or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › In lieu of a Retina Thunderbolt Display, Apple now selling 4K IGZO Sharp LED monitor
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

In lieu of a Retina Thunderbolt Display, Apple now selling 4K IGZO Sharp LED monitor - Page 3

post #81 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by robbiuno View Post

Isn't 800:1 contrast a bit low for such a mighty screen?
Yes. These numbers should be going up and they aren't. CRT contrast ratio kills LCD. But CRT is blurry, irregular around the entire surface area, and a massive waste in desktop space (I'm still using a 21" CRT). Still, when will LCD displays actually start to improve their color and contrary ratio? Must I spend $6000 on a medical display?? I can't spend twice as much on a display as on a computer.

I'll probably be using my CRT on a damn Mac Pro at this rate...
Edited by dysamoria - 12/7/13 at 11:59am
post #82 of 110

This Sharp monitor supports 60Hz refresh, so it's somewhat future-proof, but the latest MBP Retina supports 4K only up to 30Hz. The Mac Pro Tech Specs say HDMI 1.4, which is capable of 4K also only up to 30 Hz. (To get 60 Hz refresh at 4K over a single HDMI port, you would need HDMI 2.0 compliance, which neither the Mac Pro nor the Sharp monitor support.) It's possible that the Mac Pro with the Sharp will support 4K at 60Hz using dual-link HDMI, each link providing 1920x2160 at 60Hz, but we won't know until we see a Mac Pro. Yes, there is noticable motion blur at 30 Hz.

 

The 2nd Generation Sonnet Echo Express IIID Thunderbolt PCIe Expansion Chassis is significantly quieter than the 1st Gen–quiet enough to be used in a recording studio according to an editor who uses one.

post #83 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Ahead of this month's debut of the revamped Mac Pro desktop, which can drive up to three 4K displays, Apple is selling a new 4K "Ultra HD" 32-inch LED IGZO monitor from manufacturer Sharp in its online store.
 
Sharp



The Sharp PN-K321 4K monitor is currently available in various Apple online stores across Europe for 3,999 euros. It's also found in the U.K. store, but is not yet available in the U.S.

Can we get an update of this? I checked your link and the Sharp isn't on the Norway Apple Store. I also check the German and UK stores and it isn't there either. I can see your screen shot but unless it's the item that has the constant spinning whatever you call it, it isn't there.

post #84 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysamoria View Post


Yes. These numbers should be going up and they aren't. CRT contrast ratio kills LCD. But CRT is blurry, irregular around the entire surface area, and a massive waste in desktop space (I'm still using a 21" CRT). Still, when will LCD displays actually start to improve their color and contrary ratio? Must I spend $6000 on a medical display?? I can't spend twice as much on a display as on a computer.

I'll probably be using my CRT on a damn Mac Pro at this rate...


How is that thing still running? Do keep in mind medical displays aren't always appropriate for general use.

post #85 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysamoria View Post

CRT contrast ratio kills LCD. But CRT is blurry, irregular around the entire surface area, and a massive waste in desktop space (I'm still using a 21" CRT). Still, when will LCD displays actually start to improve their color and contrary ratio? Must I spend $6000 on a medical display?? I can't spend twice as much on a display as on a computer.

I'll probably be using my CRT on a damn Mac Pro at this rate...

CRTs generate black by turning off the electron gun so they'll always have higher ratios than LCDs illuminated by a backlight. OLED on the other hand turns pixels off so that'll give you CRT-like quality:

http://www.trustedreviews.com/opinions/trusted-reviews-visits-sony-in-japan_Page-2

"LCD can only get down to 0.1 candelas of brightness, and CRT technology can only get down to 0.01, OLED can get right down to 0.0001 - which is basically as black as black can get in display terms.

Sony's OLED screens should be able to significantly outperform their CRT and LCD rivals in terms of dynamic range. For while typical LCD and CRT monitors enjoy native contrast ratios of around 1000:1 and 40,000:1 respectively, Sony's OLED screens deliver a claimed 1,000,000:1."

