John Thawley Posted January 19, 2010 Share #21 Posted January 19, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Actually I was told at the Apple store that there is now an adapter avail for this connector. m Really? That's interesting, because it's the power and everything... they've been saying all along that there's no possible way or making a pin alignment that would convert.... considering older machines have the power connector on the opposite side of the monitor connection. I'll have to look into it. JT Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 19, 2010 Posted January 19, 2010 Hi John Thawley, Take a look here New Imac vs. 24" Cinema Display. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
ericperlberg Posted January 20, 2010 Share #22 Posted January 20, 2010 I've seen so much conflicting info about the latest iMacs, I'm a bit confused. Some swear by them and their photography looks great....some hate it. That's because different people have different expectations about what they want/need from their equipment. Today I went to see an Eggleston show at Victoria Miro in London with about 20 photographs. They were all in 35mm format. Eggleston has a huge collection of M cameras and lenses as well as many medium format cameras but only 1 or 2 of the images were sharp, most were slightly out of focus and could have been shot with a starter Nikon or Canon DSLR by my grannie and if they had been posted in this forum there would have been all sorts of comments about out of focus, focus shift, noise, etc. I'm fairly sure that one of the images was shot digitally and had the noise character I would associate with ISO 1600 on my M8, ie, not brilliant. Some Nikon owner would have said "the d3 would wipe the floor with this image" though its doubtful that that D3 owner would be showing his/her work in Victoria-Miro (a very posh gallery with the highest of reputations). There is no reason why an iMac monitor wouldn't have been good enough to preview these A2 sized images (which probably sell from £5-20,000 and were very beautiful and intriguing in their own way). There were probably 20 people in the gallery and I didn't hear any tsk tsking about the image quality though there were plenty of people including myself were giving a good close look over. Then I walked over to Flowers East where Robert Polidori has a show of work shot in fine art museums shot on an 8x10 large format camera. The are so rich, so detailed, so subtle in their tonalities, so saturated. You couldn't possibly preview these accurately on an iMac and see the great subtlety of tonality and light playing off the soft gold frames or the rich saturated tapestry in the images that makes Polidori's images so luscious. It's a matter of how you shoot and how you want your images to look and what equipment is needed to get you there. The Polidori images aren't better than the Eggleston images because they're more detailed or saturated, they're just different. If the Polidori images had the look of the Eggleston images I doubt they'd have been in at Flowers East (another very expensive and internationally known and respected gallery). I'm sure these Polidori images were in the same ball park in cost as the Eggleston images. Without any disrespect to Steve Huff, if you find his images ok then I'm sure you'll find an iMac ok unless you have an issue with glossy displays. I say that because Steve is fond of using in camera filters and photoshop to give his images character and these techniques generally play havoc with the very subtleties that are at issue between a decent monitor and a top of the line monitor, to wit, subtle gradations, highly saturated colours and detail in deep shadow areas. I'd say if you don't know why you need a better monitor than an iMac monitor, you probably don't need a better monitor than the new iMacs. Most people don't need a better monitor than a new iMac just like most people don't need to shoot medium or large format cameras to get the shot they want and most people don't need a porsche to get them to work or do the family shopping. What are your expectations? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericperlberg Posted January 20, 2010 Share #23 Posted January 20, 2010 Any other suggestions for a LCD to work with my Macbook? small eizos in the coloredge range of monitors small Nec in the spectraview range of monitors small LaCie monitors as shown Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisC Posted January 20, 2010 Share #24 Posted January 20, 2010 ......Eggleston show at Victoria Miro in London with about 20 photographs...... but only 1 or 2 of the images were sharp, most were slightly out of focus and could have been shot with a starter Nikon or Canon DSLR by my grannie .... Eric - Treat this post as an aside to the thrust of this thread. I was interested to read the above. Last year there was a curious [and unflattering in my view] film about Eggleston on BBC Television. He was filmed photographing with a [seemingly] zone focused Leica which he fired immediately the camera was brought to his eye. The thing is that the camera always seemed to be in motion. I marvelled at how wonderfully discrete his technique was, but I couldn't figure out whether he was a master of it or; that his pictures would be unsharp. You may have confirmed my suspicions. ................ Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted January 20, 2010 Author Share #25 Posted January 20, 2010 small eizos in the coloredge range of monitors small Nec in the spectraview range of monitors small LaCie monitors as shown Great info as usual. Thanks for babysitting through this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted January 21, 2010 Author Share #26 Posted January 21, 2010 That's because different people have different expectations about what they want/need from their equipment. Today I went to see an Eggleston show at Victoria Miro in London with about 20 photographs. They were all in 35mm format. Eggleston has a huge collection of M cameras and lenses as well as many medium format cameras but only 1 or 2 of the images were sharp, most were slightly out of focus and could have been shot with a starter Nikon or Canon DSLR by my grannie and if they had been posted in this forum there would have been all sorts of comments about out of focus, focus shift, noise, etc. I'm fairly sure that one of the images was shot digitally and had the noise character I would associate with ISO 1600 on my M8, ie, not brilliant. Some Nikon owner would have said "the d3 would wipe the floor with this image" though its doubtful that that D3 owner would be showing his/her work in Victoria-Miro (a very posh gallery with the highest of reputations). There is no reason why an iMac monitor wouldn't have been good enough to preview these A2 sized images (which probably sell from £5-20,000 and were very beautiful and intriguing in their own way). There were probably 20 people in the gallery and I didn't hear any tsk tsking about the image quality though there were plenty of people including myself were giving a good close look over. Good ol' Eggleston... I wouldn't expect anything less. