Apple displays.....

[gavspen]

.....why are they so expensive? Vaguely looking for a new monitor, and at the refurb store the cheapest 27" 5K display is $1359, but you can get an 27" 5K iMac (which is kinda just a display plus a computer, isnt it?) for $1169. Huh?

Gavin

[HCMarkus]

I use a Samsung 40" TV. $300.

Admittedly, I do audio, not video. I'm sure my display is not as accurate as one of Apple's. But still...

[gavspen]

I use a Samsung 40" TV. $300.

Admittedly, I do audio, not video. I'm sure my display is not as accurate as one of Apple's. But still...

Yeah, absolutely. For the reasons you mention there is no way I would pay that kind of money for a monitor, I'm just wondering who does, and why.

[mikehalloran]

...

Yeah, absolutely. For the reasons you mention there is no way I would pay that kind of money for a monitor, I'm just wondering who does, and why.

I will — but only for the center. I have an iMac Pro—like all 2015 and later 27" iMacs, it has a 5K LG, Compared to my 27" twin 4K LG displays on each side, the 5K is much easier to read. I like the new built in camera and TB4 hub as well. I have the NanoGlass on my wife's 2020 iMac and can hardly wait to have it in my office, too. There are a number of Refurbs available right now.
https://www.apple.com/us-edu/search/display?src=alp

No way I'll be paying $400 extra for the Tilt & Height Adjustable stand, however, instead getting the Vesa mount. Decent Vesa monitor stands begin at $22 and arms at $34 on Amazon.
https://www.amazon.com/s?k=vesa+monitor ... -doa-p_2_4

A 40" 4K monitor looks nice but I would have to redesign my desk and studio space to accommodate it. Then there's the web cam and another hub… That's not going to work for me.

[gavspen]

Whatever floats your boat I guess Mike. I have no need of a camera or the extra ports, so there's that, and I dont think I'd know a piece of nano glass (an extra $300? Whoa!) if you hit me over the head with it!

[HCMarkus]

I dont think I'd know a piece of nano glass (an extra $300? Whoa!) if you hit me over the head with it!

It shatters into smaller pieces upon impact.

[mikehalloran]

Whatever floats your boat I guess Mike. I have no need of a camera or the extra ports, so there's that, and I dont think I'd know a piece of nano glass (an extra $300? Whoa!) if you hit me over the head with it!

You would see the difference if you saw the two side by side. Although I can do it here, anyone can check it out at an Apple Store. The glare reduction is that dramatic and is done without matte filters etc. — easily worth $300 to me.

Otherwise, if you don’t have the need, then don’t buy, of course. I don’t like the idea of spending that much but it’s the tool that works best for my 69 year old eyes. I wish I felt my budget could handle replacing my LG 4Ks with them, too.

If someone offered me a used 6K/Nano at the same price, I’d probably pass. I do a lot of remote work and collaboration. Web cams are not a convenience and none of the 3rd party units I’ve tried and returned are as good (thanks, Amazon)

[James Steele]

I've been slammed busy on a project past few days, but I wanted to jump in on this and sort of wade into this discussion gingerly and see if I'm the only one experiencing something.

When I got my Mac Studio back in July '22, I enthusiastically purchased a Samsung 43" 4K TV to use as my main monitor. It's been pretty nice having all that screen real estate. It sits between 2 and 2 1/2 feet away from me. Initially I ran it at full 4K res... 3840x2160. However, about three weeks ago I decided to start running it at 3360x1890. It seemed that things were still just a little bit too small for me.

One thing I noticed when I did that change in resolution, is the 4K TV looked almost "too good" at a non-native resolution. With actual purpose-built computer monitors, when you switch to anything other than the native resolution, you immediately notice a softening of the image and loss of contrast. On the 4K TV, however, it seemed about the same. This started me wondering whether the savings with going with a TV was worth it.