They are currently expensive - Sony had a $9k 56" 4K OLED TV on show and a 30" at one point:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nlqze5uNWv8

I'm not sure what happened to those. The 30" one might make a nice computer monitor. I don't think it's all that big of a deal. The black-levels on modern displays are pretty good. Put a Dell Ultrasharp next to the CRT instead of obsessing over the spec and you won't look back.
Quote:
Originally Posted by socalart 
It's possible that the Mac Pro with the Sharp will support 4K at 60Hz using dual-link HDMI, each link providing 1920x2160 at 60Hz, but we won't know until we see a Mac Pro. Yes, there is noticable motion blur at 30 Hz.

Maybe it'll be possible to put out half via Thunderbolt to HDMI, the other half via HDMI and then merge them. There was a test here where they came across the 30Hz problem:

http://blogs.windows.com/windows/b/extremewindows/archive/2013/07/25/pushing-the-12k-pc-gaming-boundary-at-1-5-billion-pixels-per-second.aspx

They said they managed it over displayport though with the right driver support.
post #86 of 110
Originally Posted by mrial View Post
What if they start making monitors with a wider width?  Are you going to call 6K pixel monitor with 2K lines of resolution a 2K monitor?

 

They won’t; problem solved. :lol:


Rather the same thing will happen as has always happened: they’ll delineate displays of those categories. It’ll say “2.39:1 2K display” or “16:9 2K display” and then list the actual #x# resolution.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #87 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Apple’s offering will be $3,499; just wait.
I am assuming apple is waiting till the tech is cheap enough, and all there devices support it.
post #88 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by socalart View Post
 

This Sharp monitor supports 60Hz refresh, so it's somewhat future-proof, but the latest MBP Retina supports 4K only up to 30Hz. The Mac Pro Tech Specs say HDMI 1.4, which is capable of 4K also only up to 30 Hz. (To get 60 Hz refresh at 4K over a single HDMI port, you would need HDMI 2.0 compliance, which neither the Mac Pro nor the Sharp monitor support.) It's possible that the Mac Pro with the Sharp will support 4K at 60Hz using dual-link HDMI, each link providing 1920x2160 at 60Hz, but we won't know until we see a Mac Pro. Yes, there is noticable motion blur at 30 Hz.

 

The 2nd Generation Sonnet Echo Express IIID Thunderbolt PCIe Expansion Chassis is significantly quieter than the 1st Gen–quiet enough to be used in a recording studio according to an editor who uses one.

A guy on this thread claims to have got an MBP Retina 2013 producing 4K@60Hz out the Thunderbolt 2 port, by installing Windows 8.1

https://discussions.apple.com/thread/5475430

post #89 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by socalart View Post
 

This Sharp monitor supports 60Hz refresh, so it's somewhat future-proof, but the latest MBP Retina supports 4K only up to 30Hz. The Mac Pro Tech Specs say HDMI 1.4, which is capable of 4K also only up to 30 Hz. (To get 60 Hz refresh at 4K over a single HDMI port, you would need HDMI 2.0 compliance, which neither the Mac Pro nor the Sharp monitor support.) It's possible that the Mac Pro with the Sharp will support 4K at 60Hz using dual-link HDMI, each link providing 1920x2160 at 60Hz, but we won't know until we see a Mac Pro. Yes, there is noticable motion blur at 30 Hz.

 

The 2nd Generation Sonnet Echo Express IIID Thunderbolt PCIe Expansion Chassis is significantly quieter than the 1st Gen–quiet enough to be used in a recording studio according to an editor who uses one.


That wouldn't make very much sense. The rmbp was supposed to support thunderbolt 2. Thunderbolt 2 is supposed to support displayport 1.2 protocols. The displayport 1.2 specification supports 4K @ 60hz. If the rmbp doesn't support that, then it doesn't fully support displayport 1.2, which was touted as a feature of thunderbolt 2.

post #90 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by rob53 View Post

I checked your link and the Sharp isn't on the Norway Apple Store. I also check the German and UK stores and it isn't there either.

Indeed; completely vanished from all Apple sites in Europe. For the ATI Radeon HD 5870 they at least display 'no longer being made' (in my Dutch Store). Let's hope the Sharp was simply a placeholder for their own 4k screen. It's weekend and I can dream, no?

