I missed that quote. Can you link to it? With respect to "professional," what specific profession or field?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
YouTuber Compares Apple Pro Display XDR to $43K Sony Reference Monitor, Says It's a 'No Go' for Professional Colorists
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I missed that quote. Can you link to it? With respect to "professional," what specific profession or field?
This is what I was wondering. Thank you for posting.
So now that we know that there is a need for this product, does it really provide $5,000 in value? Could I get a monitor without the Apple logo for say $2,00 or $4,000 that performs just as well?
Despite? You can't ignore that it was Apple that made the comparison.
he not your average random person on youtube....
Apple brought this on themselves. They compared it to the Sony monitor. "Wow!", people said. But, when someone calls them out, and says that it actually doesn't compare..."of course it doesn't". "That's silly".
I think some people are getting their feelings hurt when they hear it's not as good as they were told.
It is a really nice monitor. But, Apple greatly overstated how good it is.
I think some people are getting their feelings hurt when they hear it's not as good as they were told.
It is a really nice monitor. But, Apple greatly overstated how good it is.
Just to mention and make you aware, as it’s possible you have forgotten or may not know, Apple compared its new XDR Pro display to the exact same professional Sony monitor on stage when it launched, praising how good it was and better in some ways. So it’s a perfectly valid comparison to make according to Apple.
It’s a pity Apples monitor turns out to be nothing then an overpriced standard 32” LCD IPD panel with local dimming, and apparently not a very good one. It’s very stylish though.
Last edited:
If the Apple monitor were $50,000 and inferior to the Sony, I still wouldn’t be surprised. I don’t think for a second that Apple genuinely thought they’d be displacing the top end monitors. They aren’t known for their low prices after all.
They’re going for the mid level pro market, which will (a) be impressed by the bold claims and (b) unable to ever verify them themselves.
They’re going for the mid level pro market, which will (a) be impressed by the bold claims and (b) unable to ever verify them themselves.
"They compared it to the Sony monitor."
Tell us more about the comparison and the aspects/details and specs that were compared and evaluated by Apple between the two displays.
I could see those scenes just fine on a $500 50" 4k Vizio tv
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.
Plus he is the Steven Wright of HDTV reviewers (the lens flare bit).
Apple did not say this monitor will replace a $43k monitor and Sony will now go out of business.
What are you talking about? Apple compared their monitor to the exact same monitor in this video. Apple said their monitor was just as good as the Sony. Implying that the only difference was the price.
Actually, not clear that it is overpriced, is it? What other 6k monitor with local dimming and comparable amount of zones costs less?
[automerge]1581625728[/automerge]
I couldn’t see them on my $2000 1080p 55” Sharp Aquos. Granted, it was 14 or so years old, but it was high end technology at the time I bought it, and still better than a lot of people have in their house now. (Just replaced it with an LG C9 - now I’m sure I can see it
This guy isn’t random. He’s been doing this for the better part of 10 years. I trust his review.
the monitor is still nice but doesn’t compare to what Apple said it Compares to. And is expensive so I’ll wait a few years for the price to come down.
Who said Apple said that? Nobody. He simply pointed out that Apple first compared their monitor to the Sony.
Apple themselves have said that software developers make up the majority of their professional users. Yet they finally bring out a "Pro" display but its mostly out of the reach of most software developers.
Even if it has a justifiable price tag of $5000+ for what it does, if its too much monitor for software developers, yet doesn't cut it for true video / film professionals, who exactly is this thing for?
Even if it has a justifiable price tag of $5000+ for what it does, if its too much monitor for software developers, yet doesn't cut it for true video / film professionals, who exactly is this thing for?
Maybe the Sony BVM-HX310 reference display is not even good enough for high-end professionals that demand even more consistency and accuracy. Maybe those people need a $234,000 monitor that can handle the most demanding color accuracy work.
Apple did say that their monitor compared to the Sony. They actually compared theirs to the Sony. Not saying the Sony was better. Not saying theirs was almost as good.
I'm not going to play the exact words game. Context has meaning.
Vincent is at the top of his game. Very well respected. Pretty hard to question his ability to review this stuff.
Apple will always talk up their stuff like this. Jobs did it all the time. Sometimes it’s true, sometimes it’s a stretch. It’s just marketing.
Anyone who really needs a 40 grand monitor like this isn’t dumb enough to fall for the marketing. The people that do are people who don’t need it but like to feel that they have it. The prosumer market basically.
(And I admit I’m pretty guilty of that mind set too.. so I’m not being all holier that’s thou!)
what you can normally count on apple is that the product they sell you is better than any in the price range it sells at. And I think it’s probably fair to say you won’t find a better monitor for 6 grand.
one thing I did notice when I saw it at the shop is that the Matt version looked so much better. The normal reflective version just looked like any old iMac monitor to me really (see told you I’m just a prosumer after all..)
Apple will always talk up their stuff like this. Jobs did it all the time. Sometimes it’s true, sometimes it’s a stretch. It’s just marketing.
Anyone who really needs a 40 grand monitor like this isn’t dumb enough to fall for the marketing. The people that do are people who don’t need it but like to feel that they have it. The prosumer market basically.
(And I admit I’m pretty guilty of that mind set too.. so I’m not being all holier that’s thou!)
what you can normally count on apple is that the product they sell you is better than any in the price range it sells at. And I think it’s probably fair to say you won’t find a better monitor for 6 grand.
one thing I did notice when I saw it at the shop is that the Matt version looked so much better. The normal reflective version just looked like any old iMac monitor to me really (see told you I’m just a prosumer after all..)
Don't know if it's already answered but that's not the point of a reference monitor. The idea is that the source material is perfect. Other screens differ from the perfect image, some one way, others the other way. If you'd have a standard source that's for example too red, a screen which has too much red in it makes is extra extra red. Just like you have a golden standard for time and measurements, you can calibrate all other sources to the perfect one. So such a monitor is not for consumers but it is for (big) companies that create the original content.
About the GoT scenes... that was about HDR not color. They underestimated how many people still have a normal display or maybe even didn't think about it since all their screens were HDR which indeed is a stupid mistake.
Well there you have it folks. The Cinema Display 2.0 at 3X the price.
But, but, but...