Vivek wrote:
You're both probably right - not staying calibrated and also not necessitating constant calibration. My concern is more economics driven. I am not doing this for business but I do want to see my pictures well. So, I am willing to calibrate the monitor a few times over its useful life but don't want to pay the Apple pro tax.
Why not just get a base model, or...even better...the outgoing model at a cut rate?
Actually thinking about that too... I might be able to snag an Apple employee discount through some folks that I know, so that might make it competitive in $$.
RoamingScott wrote:
Why not just get a base model, or...even better...the outgoing model at a cut rate?
RoamingScott wrote:
The whole reason I got a Studio Display was to obviate the need to calibrate it. These are excellently calibrated straight out of the box, throw it on the Photography display profile and rock.
It depends if the display has an internal calibrator. If not it will drift over time and should be calibrated. You also will only be able to use specific profiles that have been included.
Looks like a nice monitor, but not very bright..pretty much expected from most 5K monitors and many of the reviews mention that they were compensated via a price reduction for their review. Personally, I think the only unique Apple monitor to consider is the XDR, with a much better panel. better control of local lighting, much brighter and 120Hz vs 60Hz. Driving a 5K monitor at 120Hz is dependent upon your computer. In the Apple MacBook Pro world, M3 Max and newer will provide 120HZ, but not the M3. I do believe that third party monitors can compete with the base Studio Display Monitor, but not the XDR. I do think that Nano vs no Nano is a reasonable question. Nano makes sense if you can’t control your editing environment. Regarding panel color/brightness over time, why would the Apple panel be more stable than the LG? Anyway, LG gets a lot of positive reviews from photographers. I think that BenQ and Dell are are also cost effective high quality monitor brands for critical color work.
I calibrate once or twice a year. A calibrator will outlast the monitor so, for me, it's a worthwhile investment.
Right now looking to purchase 4k or 5K monitor for mac use for video and photo editing.
The Asus Pro Art PA27JCV looks promising until some users complain of its fuzziness.
I can’t speak to that monitor, but I’ve had some serious difficulties profiling LG monitors on my Mac-based system.
Previously I had a high-end 27” iMac system. The Mac’s internal monitor, of course, profiled well. But I never could get that LG 27” monitor that I got as a second screen to come close to matching the Mac monitor. I actually had two different profiling systems that I used on in over time.
Of course, it looks like maybe you’ll have only a single monitor, so the monitor-matching issue won’t affect you. (Perfect profiling is not as important, in my view, as consistent profiling, at least with a single-monitor system.)
I’ve been using Macs since Intel processors and have successfully calibrated the LG 31MU97, BenQ PD2700U and the Phillips 27E1N8900. I think that the key here is to purchase a monitor from a vendor with a good return policy. I did upgrade my calibration device to a Calibrite Display Plus HL from an old Spyder which no longer received software support. The Calibrite software allows you to specify what type of panel you are calibrating. Unfortunately, a good calibration device is just another expense.
I do have a question for those that are considering the base Studio Display. Other than high price, what makes this monitor stand out compared to the higher quality competitors? I will accept that factory calibration from Apple is superior to that of many other manufacturer’s monitors and that their monitors are designed for long term stability. I would not buy a third party monitor without being able to calibrate the monitor, so this makes the savings over the Apple less impressive. Also, I think there is an advantage in being able to calibrate, for example with the Calibrite software, you can specify ambient light as D50, or D65. Also, the calibrator remains active between calibration and monitors room brightness. I’ve historically used two external monitors and a MacBook Pro. If I set one monitor to D50 and the other D65 an image looks quite different when comparing monitors. Also, my glossy MacBook Pro, which is also calibrated, looks very different than my matte monitors. Given that the panel technology is the same, I would expect the XDR display to match the laptop’s rendering, but the non-XDR will once again not match what I’m seeing on the laptop.
bwcolor wrote:
I’ve been using Macs since Intel processors and have successfully calibrated the LG 31MU97, BenQ PD2700U and the Phillips 27E1N8900. I think that the key here is to purchase a monitor from a vendor with a good return policy. I did upgrade my calibration device to a Calibrite Display Plus HL from an old Spyder which no longer received software support. The Calibrite software allows you to specify what type of panel you are calibrating. Unfortunately, a good calibration device is just another expense.