@socalart Great info, thanks! And welcome to the forum.
post #91 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Wait till May:

Source: http://www.eizo.com/global/press/releases/htmls/rx850.html

Unfortunately, this will be a $8,000 display monitor excluding the high performance graphics processing unit required.
post #92 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post


That wouldn't make very much sense. The rmbp was supposed to support thunderbolt 2. Thunderbolt 2 is supposed to support displayport 1.2 protocols. The displayport 1.2 specification supports 4K @ 60hz. If the rmbp doesn't support that, then it doesn't fully support displayport 1.2, which was touted as a feature of thunderbolt 2.

The new MBPs do include TB2 but do not, at least officially, support 4K video out. Note that Apple does not say anywhere in their documentation that the new MBPs support 4K displays, unlike with the Mac Pro where they do state it many times. I assume this is a driver issue that will resolved shortly. Hopefully by the time the Mac Pro ships.
Edited by SolipsismX - 12/8/13 at 7:15am

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #93 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


The new MBPs do include TB2 but do not, at least officially, support 4K video out. Note that Apple does not say anywhere in their documentation that the new MBPs support 4K displays, unlike with the Mac Pro where they do state it many times. I assume this is a driver issue that will resolved shortly. Hopefully by the time the Mac Pro ships.

They do officially say the new MBP supports 4K but only over HDMI @ 30Hzhttp://support.apple.com/kb/HT6008

I also hope there will be a driver update, maybe 10.9.1? One of the test areas on 10.9.1 is video drivers.

post #94 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

They do officially say the new MBP supports 4K but only over HDMI @ 30Hz: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT6008
I also hope there will be a driver update, maybe 10.9.1? One of the test areas on 10.9.1 is video drivers.

I should have specified I was referring to TB2/DP.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #95 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


The new MBPs do include TB2 but do not, at least officially, support 4K video out. Note that Apple does not say anywhere in their documentation that the new MBPs support 4K displays, unlike with the Mac Pro where they do state it many times. I assume this is a driver issue that will resolved shortly. Hopefully by the time the Mac Pro ships.


I would guess the same, although I'm not 100% sure. The 680 mac edition doesn't support 4K, and the 750m in the top rmbp is a lower clocked "notebook" chip based on the same architecture. I suspect there is some need for NVidia to do the near metal driver work, but if the chip has the capability, I would expect to see a driver update. Judder at 30hz isn't something I would want to view.

post #96 of 110

And the '8k' link?

 

Press Releases

EIZO Releases 31.1" Super High Resolution 8 Megapixel Monitor for Multi-Modality Environments

  •  
  •  
  •  

RadiForce RX850Hakusan, Japan, November 27, 2013 – EIZO Corporation (TSE: 6737) announced the release of the RadiForce RX850, a 31.1-inch color LCD monitor capable of displaying 8 megapixels for multi-modality applications. The RadiForce RX850 is the successor of the RadiForce RX840-MG released last year, which was the first 8 megapixel monitor for multi-modality use.

 

EIZO’s 8 megapixel monitors act as effective replacements for multi-monitor setups for a smoother, more user-friendly environment when viewing numerous medical applications at once on a single screen. This allows medical professionals to conveniently view images side-by-side without the obtrusive bezels typically found in a multi-monitor environment.

 

What resolution is that?

 

Are we looking at 300 dpi (at last?) on a desktop?  Looking at print resolution images 1:1 basis?

 

4k monitors are good news.  But they'll be expensive.  Though the Dell didn't seem too bad to me for the price.  (I'll go to hell for saying that...)

 

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #97 of 110

The 27 inch iMac screen res is good.  But it's no retina screen.  I can tell the difference between the Macbook Pro/iPad/iPhone vs it.

 

It's just not as sharp.  Pun  not intended.  

 

It stretched my eyeballs a little.

 

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #98 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post

What resolution is that?

Are we looking at 300 dpi (at last?) on a desktop?

