yadillah Posted July 24, 2008 Share #1 Posted July 24, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hello, I am considering changing from PC to Mac. I am wondering how the monitor of an iMac compares with the Sony Triniton CRT monitor which I have been using with my PC. Some people tell me that CRT monitors are the best. What is everyone's experience? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 24, 2008 Posted July 24, 2008 Hi yadillah, Take a look here Mac Monitors. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
vikasmg Posted July 24, 2008 Share #2 Posted July 24, 2008 Hello,I am considering changing from PC to Mac. I am wondering how the monitor of an iMac compares with the Sony Triniton CRT monitor which I have been using with my PC. Some people tell me that CRT monitors are the best. What is everyone's experience? I've moved to Macs myself. 15" MacBook Pro at home and 17" MacBook Pro at work. At home I also have the 23" Apple Cinema HD Display. It's beautiful and would not like to change back to CRTs. I'm considering a 30" Cinema display at work but keep choking on the price and can't seem to be able to press that "Buy" button to purchase it :-( - Vikas Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted July 24, 2008 Share #3 Posted July 24, 2008 I bought a 24" iMac last weekend. Compared to the LG screens I'd been using before with my PC the quality of the iMac screen is fantastic. I believe you can drive a second screen from the iMac, which is what I plan to do, but to use the 30" screen at full resolution you'll need a machine such as the Mac Pro rather than an iMac as the Mac Pro video card has the dual DV output that the 30" screen needs if it's to be driven at full resolution. I'll be using one of the 19" LG screens with my iMac, but longer term I plan to get a 23" Mac screen - or whatever is available at that that point. Are CRTs better? They were once upon a time, but now I have no idea - I don't even know if you can buy one these days at anything other that astronomical prices. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
georg Posted July 24, 2008 Share #4 Posted July 24, 2008 The most important thing is the used panel-technology. On one side we have TN-Panels, they are cheaper and very fast but their colors are not very stable - they are used in notebooks, iMacs (unusable in daylight because of reflective surface), consumer-displays. The better choice are PVA/IPS (they have many names with only slight differences in technology)-panels found in displays that are usually about 30% more expensive. The last professional choice with own production is Eizo (simply try to find another display not manufactured in a low-wage-country). Take a 2031/2231/2431/2461/2761 (first two digits are the size in inch, last two digits the "class", XX01 is the consumer-version with TN-Panel) and you will be perfectly happy! Mac-Displays are just usual OEM-produced-displays with a nice case... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted July 24, 2008 Share #5 Posted July 24, 2008 ...iMacs (unusable in daylight because of reflective surface)... Unusable? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted July 24, 2008 Share #6 Posted July 24, 2008 On one side we have TN-Panels, they are cheaper and very fast but their colors are not very stable - they are used in notebooks, iMacs (unusable in daylight because of reflective surface), consumer-displays. Actually, the iMac 24" uses an IPS/sIPS panel and its a fairly good monitor. We have one here. Ditto for the 23" Cinema Display I used to own. I like to calibrate at about 120 cd/m2, however, and the 24" iMac won't go that low. I remain very impressed, however, with the NEC 2490 that I reviewed earlier this year. How do LCD monitors compare with high-end CRTs? It depends on which model of each one is comparing. A higher-end IPS/sIPS monitor can compare very well with a good CRT. Moreover, the video card in my Mac Pro doesn't have a very high quality DAC so it wasn't well suited for CRT output in any case. This is likely true for many current cards. Cheers, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
georg Posted July 24, 2008 Share #7 Posted July 24, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) @sean_reid Really, haven't they switched to TN-panels with the last generation? I'm really sensible with reflections, though - just to cut a few cents production costs... I've compared many TFTs, in 99% of the cases EIZO has the edge, many older opponents sold their production and know-how... I don't think that they're better TFTs than the current Eizos with PVA-panels, the difference between Apple iMac should be obvious. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timd. Posted July 24, 2008 Share #8 Posted July 24, 2008 the 20" imac went TN, the 24" is as good as ever. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
miami91 Posted July 24, 2008 Share #9 Posted July 24, 2008 While "unusable" may be a bit harsh, when I was shopping for a new mac a couple of months ago I found the glossy iMac display to be a deal breaker. Thus, I went MacPro with a 30" cinema display. YMMV. Jeff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carli1 Posted July 24, 2008 Share #10 Posted July 24, 2008 Most screens are okay. As graphic designer/art director we (and a lot of professional photographers) are using Mac screens. Used as 'soft-proofing' the mayor problem is calibration, which should be done weekly, whatever screen you are using. This remains a big pain. For us, the only thing that counts is the 'hard proof': a print. A glossy screen will always look brighter and sharper even with reflections. Carl Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted July 24, 2008 Share #11 Posted July 24, 2008 @sean_reidReally, haven't they switched to TN-panels with the last generation? I'm really sensible with reflections, though - just to cut a few cents production costs... I've compared many TFTs, in 99% of the cases EIZO has the edge, many older opponents sold their production and know-how... I don't think that they're better TFTs than the current Eizos with PVA-panels, the difference between Apple iMac should be obvious. Not on the 24" models, as mentioned in a post just above. Yes, the reflections can be a pain depending on where the computer is located. In our case they haven't been a problem. That said, my favorite LCD so far is still the NEC 2490 and that's the one I use every day. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