I do have a question for those that are considering the base Studio Display. Other than high price, what makes this monitor stand out compared to the higher quality competitors? I will accept that factory calibration from Apple is superior to that of many other manufacturer’s monitors and that their monitors are designed for long term stability. I would not buy a third party monitor without being able to calibrate the monitor, so this makes the savings over the Apple less impressive. Also, I think there is an advantage in being able to calibrate, for example with the Calibrite software, you can specify ambient light as D50, or D65. Also, the calibrator remains active between calibration and monitors room brightness. I’ve historically used two external monitors and a MacBook Pro. If I set one monitor to D50 and the other D65 an image looks quite different when comparing monitors. Also, my glossy MacBook Pro, which is also calibrated, looks very different than my matte monitors. Given that the panel technology is the same, I would expect the XDR display to match the laptop’s rendering, but the non-XDR will once again not match what I’m seeing on the laptop....Show more →
You did a pretty good job of listing pluses of the two-Apple monitor option. I want the excellent integration of the Apple monitor with the Apple OS and the high level of consistency between the two profiled monitors. When I moved to my current system, I got one Apple Studio monitor and planned to use my existing LG monitor as the second monitor, butI could never get them to match despite trying two profiling systems and doing a lot of research into how to make this work. I could never get the brightness the same and the color never matched well enough either. With two Apple monitors none of that is a problem.
Of course, getting two identical LG or other monitors would probably also allow more consistency among a pair of monitors, though with the loss of some of the Apple OS integration that you get with Apple monitors.
I know that this setup cost me more, but I was willing to pay more for the consistency… and we usually can keep monitors for longer than we keep CPUs, so the cost is spread out over a longer time frame.
Most comments on Mac Rumors says Apple monitor is terrible value.
However, I will got 2026 version soon to make sure, everything is working good with Apple Studio and colors are the same like in my old iMac
gdanmitchell wrote:
You did a pretty good job of listing pluses of the two-Apple monitor option. I want the excellent integration of the Apple monitor with the Apple OS and the high level of consistency between the two profiled monitors. When I moved to my current system, I got one Apple Studio monitor and planned to use my existing LG monitor as the second monitor, butI could never get them to match despite trying two profiling systems and doing a lot of research into how to make this work. I could never get the brightness the same and the color never matched well enough either. With two Apple monitors none of that is a problem.
Of course, getting two identical LG or other monitors would probably also allow more consistency among a pair of monitors, though with the loss of some of the Apple OS integration that you get with Apple monitors.
I know that this setup cost me more, but I was willing to pay more for the consistency… and we usually can keep monitors for longer than we keep CPUs, so the cost is spread out over a longer time frame.
"Value" can mean different things. To someone with a tight budget it might mean getting the best specs you can for the limited amount of money you have to spend. For someone with deeper pockets, it might start to include intangibles like seamlessness, level of annoyance, etc.
I knew the Studio Display has "bad" specs for the price when I bought it, but I also was annoyed with my Dell Ultrasharp every single day I used it. It was worth splurging on a monitor that perfectly integrates into my workflow, matches my Macbook Pro display very closely, and provides better viewing quality than anything I'd had before. Those intangibles were worth more in "value" than the extra money I spent.
RoamingScott wrote:
"Value" can mean different things. To someone with a tight budget it might mean getting the best specs you can for the limited amount of money you have to spend. For someone with deeper pockets, it might start to include intangibles like seamlessness, level of annoyance, etc.
I knew the Studio Display has "bad" specs for the price when I bought it, but I also was annoyed with my Dell Ultrasharp every single day I used it. It was worth splurging on a monitor that perfectly integrates into my workflow, matches my Macbook Pro display very closely, and provides better viewing quality than anything I'd had before. Those intangibles were worth more in "value" than the extra money I spent....Show more →
I asked because I’ve never had issue with a third party calibrated monitors, but if making the external display look like the one on the MacBook Pro, then I can say that this is something that is desirable and not something that I’ve experienced. In the Apple universe, only the old/larger Studio Display and the current XDR display will provide this experience…assuming that you are using a very recent MacBook Pro. I was interested in what other ways the display integrates. For example, I can specify the resolution of the external third party display, I can change the profile used. I can understand that Apple might include built in profiles for the Studio Displays and this isn’t true of third party monitors. For third party monitors you need to download and install profiles, or create them yourself. All that said, third party monitors that compete with the non-XDR Studio Display are only a few hundred dollars less than the Apple and in the scheme of things, probably not worth the savings. The XDR monitor is different. There really isn’t any competition. I just need to ask myself if HDR images will become a part of my workflow. For me, this would be the equivalent of mounting HDR monitors on the walls vs printing and publishing HDR photobooks for the iPad vs paying MPIX for 12”x12” inkjet albums. It would also involve replacing the SDR photo service, Flickr with an HDR site, like Zonerama. I posted a thread asking for experience in using Zonerama and no response.
