Jeff Nolten wrote:
I have to chime in here. My display is a late 2015 5K 27" Retina iMac, 16:9, 15 MP. Back when I purchased it I was using a 21 MP 5D3. My images looked great on the new display, I could use a magnifying glass and not see jaggies. The idea behind a Retina display is the the pixel density is high enough, ~220-250 PPI, that the human eye can't resolve individual pixels at the closest possible viewing (probably a teenager). Eight years later Apple has not released a higher resolution 27" display. A 30" display would require more MP probably 6K.
4K or greater "big screen" TVs are a bit different in that one is viewing them from further away. There are formulas for how close one should view a TV based on its size. I don't see a big push for higher broadcast or streaming content above 4K. It will probably come.
So it would seem that 20 MP is sufficient to feed current and future <= 30 inch desk top displays. I've found that 24 MP gave me more room to crop for composition rather than just straightening horizons. Also I will crop 16:9 when composition works to fill my display.
So why do I prefer the R5 to the R6II? Easy, reach. Cropping my R5 1.6 exactly fills the width of my 5K display. When I'm not cropping heavily I export my final images at 20 MP, sufficient for all my output needs.
One other wrinkle however is the enlarging capability of software like Topaz. If I've done my job well, images from my 12 MP original 5D or a cell phone can be uprezed to look just fine on my 5K display. This capability will only improve with time and probably offset future increases in display requirements. My 4 and 6 MP images currently struggle a bit if I pixel peep, but some images are just too important as memories for ultimate IQ to matter much.
This 6k monitor is the basis of the discussion about 20-24MP files not holding up well. Dell has just introduced one that's $1800 less and they'll get cheaper over time as all tech does:
Next will be 8K once GPUs/bandwidths catch up and I think 8K will hold the sweet spot for many years before they try to push 16k. Regardless, the point is that 6k monitors are already showing the limitations of 20-24MP files compared to 45MP files and 8k will only make things worse.
That's not to say people can't be perfectly happy with 16-24MP files and a 4K monitor for many many years. 24MP is adequate to print a large wall hanger if printing is the desired medium.
Yup, that display requires a minimum of 24 MP to feed it properly, and 30 would be more comfortable for cropping a bit. When 8K comes it will take almost everything the R5 has. And then what? I'm not disagreeing with you or Gipper53 for that matter, both your points are valid. If you are producing new content, especially for clients, future resolution requirements should always be a consideration. But needs vary.
Next will be 8K once GPUs/bandwidths catch up and I think 8K will hold the sweet spot for many years before they try to push 16k. Regardless, the point is that 6k monitors are already showing the limitations of 20-24MP files compared to 45MP files and 8k will only make things worse.
One can speculate how soon 8K will replace 4K or if 16K will ever be wide spread. I don't have an opinion on that. Apple also has a new 27" studio display that is the same resolution as my iMac but with better color rendering supporting HEIC. I'm hoping Apple reintroduces the 27" iMac. I also can't imagine needing a bigger, higher res TV than I have. So I don't see 6K being an issue for me in the near future. I have so much old imagery that I'll have to rely on software to bring it up to snuff.
A dedicated landscape photographer would probably be eager for the biggest, highest resolution display they can have. One of those curved ones that surrounds you. Wait a minute, what about looking at your images using virtual reality tech? Nothing wrong with considering any of this. But it is also valid to consider if one needs to keep up.
I don't personally know anybody with a 5K or higher resolution monitor—there are a few out there including myself! It would be hard to go back to anything less now that I'm used to it. I know many local photographers and most of them do photo editing on MacBooks, laptops and/or iPads with wee screens. Being portable and mobile is important since not much time is spent at home or office. Some of them edit on their darn iPhones! 5K+ monitors are a niche product and probably won't be significant in driving photographers to higher res cameras. Maybe they'll need larger and more dense sensors for other reasons.
Gochugogi wrote:
I don't personally know anybody with a 5K or higher resolution monitor—there are a few out there including myself! It would be hard to go back to anything less now that I'm used to it. I know many local photographers and most of them do photo editing on MacBooks, laptops and/or iPads with wee screens. Being portable and mobile is important since not much time is spent at home or office. Some of them edit on their darn iPhones! 5K+ monitors are a niche product and probably won't be significant in driving photographers to higher res cameras. Maybe they'll need larger and more dense sensors for other reasons. ...Show more →
Right. I see a lot of desktop PCs and most people are buying 24-27" 1080-1440p screens. Laptops are usually 1080p unless they buy a premium model like the Dell XPS. Most people don't even know why they'd want a higher resolution monitor. Most content is consumed on phones and people can't even be bothered to turn their phone to fill the screen. So that 45mp image you labored over is probably being viewed 2.5 - 3" on the long side. Photographers buying 4-6k large screens to view their images are a minority of a fraction of a niche.
