A good, less expensive alternative to the $1599 5K Retina Apple Studio Display?

[David Nahmani]

Since Apple hasn't updated the 27" iMac and I feel like I can't really justify the $1599 for an Apple Studio Display, I'm exploring my options for a less expensive 3rd party 27" 4K monitor that wlll play nicely with the Mac. Do any of you have experiences with a good quality monitor? Perhaps from Dell, Samsung, LG, BenQ...? 

[fisherking]

see what david says, he's the best at this OH WAIT.

i'm keeping an eye on the WWDC in june, just in case... but was considering the mac studio and a samsung monitor. personally, samsung, LG, dell... all good. most 'name brand' monitors are pretty great; worth, as usual, checking out on amazon.

i like to avoid the things i don't need (built-in speakers), and focus on what i do need (refresh rate, connections, minimal bezels, etc).

anyway, let's see what other members of our stellar community suggest.........

[MikeRobinson]

You can get a USB-C to DPMI converter (about $25) and plug almost any sort of display into your Mac and it will probably do the right thing.  I would think about a perfectly-calibrated Studio Display only if I was doing motion-picture or publication work which demanded absolute color fidelity – which this device will give you.  If you "simply want to get a second, bigger monitor," there are plenty of relatively inexpensive options which will work just fine with your Mac.

Edited May 3, 2022 by MikeRobinson

[jonljacobi]

I don't know about you, but I'm addicted to high DPI/Retina. The only retina-like alternatives that I'm aware of are the 24-inch LG Ultrafine 24MD4KL-B and its 27-inch 5K cousin the 27MD5KL-B. They're $700 and $1350 new, but you can sometimes find them for a lot less used. Note that both require Thunderbolt 3 and the larger one only works at full resolution with Macs that support dual DP over thunderbolt. If I knew for sure which those were, I'd tell you.

This is the same conundrum I'm facing if I decide to get a Mac Studio. Apple really should offer a cheaper option. Or a more powerful Apple Silicon iMac.

[jonljacobi]

Samsung's M8 is getting a lot of attention recently, but it's 32-inch.

[David Nahmani]

On 5/4/2022 at 3:31 AM, jonljacobi said:

The only retina-like alternatives that I'm aware of are the 24-inch LG Ultrafine 24MD4KL-B and its 27-inch 5K cousin the 27MD5KL-B.

Thanks a lot. I wasn't aware of those two models. I'll consider the 27" but it's on the pricey side, obviously because it's a 5K monitor. Not a fan of the thick upper bezel on that monitor, but I suppose it's there so they could fit the webcam. 

Otherwise a couple of solid contenders I've considered in a lesser price range than the 5K LG although they're only 4K monitors are: 

• The BenQ PD2725U
• The Dell Ultrasharp U2723QE

I like the design of both monitors because of the thin bezels, and they're height adjustable. There's one reviewer of the Dell on Amazon that complains about resolution scaling, which does scare me a bit when purchasing a non-Apple monitor. 

I just wish Apple offered a decently priced height-adjustable 27" display. 

[David Nahmani]

I ended up settling on a less expensive monitor that is absolutely stunning, tiny bezels, no visible branding, iMac-look-alike, and so far I'm loving it. The monitor is the 4K HUAWEI MateView 28.2", however I'm not sure if it's available in the United States? It's slightly taller than a 27" monitor and is built just like an iMac. Loving it. 

[fisherking]

looks great! but yeah... not available in the US (so, if you could pick up a second one and send it to me... that would be a good move)...

[David Nahmani]

Only problems with these 3rd party monitors and a mac is the scaling.. native resolution makes everything look HUGE here so I've scaled it down but now it's a bit small... I'll have to tinker with it. 

[jonljacobi]

Yeah, I notice this even with the 24-inch LG Ultrafine. It's "only" 4K, not 4.5K like the iMac 24. Doesn't bother me much, but it is noticeable. Remember to hold option when you select Scaled. I don't know if the list is different from the larger/smaller but at least you can see the numbers.

[fisherking]

On 5/16/2022 at 5:29 AM, David Nahmani said:

Only problems with these 3rd party monitors and a mac is the scaling.. native resolution makes everything look HUGE here so I've scaled it down but now it's a bit small... I'll have to tinker with it. 

you can, at least, experiment with text and icon sizes in the Finder (& of course, resize plugins etc in logic).

i run both my macs with more space; logic is great on my 21" imac (altho one waves plugin is nearly impossible to read numbers on..)

[David Nahmani]

I ended up finding the scaling setting that works just fine to display my screen with the same zoom level than an iMac 27" does: 

[MikeRobinson]

Apple's big monitors are calibrated, just like its computer displays are.  And, if you are doing motion-picture work, or printing-industry "pre-flights," that's exactly what you require and will pay for.  If you're doing final-approval for a magazine cover before a million copies of it are printed, "these things matter."

If you walk into a Mac retail store, one thing that you may not immediately notice is that e-v-e-r-y-t-h-i-n-g in the store ... every Mac, every iPad or iPhone ... looks e-x-a-c-t-l-y the same.

