Peter571

Presently, I use a 2k monitor for my photo editing. I need a new monitor and am wondering whether a 4k monitor would be better than a new 2k monitor. I shoot in raw, use a Nikon D500 and Nikon D850 and all my editing is done in DXO Photolab. Most of my photos are birds, animals, insects, flowers, landscapes and sometimes people. I would be interested hearing from anybody that uses a 4k monitor for editing: the higher resolution experience, the increased demand on your video card and CPU (performance) or any other issues or benefits. I have an I7 12th generation CPU, 32 Gb ram and a Radion 1660Ti video card with 6 Gb vram. Thanks for any feedback.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1425544-REG/eizo_cg319x_4k_bk_31_1_dci_4k_wide_screen.html
--Bob

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Slight contrast to my ≈$120 ACER and HP monitors from Best Buy and Walmart.

Depends on one's needs/perceptions/desires I suppose.

BebuLamar

I would say 4k is better than 2K as most of our images are more than 4K. But it's more important to have a monitor with good color rendition than good resolution. If you have to compromise due to cost then color rendition should take priority.

Peter571

I agree. My present monitor is 10 bit, and 100% sRGB capable. Any monitor I would buy would also have similar color capabilities. My main concern is performance and resolution affects.

Bill_de Loc: US

You really need two, so that when editing the image can take advantage of the full 31 inch screen. Otherwise, just shoot and edit on your cell phone which should do just as well.





---

drsdayton Loc: Dayton, Ohio

BenQ.

Great monitor w/ exceptional customer service.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

I use a 4K UHD (3840 x 2160) LG 27UP850-W 27” IPS Monitor. It connects directly to my M1 MacBook Air via USB-C, and charges the computer whenever connected. (It has two HDMI ports and a DisplayPort, too, but will not charge the laptop via those standards.)

The MacBook Air supports up to one 6K external monitor, so it has NO problem running the 4K LG. The picture is great — most importantly, I calibrate and profile both the laptop monitor and the LG monitor to match very closely, since both have a P3 color gamut. I can adjust color with confidence that it is reasonably accurate.

I got 4K primarily because I make 4K videos. Most of the time, when NOT editing video, the resolution is set a bit lower so that text is more readable.

A primary reason the M1 series Macs have no issues with monitor support is that the entire amount of memory in the computer is shared between the CPU cores, the GPU cores, and the Neural Engine cores. There is no memory redundancy requiring movement of data from a graphics card to main memory and back (as with Intel Macs and PCs). That speeds up the entire system.

Hereford Loc: Palm Coast, FL

This is a subject I find extremely puzzling. I don't currently use a separate monitor because I use a 5K 27" iMac. I need to update the iMac soon and I am beginning to have doubts that Apple will come out with a new 27" iMac with the M2 SoC, and I may be forced into a Mac mini or Studio with a separate monitor. That will be very expensive.

On a previous post some Hogger's were suggesting a lesser resolution monitor is just as good or better than a 5K monitor. So I am looking for some real scientific evidence to prove that a 5K monitor is no better than a lesser resolution monitor. I have been in the computer and electronics business all my life and find that concept extremely troubling, and can't get my arms around that one.

greenwork Loc: Southwest Florida

Thanks. For some reason this information has been difficult to find. I've been very happy with my Thunderbolt 27" & 2015 MacBook Pro. Getting ready to jump to the M series chip and trying to understand any real world advantage to going 5K.

BebuLamar

Does Apple have a 5K or more resolution monitor for the mini or Studio?

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

What you get with a 5K 27" screen is more pixel real estate. Everything gets a little smaller. But you see "more of the map."

The visual acuity of the user limits perceivable sharpness and detail. So if you're already at the average human "extinction resolution" (about 120 PPI at a 27" viewing distance, assuming 1X to 1.5X the diagonal of any picture is the standard viewing range), the additional pixels are ONLY about "graphics real estate," and not a better technical image quality.

A 4K monitor viewed at 27" has around 160 PPI, and a 5K monitor viewed at 27" has around 200 PPI. So with either 4K or 5K, a 27" monitor used at arm's length will have a very clear picture. Could you see a quality difference in a blind test comparison? I can't. But everything just gets smaller at 5K, and you wind up reducing resolution so you can read the text.

5K IS better for video editing applications, because the software can display more tool palettes and controls, and/or a larger image of the video being edited.

As for the larger iMac on Apple Silicon, the rumor mill says it is still coming, based on supply chain leaks, but of course, we don't know when because Apple doesn't comment on future products. Supposedly, TSMC's 3nm chip fabrication process will be used for the M2 Pro and M2 Max SOCs, and for the M3 family. Speculation is that Apple is waiting for 3nm to be a reality before updating the Mac mini and the larger iMac.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

Several, starting with the Mac Studio monitor and going up in quality and price from there. You can check them on the Apple site. Best of luck.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Yes. They make a 5K Studio Display and a 6K Pro Display XDR, both of which are extremely elegant, excellent, accurate, EXPENSIVE monitors. Either of them will work with ALL of the Apple Silicon Macs.

One caveat — the base M1 and M2 SOCs support just ONE external display on 13" laptops and the 24" iMac, and two displays for the Mac mini. If you use a Mac with the M1 Pro, M1 Max, or M1 Ultra, you can attach more than one external monitor/display (how many varies with the model).

Orphoto Loc: Oregon

Peter. I upgraded from 2k to 4k earlier the spring and found it a pleasant change. The increased resolution did make images appear sharper.

I echo the others in suggesting a high fidelity color reproduction as being really important along with strong dynamic range.

As to the specs for the driving equipment, yours is better than mine. 8th Gen. I7 w/32 GB Ram. For me a 4GB 1050i video card which is a few years old and hardly cutting edge by today's standards does just fine. No apparent issues relating to the viewing experience.

My camera gear is D850 with higher quality Nikon & Zeiss prime lenses. Nearly always shot on sturdy tripod with impeccable technique. The new monitor rewards those efforts. For what it's worth I found a barely used Dell UP2718Q for $600.