bwcolor wrote:
I asked because I’ve never had issue with a third party calibrated monitors, but if making the external display look like the one on the MacBook Pro, then I can say that this is something that is desirable and not something that I’ve experienced. In the Apple universe, only the old/larger Studio Display and the current XDR display will provide this experience…assuming that you are using a very recent MacBook Pro. I was interested in what other ways the display integrates. For example, I can specify the resolution of the external third party display, I can change the profile used. I can understand that Apple might include built in profiles for the Studio Displays and this isn’t true of third party monitors. For third party monitors you need to download and install profiles, or create them yourself. All that said, third party monitors that compete with the non-XDR Studio Display are only a few hundred dollars less than the Apple and in the scheme of things, probably not worth the savings. The XDR monitor is different. There really isn’t any competition. I just need to ask myself if HDR images will become a part of my workflow. For me, this would be the equivalent of mounting HDR monitors on the walls vs printing and publishing HDR photobooks for the iPad vs paying MPIX for 12”x12” inkjet albums. It would also involve replacing the SDR photo service, Flickr with an HDR site, like Zonerama. I posted a thread asking for experience in using Zonerama and no response....Show more →
I don't think about and worry about this stuff to this level, I have bigger fish to fry
I set the MBP and Studio Display both to the Photography profile and move on to more important things. If you think you will have a need to edit HDR files in the future, then the XDR display becomes an absolute necessity if you want an Apple display. You could also simply get something like an iPad Pro or Macbook for that purpose at a fraction of the cost.
bwcolor wrote:
What benefit is there to better integration with the Apple OS vs available functions with a third party monitor?
Things like high quality (for a monitor) audio, access to the apple cameras for FaceTime and otherwise recording yourself, automatic monitor brightness adjustment options, access to monitor controls from inside the OS rather than having to punch buttons on the monitor and navigate its separate menus manually, etc,
I notice above mention of matching an Apple laptop display to the external monitor display. That is sort of where I ran into trouble with my old iMac and with my newer M4Pro computer. I could never perfectly (enough) match the color and brightness with the old LG monitor on the iMac, but it was close enough that I could use the LG just for tool sets and menus while doing image display/editing on the Mac monitor. The issue was even worse when I upgraded to a newer computer and got one Studio Display and was never able to get that particular LG to match the Studio Display. I replaced the LG with a second Studio Display (bought during one of the periodic Amazon sales), plugged it in, profiled both, and all was good.
(I'm currently using the Calibrate Display Pro HL to calibrate, and I've used a ColorMunki unit ine past. I liked that ColorMunki unit because it also let me profile printer papers. I _think_ I have finally gotten it working again after a recent software update, but I haven't tested it yet. May just have to do that this week, as I may be doing one print for a show on a different paper than what I usually use.)
Speaking for myself, while I'm able to deal with various complexities on monitors and other devices, I'll pay extra for something that just... works. And that's been my experience with my part of (yes, expensive) Apple studio monitors. (Despite what some will imply, these really are very good monitors with excellent image quality.)
I'm certainly not saying that third-party options don't make sense. They can with some of the very expensive third party monitors of very high quality... and you can get a non-Apple monitor (like those LG units) for much less money.
YMMV.