paga Posted July 24, 2008 Share #12 Posted July 24, 2008 MacPro with dual 30" Apple Monitors (upgraded from G4 with 23") never been happier and I think better than my wife's Sony CRT (she's using a PC for Autocad only, my Mac for everything else). I think what matters a lot is what video card you pick for this, and Apple comes standard with pretty good stuff even at the entry level on the iMacs. Cheers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
miami91 Posted July 25, 2008 Share #13 Posted July 25, 2008 MacPro with dual 30" Apple Monitors (upgraded from G4 with 23") never been happier and I think better than my wife's Sony CRT (she's using a PC for Autocad only, my Mac for everything else). I think what matters a lot is what video card you pick for this, and Apple comes standard with pretty good stuff even at the entry level on the iMacs. Cheers You must have a hell of a large workspace for dual 30" studio displays! I'd love to do this, but my relatively small home office is already dwarfed with one 30", the MacPro, an Epson 4880 printer, color laser printer, photo scanner, etc. I second your comments on the MacPro, it's just amazing. Incredibly fast, and lots of room to grow (8 RAM slots, 4 HDD bays, 2 optical bays). An iMac would have been much more affordable, but the MacPro is a much better medium-term investment (more redundancy-proof). Regards, Jeff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
treeplanter Posted July 25, 2008 Share #14 Posted July 25, 2008 I don't know if this is true, but I remember hearing, on a Mac-related podast I listen to, that Apple monitors are actually built by Samsung. Jim B. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
georg Posted July 25, 2008 Share #15 Posted July 25, 2008 There are only a few panel-producers in the world and propably some panels used in Macs are manufactured by Samsung (a joint-venture with Sony, like LG & Philips?). The panel is like the "engine" of the display, it's importanted, but it's qualities are worthless if the rest of display isn't designed/made properly! The displays (chassis, housing...) are manufactured and assembled in low-wages-countries most likely not even by the brands itself, it's extremely likely that some Sony, Samsung, Apple, NEC, Dell... displays are actually manufactured by the same company or at least with exactly the same standards... The exception is Eizo, the only company wise enough to avoid outsourcing/off-shoring and to keep their know-how with more skilled and more expensive employees (in production, I'm sure the few top-engineers are well-paid even in China) - never underestimate this factor! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreddington Posted July 26, 2008 Share #16 Posted July 26, 2008 Steve, Sean, I am also thinking of the iMac 24" and am wondering if it is worth going for the 3 GHz rather than the 2.8GHz version. My needs are basically Lightroom and some Photoshop. I tend to buy the highest performer on the assumption that software will become more resource intenstive, but I wonder if the difference is worth the money at the moment. The other question is if it's worth getting the NVidia graphics option given that I don't play games. And if I add a second monitor, can I calibrate them separately either with ColorSynch or with the Eye One Display 2? Any advice would be appreciated. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted July 26, 2008 Share #17 Posted July 26, 2008 Hi Martin, I edit with a Mac Pro and my wife edits with a 24" Imac. I doubt you'll need to do the graphics upgrade but I haven't done any testing to be able to say that for sure. We didn't bother with it. As for the 3 Ghz vs. 2.8, I doubt that will make a huge difference either but its your call (based partly on your budget). My wife's computer is a 24" 2.4 with 4 GB of RAM. She routinely uses it to process large shoots and has no complaints. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted July 26, 2008 Share #18 Posted July 26, 2008 Hi Martin, I don't expect that such a minor difference in processor speed would make much of a practical difference. The faster iMac also has a slightly larger hard drive, but again it isn't so large as to influence the decision IMHO. My advice would be to get the basic 2 gig model an upgrade the memory by buying from a 3rd party supplier. That's what I did and the two 2 gig modules that I bought cost about a third of what Apple want to charge you for supplying a 4 gig model rather than the standard 2 gig version. That meant that I basically threw away the original memory that the iMac shipped with. Upgrading the memory is _very_ simple, it took me all of 5 minutes to do - and I was taking my time! I'm currently using Photoshop and the beta of Lightroom 2, they run very well in 4gig. To answer your final question, yes, both screens can be calibrated independently of each other. I'm currently running the 24" iMac and a 19" monitor that I used with my XP PC. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreddington Posted July 27, 2008 Share #19 Posted July 27, 2008 Thanks, Sean and Steve, I think it will make more sense for me to go with the 2.8 but with the 1TB disk. It's probably better to spend money on adding an external backup disk than to have a marginally faster processor. I looked at the price of RAM on the crucial store and as you say it is much cheaper to replace it with 4 GB and throw out the old memory than pay the extra directly on ordering from Apple. Thanks for the info. If I can calibrate both monitors I would have a good choice between the glossy iMac screen (in case I don't get on with it, but having looked at it in suitable light it seems excellent) and my present Samsung 213T. Thanks for the advice Cheers! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted July 27, 2008 Share #20 Posted July 27, 2008 Martin, I have all my data - photographs, documents etc. - on external hard drives, so personally I wasn't bothered with a larger internal hard drive. One of the good things about OS X is that you can set up a raid array in software, so if you have two similar sized external drives you can combine them into a single raid drive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.