It's hard to tell from that image but that might not be 16:9 but instead one of the other variances like 1.85:1 or 1.90:1. If we assume 16:9 we're looking at 7680×4320 which is 33.1 million pixels or 16x that of 1080p and a PPI that's still not quite 300 at 283.33.

But how would all this run? For 4K you need DP1.2 or HDMI 2.0 for 60Hz, and I don't think either of these supports higher Hz or 3D. It's 8K is 4 times the number of pixels of 4K but I think you need less than 2x the bandwidth which could mean 2xHDMI2.0/DP1.2 could support around 35Gbit/s but I assume this would all need an expensive device to interpolate the streams. With no mention of DP 1.3 I will be somewhat surprised if this ever hits the market and really surprised if it's under $15k.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #99 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curtis Hannah View Post


I am assuming apple is waiting till the tech is cheap enough, and all there devices support it.


I agree.

Maybe also for when they can be implemented into the iMac lineup and not destroy the price point.

post #100 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

 With no mention of DP 1.3 I will be somewhat surprised if this ever hits the market and really surprised if it's under $15k.

DP 1.2 was finalized back around the end or 2009. It took over a year to gain any traction in specialty markets. It's still not entirely down to the mainstream, although I am less forgiving when it comes to products that exist in the higher price tiers. Displayport 1.3 was technically announced, but the spec isn't finalized. As for Eizo, they cater to a lot of specialty markets. I have noticed with them and NEC that the technology does trickle down to some of their lines in the $500-2000 range.

post #101 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post

And the '8k' link?


Press Releases



EIZO Releases 31.1" Super High Resolution 8 Megapixel Monitor for Multi-Modality Environments



  •  
  •  
  •  

RadiForce RX850
Hakusan, Japan, November 27, 2013 – EIZO Corporation (TSE: 6737) announced the release of the RadiForce RX850, a 31.1-inch color LCD monitor capable of displaying 8 megapixels for multi-modality applications. The RadiForce RX850 is the successor of the RadiForce RX840-MG released last year, which was the first 8 megapixel monitor for multi-modality use.


EIZO’s 8 megapixel monitors act as effective replacements for multi-monitor setups for a smoother, more user-friendly environment when viewing numerous medical applications at once on a single screen. This allows medical professionals to conveniently view images side-by-side without the obtrusive bezels typically found in a multi-monitor environment.

What resolution is that?

Are we looking at 300 dpi (at last?) on a desktop?  Looking at print resolution images 1:1 basis?

4k monitors are good news.  But they'll be expensive.  Though the Dell didn't seem too bad to me for the price.  (I'll go to hell for saying that...)

Lemon Bon Bon.

Their press release indicates 146 ppi.
post #102 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven N. View Post

Their press release indicates 146 ppi.

That's pretty much half of my estimation for a 4K monitor, which got me to read it more closely. It doesn't say 8K it says 8Mpx. A 16:9 8K monitor is 33.1Mpx but a 16:9 4K monitor is one-quarter that at 8.3Mpx. That all makes much more sense now.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #103 of 110
A 39" 4K display for under $450? Yup.
http://www.amazon.com/product-reviews/B00DOPGO2G/ref=acr_offerlistingpage_text?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

EDIT: Apparently the 4K Sharp monitor wasn't intended to go live yet at Apple according to some blogs. Looks like it was supposed to be offered alongside the new Mac Pro when it becomes available.
Edited by Gatorguy - 12/9/13 at 5:56am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #104 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

A 39" 4K display for under $450? Yup.
http://www.amazon.com/product-reviews/B00DOPGO2G/ref=acr_offerlistingpage_text?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

EDIT: Apparently the 4K Sharp monitor wasn't intended to go live yet at Apple according to some blogs. Looks like it was supposed to be offered alongside the new Mac Pro when it becomes available.

That's a TV, not a computer monitor. If I may be blunt.
post #105 of 110
It can't be used as a monitor?
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #106 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

That's a TV, not a computer monitor. If I may be blunt.

Any particular reason it can't be used as a monitor?

There's a reason why people site xx feet away from their TV, and only one foot away from their monitor. The pixels can be seen, counted, close in front of a TV. Then there's input lag on many TV's.