To the right and adjacent to my 43" 4K TV main monitor, I have a 32" LG monitor that is 2560x1440. Objects on it appear about the same size. I noticed that it's easier to read text on the actual computer monitor. Everything seems to pop a bit more and look sharper than on the 4K TV, even when the 4K TV is in native 4K resolution. The TV seems "softer" and not quite as bright either.

Given that prices of larger computer monitors continue to decline, I'm seriously contemplating moving the Samsung 43" 4K TV into my bedroom and using it for the purpose the engineers who designed it intended, and going with something like this LG 35" curved monitor as my main monitor that was specifically designed as a computer monitor.

https://a.co/d/7vvVWx4

(NOTE: This is maddening... somehow the link above is being hijacked when you use Tapatalk by some dumbass site called superoffers.com. But from a web browser it goes to Amazon as it should. Ridiculous!!)

If you are using TapaTalk use this link:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08TB3DCJG?re ... FX5RT1W0KP

The refurb was priced at $339 when I first made this post, now it has dropped to $299, which is $100 less than the $399 I paid for the Samsung when I purchased it. The resolution is 3440x1440, so I'll have just a few more pixels across horizontally and 450 less vertically... but I'm really thinking that it will be sharper and easier on the eyes.

Bottom line here, is for me personally, as dedicated monitor prices drop, I'm rethinking the notion of pressing 4K televisions into service as computer monitors. And in this case, it has nothing to do with color accuracy (although I'd really like to tweak something in Photoshop without having to move it over to my LG to the side), but more that I suspect that a purpose-built computer monitor will be sharper and reduce eyestrain, which... ummm... as I mature chronologically... in increasingly important.

[HCMarkus]

Have you gone thru the settings on your TV?

Set chroma to 4:4:4. Disable all smoothing features, put in Game Mode to minimize lag. I'm no pro at this and it's been quite awhile since I adjusted my 40" Samsung TV, but it looks sharp to me.

OTOH, aging eyes here.

[James Steele]

Have you gone thru the settings on your TV?

Set chroma to 4:4:4. Disable all smoothing features, put in Game Mode to minimize lag. I'm no pro at this and it's been quite awhile since I adjusted my 40" Samsung TV, but it looks sharp to me.

OTOH, aging eyes here.

I'll give that a shot. I'm pretty sure I've tweaked all of those setting, but I'll go back and doublecheck. It may also have to do with the fact that mine is a bit larger at 43".

All that aside... I may have gone too big with this monitor anyway as I'm concerned it's blocking some of the sound from my mid-field monitors.

If I *do* go with the LG, I found it new for only a few bucks more at Costco.
https://www.costco.com/lg-35-class-ultr ... 95387.html

UPDATE. Since I made this post. the refurb price at Amazon dropped to $299. I might go for it. Went by my local Costco to see if they might have had one in stock, but struck out.

[James Steele]

Set chroma to 4:4:4. Disable all smoothing features, put in Game Mode to minimize lag.

Aging eyes here, too. Where did you find the chroma setting? I couldn't find that on mine. I did set "Contrast Enhancer" to "High."

[HCMarkus]

https://www.lifewire.com/best-picture-s ... tv-4776573

The above looks like a pretty good reference. I set the chroma years ago; IIRC, the article is accurate:

HDMI UHD Color: This allows a designated HDMI input to access 4k@60Hz signals encoded with 4:4:4, 4:2:2, or 4:2:0 chroma subsampling.

[gavspen]

You would see the difference if you saw the two side by side. Although I can do it here, anyone can check it out at an Apple Store. The glare reduction is that dramatic and is done without matte filters etc. — easily worth $300 to me.

You've made me curious. I'll go there and see for myself.

[James Steele]

https://www.lifewire.com/best-picture-s ... tv-4776573

The above looks like a pretty good reference. I set the chroma years ago; IIRC, the article is accurate:

HDMI UHD Color: This allows a designated HDMI input to access 4k@60Hz signals encoded with 4:4:4, 4:2:2, or 4:2:0 chroma subsampling.

Yeah... could be my particular TV that I got his substandard in this area. I didn't really consult any sort of article or do much research. I couldn't find any setting like that in the menus.