Now, go into a Wal-Mart and look at the PCs.  Look also at the big-screen televisions.  Nothing looks the same.  Color-casts going this way and that, color-depth all over the map.  Sure, you can get used to anything once you get used to it, but it's not standardized.

If you simply need "a nice external monitor that works well with your Mac," that's very easy and not very expensive.  But if you require calibration, you're going to pony up some cash ... and be perfectly willing to do so.  (That's also why, if you see a computer on a movie set, it's gonna be a Mac.)

Edited May 17, 2022 by MikeRobinson

[space]

On 5/13/2022 at 9:17 PM, David Nahmani said:

I ended up settling on a less expensive monitor that is absolutely stunning, tiny bezels, no visible branding, iMac-look-alike, and so far I'm loving it. The monitor is the 4K HUAWEI MateView 28.2", however I'm not sure if it's available in the United States? It's slightly taller than a 27" monitor and is built just like an iMac. Loving it. 

Hi David, how do you find the MateView? What’s the scaling like? Would you recommend it? Is it your main monitor?

Do you connect it via USB C?

I’m looking for a monitor right now for my Mac Studio, there’s a lot of to choose from, I’ve read a lot about how macOS scales.  Not sure what to go for.

The Studio Display looks amazing but is expensive especially when I’m only really going to be using Logic.

Edited July 20, 2022 by space

[David Nahmani]

I love it! 

On 7/21/2022 at 12:38 AM, space said:

Hi David, how do you find the MateView? What’s the scaling like? Would you recommend it? Is it your main monitor?

Yes, it's my main monitor and I would definitely recommend it. The scaling is fine. I've set mine to the second scaling setting (see below) and I get the same view as an iMac 27" retina display, with a little more added height. 

Yes, USB-C. 

I was concerned with scaling before too, but honestly it's not an issue. The speaker is pretty bad but I don't use it, so I don't mind. 

[FLH3]

Regarding the definition setting on various monitors I use Display Menu (free version). With that you can adjust the resolution on each of your displays. In y case the 27'' of my iMac pro and a 27'' samsung. All of them are usualy set at 2560x1440.

Actualy I installed this app in order to quickly set the additional monitor to a coarse resolution when I have to edit things in Kontakt (which,as everybody knows, is a pain in the back with its GUI from the 90s)

Edited July 22, 2022 by FLH3

[David Nahmani]

BTW I forgot to attach the screen capture in my previous post... here it is: 

[Dewdman42]

Its not less expensive, but check this one out:  https://www.lg.com/us/monitors/lg-40wp95c-w

[Dewdman42]

Regarding custom resolutions...I have a lot to say on this topic.  

I highly recommend SwitchResX as a commercial app for creating and switching between custom resolutions beyond what Apple provides automatically.  I highly recommend this app in order to make full use of HiDPI technology and much more optimal scaling options.  Apple's default Control panel only provides a few scaled resolutions.  They call them "scaled", but internally they are actually HiDPI scaled resolutions...which is a good thing, but not obvious from the labeling.  

My custom resolutions with my 32" LG monitor look like this:

Note that that PPI values I calculated above are based on my 32" monitor, they would be different for a smaller 27" monitor.  You can use a web calculator such as this one to calculate the effective software canvas PPI at various different resolutions:

https://www.sven.de/dpi/

Basically the ideal golden range of PPI values that are about right for working with your eyes around 2-3 feet away from the monitor are going to be in the range of 100-110dpi (based on the scaled resolution, not the native resolution).

With HiDPI scaling, which I highly recommend everyone use nearly always, especially on a 27" 4k monitor; then you have to juggle and balance a couple of things to find the ideal resolutions to use:

1. Readable fonts, in the golden range of 100-110ppi (@typical desktop viewing distance)
2. As much screen real estate as possible
3. HiDPI scaling as close as possible to the gorgeous 1920x1080 resolution Apple labels as "default"

Readable Fonts

MacOS and the way software is created all sizes their guis to a sort of standardized sizing of everything and basically in the range of 100-110ppi is the range that software makers are expecting you to be running your monitor.  Fonts especially are sized according to that expectation.  The classic 30" Apple Cinema Display which many at the time regarded as just "perfect" had a native resolution of 100ppi.  The fonts were arguably slightly larger then perfectly optimal, but the point is, that this size is about what software makers expect you to be using.  So the OS fonts, the software fonts...when not scalable by the app, will make assumptions that you are using a display around that size.  Stated simply, an effective scaled resolution that results in 100-110ppi will give you font sizing that you can sit at a computer 2-3 feet away from your eyes for long hours and read all the fonts without strain, and also not so big as to be wasting screen real estate.  Just right.  Younger people may claim they can use slightly smaller fonts, which would mean slightly larger PPI values.  The largest I can do, and not for all day, is around 117ppi.

As much Real Estate as possible.

Everyone wants more land.  More windows, see the whole page of a document, etc..  So in whatever we do, we are trying to balance the requirement of readable font sizes, clear scaling....and getting as much real estate as we can out of whatever sized monitor we have.