Solipsims also pointed many issues out in this very thread. And TV pixels are usually rectangle and monitors square. If you're in photography you'll see the difference.
post #107 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

There's a reason why people site xx feet away from their TV, and only one foot away from their monitor. The pixels can be seen, counted, close in front of a TV. Then there's input lag on many TV's.

Solipsims also pointed many issues out in this very thread. And TV pixels are usually rectangle and monitors square. If you're in photography you'll see the difference.
Yes, I understand it's not the same as a $3000 Sharp monitor. With that out of the way there's this from the Amazon comments:

"Ok. I got this in the mail today and wasn't sure if it would work with my hp dv7 laptop with an intel hd3000 graphics card (HDMI only out). When I first opened and connected to this monitor the resolution defaulted to a maximum of 1920x1080 @ 24 Hz. It was pretty sharp but the last TV I had was just as sharp at that resolution.

So I spent all day working with different modelines to try to manually get the resolutin right. The monitor was impressive and would display all kinds of modes between 1920x1080 and 3840x2160. BUT. They were all kind of blurry and would not have worked to program all day on.

Well after about 4 hours of working with random timings and resolutions I thought I would try xrandr with the 3840x2160 modes untill I found one that very closely matched an hsync of 30. I found the closest line that I could get to 30hz was:

root@dv7# cvt 3840 2160 13.8
# 3840x2160 13.79 Hz (CVT) hsync: 30.05 kHz; pclk: 144.25 MHz
Modeline "3840x2160_13.80" 144.25 3840 3944 4320 4800 2160 2163 2168 2180 -hsync +vsync

I guess you could find something closer but that was close enough. So I ran:

xrandr --newmode "3840x2160_13.80" 144.25 3840 3944 4320 4800 2160 2163 2168 2180 -hsync +vsync
xrandr --addmode HDMI1 "3840x2160_13.80"

Those make it so you can select it in the Displays or monitors section depending on your distribution (make sure you have the right HDMI port by running xrandr without any arguments).

If you don't know where the monitors section is you can run (leave off the quotes):

xrandr --output HDMI1 --mode 3840x2160_13.80

Anyway after I ran that and the monitor came back from being black... BAM! Super high definition and huge display! I was so happy I cried a little. Not a pixel is bad and text is so sharp it is like sitting in front of 4 monitors!
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #108 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

With that out of the way there's this from the Amazon comments:

^ post

Interesting! Though not for average Joe on a Mac I'd say. But yes, one can hook up a TV monitor to a PC, if the plug fits.
post #109 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

Interesting! Though not for average Joe on a Mac I'd say. But yes, one can hook up a TV monitor to a PC, if the plug fits.

It looks as tho some folks found a way to run it with a Mac:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1579661
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #110 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

Interesting! Though not for average Joe on a Mac I'd say. But yes, one can hook up a TV monitor to a PC, if the plug fits.

It looks as tho some folks found a way to run it with a Mac:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1579661


While looking up a ‘counter argument’ I came across a website called hookup69 after which I didn’t want ‘looking up how to hook up’ anymore.

But yes, a TV monitor can work with a Mac, and might even be nice for gamers. But because the plug fits doesn’t mean it’s a nice experience. Try reading text, for hours on end.

There’s a reason medical monitors are expensive: NEC sells a 21”, 5Mpixel screen for $13,799 And yes, that's Black and White!

http://www.necdisplay.com/images/Products340x340/medical/md211g5_htadj.png


Viewable Image Size 21.3"
ColorType Grayscale
MegaPixels 5MP
Native Resolution 2048 x 2560
Pixel Pitch 0.17mm
Pixels Per Inch 154@ native resolution
Brightness (typical) 500 cd/m2 calibrated / 1200 cd/m2 max
Contrast Ratio (typical) 1200:1
Viewing Angle 176° Vert., 176° Hor. (88U/88D/88L/88R) @ CR>50
Response Time 25ms
Lookup Table 11.9-bit
Displayable Colors 1024 levels of gray out of a palette of 12277
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › In lieu of a Retina Thunderbolt Display, Apple now selling 4K IGZO Sharp LED monitor