iMac 5K display that much better?

Looking to upgrade my 2007 24" iMac in the near future and was wondering if the new iMac 5K displays were really worth it. My present iMac just keeps chugging along with no problems other than being slow, since it only has usb2.0 and I store my photos on an external drive and only having 4GB of Ram, so I would like to upgrade but don't have to. When the new 5K Retina displays were released I looked at one at the Apple Store but could not see any difference between the regular display and the new 5K. It was not night & day difference, I was expecting to being blown away like when looking at the new 4K tv's. One day when I was at BB I asked one of the salesmen if the new 5K displays was that much better, they did not have a display model to look at, and he said unless you are using 4K cameras for video you probably wouldn't see much difference between the regular displays and the new 5K displays for photo editing. I don' plan on doing any 4k video recording right now and only use my present iMac for photo editing and surfing, my question to those who own the new Reina 5K display iMac are they that much better for photo editing and why. Since at the store I can't open LR and start editing my photo's and see a difference in the displays. I hate to upgrade to an obsolete model, would like to stay current but don' t know if spending the extra dollars is worth it when I could get a refurbished iMac much cheaper. Any input would be greatly appreciated.

I had a 24" and this year upgraded to a 27" at home (primarily for photography) and a 21" at work (don't need a huge screen for email and Excel). The speed of both the new machines is very welcomed. They simply run circles around the older machine. The Retina machine came out about a month after I purchased the 27"... but I don't see a need to swap it or feel like I'm missing anything at all. In fact I usually don't buy the latest Mac, preferring to get the model that was just replaced and am happy with that (and saving $200-400 each as well).

I don't think the new resolution monitor is needed. Sure I'll want it in 3-5 years when I next upgrade but I'm very happy in the meantime. I'm sure you will be as well. Spend the extra money on RAM.

For Lightroom use it sure helps to have two monitors. I would aim for a two monitor setup if you most often use your computer for photo editing at the home or the office.

If you do that it is nice to have a premium monitor in a laptop but not necessary. Only requirement I would want is for it to be an IPS monitor.

Now having said all that, if you process on the go all the time, get the best your budget can withstand.

Sorry, I was thinking an iMac was a laptop. Looked it up and see it is an all in one. That changes things.

I am in the same position. The cost of a new i7 5K Retina is closer to $800 more than a i7 27" imac 2013 model. The newer version does come with a 4ghz cpu and fusion drive, but I thought that the 3.5ghz and 7200rpm drive was enough, and that savings would bump me up to 32gb ram and still have left over to by a second 23" IPS monitor to plug in.

Well, that was the plan until I did the fatal flaw and didn't order it right there and then, rather decided to order it later in the week only to find they had sold out. So, the huge savings I had simply vanished on me.

I was thinking of a refurbished iMac since if you bring the processor and the HD of a new 27" iMac to what the standard 5k iMac has there is not much price difference. I was wondering if the display model at the Apple Store was really a 5K Retina since on the standard display screens I could not see any noticeable difference between the two iMacs. I keep thinking if my next computer hopefully last as long as this one I should probably get the latest and greatest but could use the savings on the computer to more camera equipment.

I have a 2012 iMac, and also a Retina Display Macbook Pro.

Side by side comparison, theres no doubt the Retina Display wins hands down. While looking at text, my iMac now looks blocky.

My advice is to never look at a Retina Display again, because you will end up buying it.

Angry Dad wrote in post #17355329
I have a 2012 iMac, and also a Retina Display Macbook Pro.

Side by side comparison, theres no doubt the Retina Display wins hands down. While looking at text, my iMac now looks blocky.

My advice is to never look at a Retina Display again, because you will end up buying it.

I'm almost there as well. 2009 MBP and 2010 iMac. I don't do much editing on the go. Usually I shoot, and download while away from home, get home and edit on the big screen.

I just got my wife a 13" retina and love the display and of course want to upgrade my computers now too.

I'm going to check out the 5K display next week now.

The part that makes me wonder a bit.. Back 3-4 years ago, everyone online here was going all a buzz about the 23" IPS 1980x1080 monitors, then Apple came out with the It's 27" screen that was suddenly the pinicle of everything. Now you get I guess 4x the resolution, but at what point are you exceeding your eyes ability to see the difference?

I personally find it very hard to tell the difference between 720p and 1080p on my 46" tv from 6' back. if you use some form of size vs distance vs resolution ratio, you might find it interesting as I don't have my computer monitor 10" from my face.

Now given, the newer iMac does have a 4.0ghz CPU, and you are paying for a slightly optimized fusion hard drive. But from the side of screen, are you really doing to actually see the improvement from 4x the resolution on the screen if you have it a standard 24-30" away from your face?


I have read many reviews that ponder this very point, and I don't actually know. I guess the truth is always in the seeing, and short of seeing it for myself, I will not know. So the only real way to test it out is to give it a try so I bit the bullet and ordered one. I have a 23" NEC ips monitor that I can hook up as the secondary and see in dual screen if one image does look any better than the other.