(I'm especially in the "just works" mode after spending a good part of my day sorting out why my Epson P9000 suddenly decided to stop printing files from my workstation... on a day when I have to finish up a print job to send off this week. Yeah, finally fixed it, but no fun.)
gdanmitchell wrote:
Things like high quality (for a monitor) audio, access to the apple cameras for FaceTime and otherwise recording yourself, automatic monitor brightness adjustment options, access to monitor controls from inside the OS rather than having to punch buttons on the monitor and navigate its separate menus manually, etc,
I notice above mention of matching an Apple laptop display to the external monitor display. That is sort of where I ran into trouble with my old iMac and with my newer M4Pro computer. I could never perfectly (enough) match the color and brightness with the old LG monitor on the iMac, but it was close enough that I could use the LG just for tool sets and menus while doing image display/editing on the Mac monitor. The issue was even worse when I upgraded to a newer computer and got one Studio Display and was never able to get that particular LG to match the Studio Display. I replaced the LG with a second Studio Display (bought during one of the periodic Amazon sales), plugged it in, profiled both, and all was good.
(I'm currently using the Calibrate Display Pro HL to calibrate, and I've used a ColorMunki unit ine past. I liked that ColorMunki unit because it also let me profile printer papers. I _think_ I have finally gotten it working again after a recent software update, but I haven't tested it yet. May just have to do that this week, as I may be doing one print for a show on a different paper than what I usually use.)
Speaking for myself, while I'm able to deal with various complexities on monitors and other devices, I'll pay extra for something that just... works. And that's been my experience with my part of (yes, expensive) Apple studio monitors. (Despite what some will imply, these really are very good monitors with excellent image quality.)
I'm certainly not saying that third-party options don't make sense. They can with some of the very expensive third party monitors of very high quality... and you can get a non-Apple monitor (like those LG units) for much less money.
YMMV.
(I'm especially in the "just works" mode after spending a good part of my day sorting out why my Epson P9000 suddenly decided to stop printing files from my workstation... on a day when I have to finish up a print job to send off this week. Yeah, finally fixed it, but no fun.)...Show more →
Everything above makes sense and is generally why people go with Apple vs Windows, or Linux. I’m happy with my 4K monitor and don’t need sound, or a camera. I was only looking at the XDR and editing HDR images, but as much as I like looking at HDR on my IPhone, IPad, or MacBook Pro, I can’t see it as a regular workflow and as Scott suggested above, I can use my MacBook Pro screen for HDR editing. I appreciate all of the posts this thread. Previously, I was unaware of the benefits of using Apple monitors.
bwcolor wrote:
Does such a monitor exist, where it arrives calibrated and stays calibrated?
The Apple ones do.
I have calibrated a Studio Display, one of the last 5k iMacs, a couple of XDR MBPs, and probably some other Apple product and rarely have they deviated over time. Not as much as some other monitors I've had, and frankly so little I just stopped doing it. And my Dell is the same; it has a built in colorimeter and by default calibrates on a schedule, but it too hardly varies at all. Good monitors these days are just good I guess.
I've used the older Studio Display and am trying the Studio Display XDR.
The regular Studio is quite nice, and not that much competition in 5k at 27". It's a fantastic sRGB/P3 display, and plays well with Apple stuff. Not the greatest camera, OK speakers. It actually can do about a full stop of HDR; it's definitely worth it for the first one IMHO...if you care about dynamic range. But it IS pricey, and I often advise folks to maybe look at the MBP 16" instead.
The Studio XDR I'm trying is a much better deal. Yeah, it would be sort of a waste if you don't need display HDR for stills or video. But it's basically not an extensive computer monitor, more like a budget reference monitor, as was the older 6k XDR. The fact that it's also a full powered Thunderbolt port is really nice; those aren't the cheapest either.
And the brightness...oh my. I was just editing some beach shots, super high contrast with low sun, lots of glare, and very dark sections. In HDR I could recover some very nice highlights of really bright sand grains, little sparkles all over, much more realistic to the scene, which looks much more flat in SDR with the lower DR. Looks more like what I'll be able to show on a recent phone display.
Seems like many in this thread are happy with Apple Studio Displays, despite the price. I'm considering a refurbished one from Apple. I've had good experiences with refurbished Mac Pro towers in past.
That’s how I got both my Mac studio and studio display, couldn’t be happier with either.
Kascade7 wrote:
Seems like many in this thread are happy with Apple Studio Displays, despite the price. I'm considering a refurbished one from Apple. I've had good experiences with refurbished Mac Pro towers in past.
