iMac with Retina Display

<p>Will this be as great for photography as it sounds? Should I move to the Dark Side?</p>

<p>I have a Samsung 28" UHD / 4K screen and love it.<br>

Being 40+ I confess: I am near sighted, popping out my contact lenses and still a tad challenged with the small font rendering on it. I do <em>need</em> my 10" webbook to enjoy youtube videos now and wish I had still a 24" HD screen running to do my online shopping.<br>

But for photography I believe 4k UHD displays are the best that could happen to safe the rainforest. - Its great to meet (allmost) all these Megapixels in person and I am still trying to figure out if a SRA3 color laser print done at work holds more pixels than my screen. <br>

I never used any iMac, but I believe it will be the perfect digital picture frame if its available with Retina display. - Can you add a 2nd screen with your photoshop tool trays to it? Anyhow the color rendering of iMacs has a good reputation, that fact alone makes it tempting to go for one.</p>

<p>Depends on your eyes.</p>

<p>Mine can't tell much difference between a retina and non-retina screen for normal computing at normal viewing distances. So when I got a new MBP last year I got a normal screen, because I still wanted firewire and an optical drive.</p>

<p>Go see one and see!</p>

<p>There are a bit two questions; a good quality 5k screen: yes, pretty great. I have some doubts whether it is a big advantage over 4k, though (but given how Apple implements the HiDPI scaling, jumping to 5k makes sense). Apple usually uses really good LCD panels, and no reason to doubt they'll do so for this model. The price isn't bad either. But - is it enough of an advantage of 4k really? I'd have to see, but I think both are beyond what my eyes can do, at least for 27-28" screens. Second: would I want an all-in-one desktop, and/or OSX? Those are personal considerations. For me: no all in one, and OS X isn't my cup of tea at all. So, I'd be searching for a good quality 4k screen instead, if it wasn't for the fact that I am perfectly happy with my current 16:10 screen.<br>

For those prefering OS X, and OK with an all-in-one: it looks to be a really sweet piece. Price is really reasonable considering what you get, specs are solid, and I do not really doubt the screen will be pretty spectacular.</p>

<p>One thing that "scared" me though: the screen in that new iMac has a higher resolution than my DSLR. I'd be pixelpeeping all the time - aaaargh!</p>

<p>Hi Dave<br>

I am on a Mac yet not for performance of display technology.<br>

I am sure it is a nice display yet here are a few things to check out.<br>

1) Past displays of Apple on the iMac have all been sRGB color gamut. I have not hear that the new iMac 5K is wide gamut so if that is what you want, better be sure it is.<br>

2) 24 bit vs 30 bit color depth. If you want 10 bit per channel (possible on Win 7 and Win 8 if your entire graphics display path is alos 30 bit yet it is my understanding you can only hav 24 bit on Mac OS independent of what display you hook up.<br>

3) You should always check the dispalys in person to make sure that it meets your needs. In particular the screen glossiness. The iMacs are pretty good yet they are not matte if that is what you want.<br>

Personally I would not jump OSes lightly just because there are transitions costs involved (not all software transfers to the Mac without cost even though it is not an issue with the Adobe subscription plan<br>

Hope the information is helpful.</p>

<p>The simple 2560x1440 27" screen on the traditional iMac by itself is great. The advantage of the so-called "5K" on the new iMac is that it lets you edit <strong><em>full-sized 4K video</em></strong>, and still have lots of real estate for the program menus and bars.<br /> I would think that the "need" for it for still photographic work is somewhat less.<br /> John's 'warnings' not withstanding, this one looks really good.</p>

<p>This is doing what Apple does better than anyone else:<br /> <strong>Apple Releases Brief, Fleeting Moment Of Excitement</strong> <br /> [<a href="http://www.theonion.com/articles/apple-releases-brief-fleeting-moment-of-excitement,36888/">Onion headline</a>]</p>

<p>But if you want to watch a cat video on YouTube, it's gonna be really tiny!</p>

<p>I hope an early adopter posts here so we can see how they get on. It may be me.....</p>

<p>Agreed on the youtube videos. - I bought a used 10" webbook that displays them more impressively than the big(screened) desktop.<br>

I think that iMac is kind of a one trick pony (since it probably won't allow serious gaming either). But still: what else could run an eternal slideshow of all your keepers and photo.net in a column next to that + play a favorite web radio? - Looking at it that way the 5K iMac seems decent home entertainment and encouraging to go out to burn CMOSes & CCDs further.<br>

