Do you need Q2 ? It's all about pixels

[marchyman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

• iMac 27" 2K : 0.79m (2.6 ft)
• iMac 27" 5K : 0.44m (1.4 ft)

That is what I went from and to.   Image editing is a more pleasant experience on the 5K monitor.  Besides images the difference is one of quality.   Windows and text within the windows may be the same size they were on my 2K 27" (in points, not pixels), however text is much more crisp and readable.  Also, I can zoom into a screen without getting fuzzy boarders around individual characters.

There is a down side.   Those 512 x 384 jpeg images I took in 1999 because memory was expensive and screen size was 640 x 480 for many are really, really small on the new machine.  It looks more like a thumbnail than an image.

[zampelis]

4 minutes ago, marchyman said:

• iMac 27" 2K : 0.79m (2.6 ft)
• iMac 27" 5K : 0.44m (1.4 ft)

That is what I went from and to.   Image editing is a more pleasant experience on the 5K monitor.  Besides images the difference is one of quality.   Windows and text within the windows may be the same size they were on my 2K 27" (in points, not pixels), however text is much more crisp and readable.  Also, I can zoom into a screen without getting fuzzy boarders around individual characters.

There is a down side.   Those 512 x 384 jpeg images I took in 1999 because memory was expensive and screen size was 640 x 480 for many are really, really small on the new machine.  It looks more like a thumbnail than an image.

The 27'' iMac has an absolutely brilliant screen! I hope you enjoy it!! 

On a system at this league, I would strongly suggest the use of a colour calibration hardware. I personally use the xrite i1display and I am very happy with it. The default colour profile has very intense reds and greens and makes the colours look a bit unnatural in a "too much of a good thing" way. 

[marchyman]

I also use the i1 profiler.  I agree that it make a difference.  A good difference.