Gochugogi wrote:
I don't personally know anybody with a 5K or higher resolution monitor—there are a few out there including myself! It would be hard to go back to anything less now that I'm used to it. I know many local photographers and most of them do photo editing on MacBooks, laptops and/or iPads with wee screens. Being portable and mobile is important since not much time is spent at home or office. Some of them edit on their darn iPhones! 5K+ monitors are a niche product and probably won't be significant in driving photographers to higher res cameras. Maybe they'll need larger and more dense sensors for other reasons. ...Show more →
Maybe that's a Hawaii thing. The 27" iMac retinas have been around for a long time and they are 5k. I know tons of people who own them and prefer to work on them rather than their MacBook Pros, myself included. I feel handcuffed when working on a laptop now, so I only for travel because I can't cart around a 27" iMac or 32" 6K monitor. You won't understand this until you work on nice big beautiful displays. A lot of people like Jeff above are hoping for a new release of the 27" iMac which would also be 5k.
Everyone has their own preferences and standards. There are tons of people who prefer nice big high res displays to perform their work. The mac forums have thousands of apple customers always wanting more, but also wanting them less expensive
Mike_5D wrote:
Right. I see a lot of desktop PCs and most people are buying 24-27" 1080-1440p screens. Laptops are usually 1080p unless they buy a premium model like the Dell XPS. Most people don't even know why they'd want a higher resolution monitor. Most content is consumed on phones and people can't even be bothered to turn their phone to fill the screen. So that 45mp image you labored over is probably being viewed 2.5 - 3" on the long side. Photographers buying 4-6k large screens to view their images are a minority of a fraction of a niche.
I hate viewing anything on my phone, iPads, or MacBooks. I wait until I get back to the desk unless it's something urgent. Be careful lumping everyone into your category. "Most people" in your world with 1080p laptops are definitely the type that I know in the photography/videography world. More like 5k iMac at with high end retina MBPs for travel. All of them wanting the 6k monitors to come down in price so they can snatch one up. That's "most people" I know.
artsupreme wrote:
I hate viewing anything on my phone, iPads, or MacBooks. I wait until I get back to the desk unless it's something urgent. Be careful lumping everyone into your category. "Most people" in your world with 1080p laptops are definitely the type that I know in the photography/videography world. More like 5k iMac at with high end retina MBPs for travel. All of them wanting the 6k monitors to come down in price so they can snatch one up. That's "most people" I know.
artsupreme wrote:
Apple is one of the largest companies in the world from selling high end gear, that's a big bubble if that's what you want to call it.
Globally, it is a bubble. The vast majority of computer or phone users are not using Apple products. Of course on the beach where everyone lives in a $5M+ house and drives fully loaded Tesla X's and exotics, you might get a different impression.
Mike_5D wrote:
Globally, it is a bubble. The vast majority of computer or phone users are not using Apple products. Of course on the beach where everyone lives in a $5M+ house and drives fully loaded Tesla X's and exotics, you might get a different impression.
You don't have to stretch the bubble that far. We are not in a "general public" forum here referring to the general public in this Country. We are in a photography forum where expensive cameras and 3-10K+ lenses are used daily to post images here. One definitely doesn't need a beachfront home or Tesla to afford a 5k iMac and Macbook pro. Those are less than most camera kits people own here.
artsupreme wrote:
Maybe that's a Hawaii thing. The 27" iMac retinas have been around for a long time and they are 5k. I know tons of people who own them and prefer to work on them rather than their MacBook Pros, myself included. I feel handcuffed when working on a laptop now, so I only for travel because I can't cart around a 27" iMac or 32" 6K monitor. You won't understand this until you work on nice big beautiful displays. A lot of people like Jeff above are hoping for a new release of the 27" iMac which would also be 5k.
Everyone has their own preferences and standards. There are tons of people who prefer nice big high res displays to perform their work. The mac forums have thousands of apple customers always wanting more, but also wanting them less expensive ...Show more →
Mahalo for the long lecture. Apple discontinued the 27" iMacs a few years back. I still have my old 2017 iMac Pro with 5K monitor and don't want to edit images, video or audio on anything smaller. Wish I had two monitors but space is tight. I work in a large fine arts environment and almost everybody—photographers, graphic artists and musicians—are working on MacBook Pros. I'm guessing their eyesight is better than mine at close distances. Our employer even bought me a MacBook Pro but due to the tiny screen, I only use it for email and travel. No Tesla but I do live a few hundred feet from the Pacific Ocean...
Gochugogi wrote:
Mahalo for the long lecture. Apple discontinued the 27" iMacs a few years back. I still have my old 2017 iMac Pro with 5K monitor and don't want to edit images, video or audio on anything smaller. Wish I had two monitors but space is tight. I work in a large fine arts environment and almost everybody—photographers, graphic artists and musicians—are working on MacBook Pros. I'm guessing their eyesight is better than mine at close distances. Our employer even bought me a MacBook Pro but due to the tiny screen, I only use it for email and travel. No Tesla but I do live a few hundred feet from the Pacific Ocean... ...Show more →
Cool, the iMac pro is a nice machine and like you said once you have used one of these beautiful displays it's hard to go back to anything else. Having a tight workspace is not so bad when you live in HI. I used to live in Lahaina and had a pretty tight space myself.