When I wrote my first reply I wasn't aware of the bigger than 4K screen which seems ideal for pixelpeeping + something else too.<br>

I won't jump to buy one. - A huge investment in a according to my understanding not user service friendly device thats meant to break although it looks "probably still nice to have 12 years from now". - I'd be happier if I could easily swap my old laptop's late mainboard battery. </p>

<p>You can always zoom in while reading text, haha I do that all the time!</p>

<p>The new iMac with Retina display<br>

Pros: Beautiful, very high resolution display.<br>

Cons: It's not a wide gamut display and cannot be used as, or with, a second display. </p>

 

<p>Wow, you can't hook up a second display? Is that true of any of the MacBook Pros with Retina?<br>

Count me out!</p>

<p>Hi Carl and Peter<br>

I believe it can support a second display based on their published spec in the link below and here is a snippet:</p>

<h3>Video Support and Camera</h3>

<ul>

<li>FaceTime HD camera</li>

<li>Simultaneously supports full native resolution on the built-in display and up to 3840 by 2160 pixels on an external display</li>

<li>Support for extended desktop and video mirroring modes</li>

</ul>

<p>http://support.apple.com/kb/SP707<br>

If there is information that contradicts Apples spec it would be helpful to provide a link or info that contradicts what they are telling the public. If there is a problem it would be good to know yet Apple says "yes it can."</p>

 

Don't take my word for it, ask Apple. Or a simple Google search ought to convince you.

>>> Don't take my word for it, ask Apple.<p>

 

Apple:

<center>

.<br>

<img src= "http://www.citysnaps.net/2014%20Photos/iMac%20Retina.jpg"><BR>

.<P>

</center>

www.macrumors.com/2014/10/17/retina-5k-imac-external-display-no/

>>> <B>Carl:</b> "Cons: It's not a wide gamut display and cannot be used as, <B>or with</B>, a second display."<P>

 

The Retina iMac *can* be used *with* an external display, as John W and I pointed out, each using different Apple sources. <P>

 

You did say "ask Apple". We did...

But you didn't ask, you just posted the same specs that are talking about an HDTV.

>>> But you didn't ask, you just posted the same specs that are talking about an HDTV.<P>

 

No need to go to the Apple store and ask a retail employee. Apple specs, saying you can use it *with* an

3,480 x 2,160 external display works for me. Where was HDTV even mentioned in the screen shot I

posted? What does HDTV have to do with using an external display with the Retina iMac?<P>

 

In that same Apple screenshot I posted, what do you think <B>"Support for extended desktop and video mirroring modes"</B> means?<P>

 

Are you suggesting Apple are not being truthful?

<blockquote>

<p>Wow, you can't hook up a second display? Is that true of any of the MacBook Pros with Retina?<br />Count me out!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You are listening to simply wrong information. I have a mbp retina and use it with an external monitor all the time. Its just false. </p>

<p>It won't act as a second display, and cannot use another 5k or 4k display as a second display. It can use Sorry about the confusion. </p>

<p>I'm a professional printer, and scanner operator. I have seen the recent monitor choices and they are all good. I think Apple moving to the 5k mark is a good thing. Each new thing that Tim Cook has put out has had exceptional quality. You may like them or not, but a look at the new iPad Air2's shows that the attention to detail is terrific. The new Yosemite OS is stunningly beautiful. There are many reasons to upgrade if you happen to like macs. I am waiting for this screen to be offered as a separate screen that I can plug in to a Mac Pro. Then I will dump my way-too-expensive 27" Eizo like hot potato. It's delaminating and I have to send it back to the factory. It comes with a 5-year warranty, but apparently doesn't cover the monitor turning to s__t.</p>

<p>Despite my upset with Eizo, it is my sincere opinion that color management is simply not all its cracked up to be. Sure, its good to calibrate your screen so that there aren't any color casts, but the major factor in figuring whether your monitor is going to match a print is your eyes. The only calibrator for them is a print, and consistent printing over time.</p>

<p>Numerous people told me that it would be so much better for my totally managed workflow, and so I went for it, but it hasn't turned out that way at all. Not $3000 worth. I'd like to get an Apple monitor, it would have an integrated camera, which is useful for all the video conferencing I do... at the moment I am using a Logitech, and it is truly horrible. </p>