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericperlberg Posted January 21, 2010 Share #27 Posted January 21, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) I couldn't figure out whether he was a master of it or; that his pictures would be unsharp. ................ Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted January 21, 2010 Author Share #28 Posted January 21, 2010 Eggleston is a master for sure... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisC Posted January 21, 2010 Share #29 Posted January 21, 2010 Eric - Well, I'd like to view the UTube video but the connection keeps crashing my Browser. I'm not a fan of the man, he struck me as having that obnoxious bullying arrogance so favoured by the spoilt rich down the ages. Where I was raised the traditional cure was a smack in the teeth. ............... Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacSpikes Posted January 23, 2010 Share #30 Posted January 23, 2010 I used to work with an iMac for my photos, but a year ago I switched to a Mac Pro with a separate display, just like your notebook has a separate display. First I bought a Cinema Display 23" from Apple. I liked it better than the iMac screen for obvious reasons: it is matte and not glossy. After almost a year of working I sometimes had the idea that the images looked somewhat dull in colour. I learned from Diglloyd's blog that there are displays that show 96% of Adobe RGB resulting in more and deeper colours. I bought the 26" NEC Multisync LCD 2690WUXi2 (cor, what a name) and I am thrilled with the results. My guess is that Eizo can be compared. Apple displays are good, but this is just much better. So my recommendation would be the NEC WUXi. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceflynn Posted January 23, 2010 Share #31 Posted January 23, 2010 Widescreen displays - ProCreative - Macworld UK Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted January 23, 2010 Share #32 Posted January 23, 2010 Separate components allow you to repair/replace on an individual basis. Get a dressed up mini Mac + screen and you will be better off. Best calibration is done with a screen that has onscreen controls. That lets out mac. Although my Eye One does well with my Mac 24 matt. To do it again, I would go the mini route plus a quality editing screen or a Mac tower. In a dark room, I can not see a the difference between a matt and glossy. I have put my notebook next to the matt 24. Environment is all important. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacSpikes Posted January 23, 2010 Share #33 Posted January 23, 2010 Thanks for pointing to Macworld ceflynn. I was not aware of that review, but it appears they are happy with the WUXi too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceflynn Posted January 23, 2010 Share #34 Posted January 23, 2010 You are welcome. The user reviews at B&H Photo are equally full of praise for the NEC: NEC | MultiSync 2690WUXi2 25.5" | LCD2690WUXI2-BK | B&H Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted January 23, 2010 Share #35 Posted January 23, 2010 Separate components allow you to repair/replace on an individual basis. Get a dressed up mini Mac + screen and you will be better off. I don't follow. If a Mac mini breaks, how is that better than if an iMac breaks? In both cases you have to wait for the repair to be made before you can use the system again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted January 24, 2010 Share #36 Posted January 24, 2010 To back up to the question about why there is such - variable - opinion on the 27" iMac. I would say this - with my older iMac and previous CRT macs, the default settings were pretty much on target to begin with, and took less work to get right - FOR PRINTING. And were adequate for web viewing and posting. The new iMac's defaults are much nicer for viewing and creating images on the Web, but not as good for printing. Probably not surprising, given how many images show up on flickr and youtube compared to the galleries. Apple isn't selling just to photographers, or just to fine printmakers. With some work - more than with the previous computers/screens - I've reached the point where I get a very good match between the iMac and Epson K3 inks (B&W and color). But without that work, my view of the iMac 27" would have been more variable. I'd have loved it (based on the defaults) if I primarily did web-based photo work, and hated it if I did primarily fine printing. Since I do both, I just had to find the rather different settings to use for each workflow. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted January 31, 2010 Share #37 Posted January 31, 2010 An iMac 27" update. The screen is what it is - however my 3-month-old iMac just handed me my first-ever hard-drive failure in 25 years of personal computing. A freeze-up followed by a complete inability to start up even from the DVD-ROM. Fortunately most of my recent photos not yet backed up are still on the SD cards, but I forsee a long day reinstalling/re-registering software once the new drive is in place. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptarmigan Posted February 3, 2010 Share #38 Posted February 3, 2010 I've been through a similar selection process to replace my 3 year old 20" iMac. I've been pleased with it but could do with more real-estate, more HDD space and the option to add a lot more ram. I've looked at the 27" iMac i7 but three things put me off. The over riding BIG issue is the shiny screen which I cannot live with. Whatever I do I can always see my own reflection in it. Secondly the difficulty in upgrading things like HDD with the iMac. Finally, having to run additional external drives via USB or FW. So I'll be going for a Mac Pro with Eizo ColorEdge CG243 which I expect to get later this month when I've finished re-decorating my office. It 50% more expensive that the 27" iMac but with way more flexibility and no shiny screen! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted February 3, 2010 Author Share #39 Posted February 3, 2010 I've decided to go the external, matte, IPS LCD route... f the iMac. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted February 5, 2010 Share #40 Posted February 5, 2010 ... f the iMac... ?? "f the iMac" ?? Does that mean what it looks like? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.