Scaling Quality

HiDPI is tech I won't belabor to explain now, but both Macs and PC's have it.  Apple is by default scaling your 4k display to the "default" resolution of 1920x1080 using HiDPI technology under the covers.  In general HiDPI is great.  It looks gorgeous.  It is 1/2 the resolution of the full native 4k resolution.  its actually 1/4 the number of pixels.  That's why it looks beautiful is because under the covers Apple uses all the in-between pixels to fill in the lines and curves, making it look much nicer.  Old school non-HIDPI scaling would simply look terrible.  Try it and see what I mean (see below).  In general use HiDPI.

However 1920x1080 is just not enough real estate and you will probably feel the fonts are bigger then they really need to be, no matter how gorgeous it looks at the 2:1 HiDPI scaling.  So..you can compromise and choose the next option provided by Apple, which is 2560x1440.  This still looks pretty darn good, due to HiDPI, even though its not perfect 2:1 scaling, its still filling in some of the curves, its not as perfect but still very acceptable.  On a 27" monitor I would argue that is quite likely the resolution you will want to use in terms of font sizing.  For my 32" monitor the fonts are still too big and I feel compelled to scale it even less (getting closer to native resolution).   But as you scale it less and less, further way from 2:1 scaling, HiDPI starts to not look quite so gorgeous.  Its still generally an improvement until you get to a certain point then its about the same as non-HiDPI scaling...at which point you might as well use non-HiDPI in order to use less computer resources.  But I personally find that by then the fonts are too small anyway.

Apple Control Panel

Apple's control panel is quite limited and only provides a few resolutions to choose.  They are all HiDPI scaling from this view.

what you will notice is that it has first the "default" resolution which is typically 1920x1080 (for 4k monitors), which is half the resolution of full native.   That looks awesome, but for me its just not enough screen real estate of what is possible with a 32" monitor.  Might be ok for 27".  

If you hover your mouse over the next two icons to the right it will say 2560x1440, or 3200x1800, choose one or the other.  That's fine, but honestly as you can see from my SwitchResX list above, the best golden range of resolutions, with a 32" monitor; are actually all the resolutions in between those two.  Apple's control panel doesn't provide any of them.  Trying to balance all of the points I mentioned earlier..I can get closer to the golden range of font sizes..with as much real estate as possible and still with reasonable HiDPI scaling......by having more HiDPI resolutions to choose from.  

There are more hidden resolutions to choose in the Apple control panel, if you hold down the OPTION key while clicking on the "scaled" radio button, the control panel will change to the following layout and if you check the "Show All Resolutions" checkbox...you will see both HiDPI and non-HIDPI scaling options.  The non-HiDPI scaling options are labeled as "low resolution"

But even here you can see that Apple did not provide all the resolution options I want..  It jumps from 2560 to 3200 with nothing in between...just the option to choose between HiDPI or old school non-HiDPI low resolution scaling.  And frankly I don't see a point, especially with 27" monitor, to ever use low resolution scaling.  Only if you are using an app that doesn't support retina high resolution displays.

SwitchResX is great because you can define as many custom resolutions as you want, with or without HiDPI, and they work perfectly.  They don't show up in Apple's control panel, but SwitchResX has excellent menubar app to choose whichever you want.

27 inch monitor vs 32" monitor

A 27" monitor will arguably need to use smaller resolutions then what I typically use on my 32" in order to meet criteria #1 above, be able to read the fonts.  A 27" inch monitor at 2560 is actually in the golden range at 109ppi...which is same size fonts as my 32" is at around 3000 across.  But I would expect a 27" to be mostly useless with 3200 pixels across.  You could probably scale it down a bit, maybe up to about 2800 across horizontally will be about as small as you would want to go with font sizes (equivalent to my 32" at 3200 across).  And if your eyes are tired, you might not want to drop all the way down to 1920x1080 "default", with SwitchResX you could get something like 2200 pixels across..and it will be the same sized fonts as my 32" at 2560...quite readable when you're tired...with decent HiDPI scaling.

Bottom line, the optimal range for a 27" monitor is probably various resolutions between around 2200 across and 2800 across.  That makes the built in 2560 to be the best one...or with SwitchResX you can add a few more...use 2800 across until your eyes get tired and then drop down to something lower like 2200 across if and when your eyes are tired...and really only use 1920 across when you want to trip out on the gorgeous graphics of full 2:1 HiDPI scaling.

SwitchResX let's you create these custom resolutions easily and then select them on a whim.  I highly recommend.  it has made my 4k 32" an absolute joy to use.  Its one reason I like that 40" ultra-wide I mentioned in my previous post, I would have all these HiDPI modes available for custom resolutions to be "just right" according to my mood and needs..but with even more real estate.  I don't have TB4 yet though..so it will have to wait for me.  All the other 38" Ultrawide monitors have much lower native resolution and basically should not use HiDPI scaling or any scaling of any kind, they are intended to run at one and only one native resolution of whatever they are.  Much like the old Classic Apple Cinema Display was..only bigger.  I'm still tempted for one of those, but you definitely see the pixels and have no ability to scale their resolution on a  whim, so I'm holding out with 32" 4k until I have a higher powered computer.