I'll join in saying I wouldn't want to edit on any less than a 27" retina. To tell the truth I'd be a bit afraid to see the 32" display, 'cause then I'd have to spend the extra $3500. A separate 27" display and computer already would cost way more than my iMac did. I'm trying to make this one last as long as I can.
Jeff Nolten wrote:
I'll join in saying I wouldn't want to edit on any less than a 27" retina. To tell the truth I'd be a bit afraid to see the 32" display, 'cause then I'd have to spend the extra $3500. A separate 27" display and computer already would cost way more than my iMac did. I'm trying to make this one last as long as I can.
Give it a few years and they'll get much more affordable as they start pushing 8k. Then you'll soon have a couple 32" 6K displays, probably driven by a tiny MPB Pro or Air that can be tucked away in clamshell mode. Apple will be long into their 3nm chips by then and MBPs will be more amazing than they are now, and will easily drive multiple 6k monitors like the current models. Best of both worlds. The old iMac 5k is not a shabby machine to use until then I'm also hoping for a new 27" iMac to replace my 2020 version, but I'm not holding my breath on that one. A newly designed iMac 27-30" M3 5k+ with a couple newly designed studio displays to match on each side would be a sweet setup too.
Mike_5D wrote:
Globally, it is a bubble. The vast majority of computer or phone users are not using Apple products. Of course on the beach where everyone lives in a $5M+ house and drives fully loaded Tesla X's and exotics, you might get a different impression.
I just bought this and hooked it up today to test it. This will replace one of my older triple display office setups that are currently running on 2015 13" MBP's. This is a screaming fast M1 Air 8/8 16gb 1TB SSD, three Dell 27" 4k UHD monitors, and a pluggable triple 4k display station. All powered by one cable from the MB Air. Total price for everything here including tax and shipping was $2323. No $5M beachfront home or Tesla's required to buy this. This whole setup was cheaper than buying an R6II body which is the topic of this thread. If you are still handcuffing yourself using a tiny little 1080p laptop display I suggest you expand your horizons with something similar. Once you use a setup like this you'll wonder how you ever used a single little laptop display. I watched some 8K content and the picture quality is stunning. This 4k setup should be sufficient for a lot of people for many years. The laptop and cabling will be hidden under the desk and I can just grab the MB Air and go if I need to take it with me.
@artsupreme. Thanks for such a detailed response. I have read it over a few times and the more I think about this the more the sensible path may be the R8 since that will allow me to get the RF 24-15L and the RF 100-400 I was planing on getting AND add the RF14-35. Since all are IS lenses I won't miss IBIS much if at all and then when the R5 Mk II comes out I will have good RF lenses and can sell the R8 or keep it as a backup. I generally don't do the sensible thing however But I am looking for any serious downsides to that plan.
TroPhoto wrote:
@artsupreme. Thanks for such a detailed response. I have read it over a few times and the more I think about this the more the sensible path may be the R8 since that will allow me to get the RF 24-15L and the RF 100-400 I was planing on getting AND add the RF14-35. Since all are IS lenses I won't miss IBIS much if at all and then when the R5 Mk II comes out I will have good RF lenses and can sell the R8 or keep it as a backup. I generally don't do the sensible thing however But I am looking for any serious downsides to that plan. ...Show more →
Good plan. I'm wondering if the R5II will come out soon or if they'll wait awhile and release a firmware update that will make the current body an R5 Mark1.5? I don't know, but I'm perfectly happy with my R5's other than the lack of a fake shutter sound. But that's not too important unless I'm teaching someone. I would also like the ability to shut off the proximity sensor but that's for a very specialized use. I don't feel limited at all with the current AF performance so if the mkII has only improved AF and similar IQ then I'll probably just stick with the trusty R5's and run them to death.
So to close the circle on this — based on all the great info in this thread I found an R8 and RF 24-105L for less than a used R5 body alone, less than the RR6 mkII body alone too for that matter. Since all current glass is APS-C for my 7d mkII it seemed the most sensible route to reallocated the budget to glass and still get a great sensor to work with. Looking forward to full frame.
The idea behind a Retina display is the the pixel density is high enough, ~220-250 PPI, that the human eye can't resolve individual pixels at the closest possible viewing (probably a teenager). Eight years later Apple has not released a higher resolution 27" display. A 30" display would require
I'm also hoping for a new 27" iMac to replace my 2020 version, but I'm not holding my breath on that one. A newly designed iMac 27-30" M3 5k+ with a couple newly designed studio displays to match on each side would be a sweet setup too.