac pro it's suddenly poor value? What?

As a primarily 2D designer/editor myself I fully understand that any FALD monitor that doesn't allow you to disable FALD is pretty useless for any non-HDR work. I didn't say anyone would want a single 4k monitor over a 6k, I said they would always want two 4k monitors over a single 6k. Because that's exactly what you can get for the price of one XDR. In Europe the comparable monitor I mentioned is about 3000Euro(~$3300USD) and in Australia it's 4399AUD(~$3000USD). A single XDR with stand is $5998USD, and if you want anti-glare it's a truly comical $6998USD.

3) Yeah I can't wait to see where this "game changer" is in 12 months, especially when it's already lagging on certain specs and you consider Apple almost never drops prices on anything for many years, and has a very long track record of letting many of their "pro" products stagnate for several years. I fully expect Apple to be selling this same monitor at the same price in 2025 while everyone else has moved onto something like 50,000 zone FALD or QD-OLED or maybe microLED or who knows what, at a lower price.

 

[fathergll]

A monitor that costs 9x more is better? Wow.

Apple are the ones that specifically used a Sony HX310 as a reference for the XDR at the keynote and it was clearly a lie.
[automerge]1581692069[/automerge]

Random person on YouTube. Let’s hold of for real reviews.

Random comment on MacRumors. Let’s hold of for real comments.

 

[theluggage]

However there are a significant number of professionals who want something between what Dell, Samsung, LG, etc. offer out of the box (4k, reasonable calibration, etc. but not great color, etc.) and those $40k displays.

No, they don't want something "between" $2k and $40k. The only people who want/need anything like those dual layer $40K displays are professional colour graders who need a dual-layer display to ensure that major video/movie productions won't look pants in a few years' time when true pixel-accurate HDR TVs (probably OLED or MicroLED) become common. They're probably using them as secondary displays (common sense 101 says that you don't want bright distractions next to a picture you're trying to fine-tune) and they probably need to be 4k (or 8k) because that's what they're targeting. A display is either good enough for that or it isn't.

Saying you want something between is like saying they want something between an iPod and a Steinway concert grand piano. Maybe they want something better than the Dell/Samsung/LG models including, possibly including 6k resolution so that they can have actual-size 4k side-by-side with other tools.

Let's try again in bold italics: this thread is only here because Apple themselves chose to compare the XDR with a $43k Sony reference monitor. It's not some straw man, comparing apples-to-bananas attack dreamed up by a hater - its a justified rebuttal of what was actually presented at the last WWDC.

Yes, maybe $5000 (or more like $5300 by the time you've added a $200 VESA adapter and a stand) is a fair price for the only 6k display on the market, but that's not the point. It's pretty clear that the "between" that a lot of people wanted was something between $5000 and the $1200 LG 5k in an Apple-standard box.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Yeah, it's nice but not comparable to reference monitors.

It seems to be comparable for most average content that’s produced. However, there’s a range of content (bright points of light on perfectly dark backgrounds) where it performs worse. If all a user shoots is fireworks, floating candles, and supernova explosions... they’ll wanna buy something different.

Apple brings up the references monitor price so it can charge you $5000 without feeling rip-off and never bother to do a demo or comparison for colorist work.

Seems like they brought up reference monitor price so folks will create YouTube videos and long forum threads about it. There’s only one thing worse than being talked about, and that’s NOT being talked about. I mean, even those that can’t stand Apple are still educating parts of the internet that the monitor exists!

 

[koa]

He's right on spot about J.J. Abrams using too much lens flares...

The technical term Abrams uses is... More Cowbell!

 

[AndiG]

So what he says is that you pay $1K for the stand, $4K for the cheese grater pattern and $1k for the standard IPS panel. So it is very similar to pay $6k for a low end MacPro workstation.

 

[nt5672]

I love Vincent! He is awesome and I'm happy to see this.
As others mentioned it may not be fair to compare these two but it was Apple that started it so if Apple makes a claim like that then they have to deliver and clearly they haven't.
So, if Apple knew that they can't achieve the same quality as the Sony one then why include it in the first place?
Regardless, here we are and now we know. Simple as that.

This is the key, "If Apple knew . . .". Apple no longer knows, their marketing people just spew out marketing BS a lot of the time. After all they are Apple and reality does not normally apply since their customers believe whatever the Apple message is. This is the fault of the customers not being critical, not Apple. They get away with it, so they do more if it.

 

[Hasbro1]

This is pretty egregious, even for the Fruit. Glad I did not shell out for it.

 

[V_Man]

It’s called discussion. And for the most part Apple does its homework, when it released products. I am not in the target market for this type of equipment, but know people who are and how much they spend on higher-end stuff.

No. It’s called you defending a Apple product at all costs even when it was proved several times in this thread that you were wrong.

I love my apple products but I’m not afraid to call Apple out on their BS.

Clearly apple Didn’t do the best job on their homework because their statement about the XDR was wrong.

I know a lot of people too. What they buy and use makes no difference in this discussion

 

[happygodavid]

Random person on YouTube. Let’s hold of for real reviews.

Watch any random episode on his channel, and you'll see that he knows his stuff. I've learned a ton about monitors and TV calibration from him. Seriously, next time you want to buy a TV, see if he has a review or comparison video on it. It's hard find a more thorough and knowledgable reviewer anywhere else besides, say, rtings.com. Also, his dry wit is fantastic.

 

[mozumder]

The real question is: who is it for? Consumers who will find it way too expensive, or pros who will find it too inaccurate?

I think it's probably best for photographers for print work. I wouldn't use it for HDR video.

 

[Hasbro1]

No. It’s called you defending a Apple product at all costs even when it was proved several times in this thread that you were wrong.

I love my apple products but I’m not afraid to call Apple out on their BS.

Clearly apple Didn’t do the best job on their homework because their statement about the XDR was wrong.

I know a lot of people too. What they buy and use makes no difference in this discussion

Sorry. Not sorry. They don't "ALWAYS" do their homework. They are spoiled Billionaires at the top of the food chain now, paying themselves ungodly amounts of $ for a company that they do not own. They have grown lazy in software development, and there is a direct correlation between them losing the Pro market and Scott Forestall being fired. They did no such thing as compare this product properly, if they did, they would not make such claims. I imagine there will be a big lawsuit now, as this video shows they are incredibly negligent in their claims.

 

[jasonefmonk]

This guy is very well respected in the high-end display world. His reviews on the OLEDs and upper-tier LEDs for home theater use are considered the gold-standard.

I watched the posted video and then one comparing the C9 to the B9. It was immediately apparent that this guy is an expert. He shows the tools, explains what he is doing, and explains what the differences are and how those would effect various types of viewing. I’ll be paying attention to his opinion on anything with a screen.