iPad Pro Not convinced iPad needs OLED

[Digitalguy]

I’m curious… In what context do you use the internal speakers?

I don’t really use iPad speakers… either I‘m using a bluetooth speaker or my headphones, I don’t particularly find iPad speakers something I value. Mind you, I don’t care for a mediocre sound… but if I get a fair sounded experience then I‘m good with that.

I use them most of the time, at home. But I guess I should give more context.
I am the kind of person that does not watch or listen to content while doing nothing else. 99% of the time I am doing something else like cooking, having breakfast, lunch or dinner (but a lot of people don't have lunch or even breakfast at home, I do as I mostly work from home), cleaning (I have a cleaner once a week but I do some cleaning and tidying up in between...), changing, shaving (mainly listening in that case). Often therefore the device follows me, like from lunch to teeth brushing, which does't work well with an external speaker. I need the speaker to be loud to cover noisy activity like cooking, using water etc. I only use bluetooth late in the evening in order not to bother neighbours or when I have my girlfriend sleeping before I do at my place on weekends (she has her own apartment).
I don't like having headphones while I eat, it bothers me...but that may be personal...

 

[sunny5]

OLED is not for professional which is a biggest issue. Even now, there are only a few professional grade OLED monitors and even then, they lack peak brightness and quality.

 

[Flynnsworth]

I have an M1 iPP and the Mini LED screen is so bad that I doubt I’ll ever buy similar screen tech again.

I tried the Mini LED MBPs and really don’t like the screens on them either. MacBook Air all the way until OLED arrives.

 

[6749974]

In the real world, the blooming on the iPad Pro 12.9" is not actually much of an issue. I've played with it a lot and you have to be using the iPad in near pitch black darkness to see it. Turn up the lights even slightly and it's no longer visible. If usage in blackout conditions is a big deal for anyone then sure, get the OLED display ... but I just don't see it being a big deal for most people.

I have iPad Pro and MacBook Pro and in the real world the blooming is obvious—it does not need to be pitch black—any indoor lighting will do. Its just a matter of the right scenes that trip dimming zones because how can those dimming zones serve dark backgrounds and light objects simultaneously.

Some people aren't able to see it as distinctly—all eyes take in light differently—so that may be the case with you—or due to panel variability you won the lottery.

You're right, its not a big deal or deal breaker for most people. But Apple is concerned, which is why they are abandoning mini LED.

 

[sunny5]

In the real world, the blooming on the iPad Pro 12.9" is not actually much of an issue. I've played with it a lot and you have to be using the iPad in near pitch black darkness to see it. Turn up the lights even slightly and it's no longer visible. If usage in blackout conditions is a big deal for anyone then sure, get the OLED display ... but I just don't see it being a big deal for most people.

I have no idea why people complain about the blooming when it's way better than LCD and it really not an issue. Never had any issues.

 

[sparksd]

I have no idea why people complain about the blooming when it's way better than LCD and it really not an issue. Never had any issues.

I think it is in some ways like the jelly scroll in the Mini 6 - people have different sensitivities to what they are seeing.

 

[6749974]

OLED is not for professional which is a biggest issue. Even now, there are only a few professional grade OLED monitors and even then, they lack peak brightness and quality.

OLED has been adopted by professionals first. The $10K Sony reference monitor is OLED and only 100 nits. All those $3-5K OLED monitors of the last years were marketed at professionals. But not all professionals work in light controlled rooms, so you have a point there.

But what do you mean by they lack quality?

 

[6749974]

I have no idea why people complain about the blooming when it's way better than LCD and it really not an issue. Never had any issues.

Blooming, is an artifact. Its an error. The brain goes, "GAH! Something is wrong."

Imagine your walls are white, but not uniform white, there's splotches of beige that get your attention every-time you walk by them. Your brain goes "error, error, the wall isn't uniform. I can see where the landlord was repairing holes in the wall."

I would rather my wall be uniform and off-white, than have a purely-white wall with splotches that distract.

Also, blooming doesn't just happen outside of objects, they happen inside objects like faces (example). That is distracting to me.

 

[sunny5]

OLED has been adopted by professionals first. The $10K Sony reference monitor is OLED and only 100 nits. All those $3-5K OLED monitors of the last years were marketed at professionals. But not all professionals work in light controlled rooms, so you have a point there.

But what do you mean by they lack quality?

You said it to yourself. 100 nit for reference monitor? That's a joke. Even those OLED displays have limitation such as peak brightness and yet consume way more than LCD monitors. This is why LCD is still the dominant tech for professional display. Beside, OLED has actual peak brightness due to burn-in.

 

[6749974]

You said it to yourself. 100 nit for reference monitor? That's a joke. Even those OLED displays have limitation such as peak brightness and yet consume way more than LCD monitors. This is why LCD is still the dominant tech for professional display. Beside, OLED has actual peak brightness due to burn-in.

I'm not a colorist or video editor but its my understanding that professionals working in video standards like REC.709 work in peak luma of 100 nits. These are standards that they adhere to for many reasons (1) screens increase in inaccuracy the brighter they become (2) overhead lights and sunlight contaminate the screen accuracy, so there is a standard of dimness they need to work in.

That is why the $10K Sony Reference Monitor is 100 nits. Its not a limitation of the brightness technology but of color accuracy and meeting those standards.

Many pro photographers work in 100 nits (I think it varies between 70 - 140 nits). If a photographer works on a monitor that is 300 nits, their photos will print dark, so photographers are trained to work at 100 nits.

 

[Jim Lahey]

It should be noted that slower pixel response times can actually help to smooth frame transition in 24fps video. Super fast 24p OLED can exhibit some pretty nasty motion judder in panning shots because the transition to each frame is virtually instant.

The best OLED TVs now have very good frame interpolation options that can fix this with without introducing soap opera effect or noticeable artefacts, but iPad probably won’t.

 

[6749974]

It should be noted that slower pixel response times can actually help to smooth frame transition in 24fps video. Super fast 24p OLED can exhibit some pretty nasty motion judder in panning shots because the transition to each frame is virtually instant.

The best OLED TVs now have very good frame interpolation options that can fix this with without introducing soap opera effect or noticeable artefacts, but iPad probably won’t.

My guess is, knowing Apple, motion smoothing will automatically turn on when video is played.

 

[Jim Lahey]

My guess is, knowing Apple, motion smoothing will automatically turn on when video is played.

Certainly possible. Guess we’ll see soon enough 👍

 

[rkuo]

I have iPad Pro and MacBook Pro and in the real world the blooming is obvious—it does not need to be pitch black—any indoor lighting will do. Its just a matter of the right scenes that trip dimming zones because how can those dimming zones serve dark backgrounds and light objects simultaneously.

Some people aren't able to see it as distinctly—all eyes take in light differently—so that may be the case with you—or due to panel variability you won the lottery.

You're right, its not a big deal or deal breaker for most people. But Apple is concerned, which is why they are abandoning mini LED.

HDR movies trying to get HDR highlights on a black background does make blooming a lot worse than SDR white text on a black background. I still think it's quite easy to mitigate with low level bias lighting.

 

[Frosties]

I'm not a colorist or video editor but its my understanding that professionals working in video standards like REC.709 work in peak luma of 100 nits. These are standards that they adhere to for many reasons (1) screens increase in inaccuracy the brighter they become (2) overhead lights and sunlight contaminate the screen accuracy, so there is a standard of dimness they need to work in.

That is why the $10K Sony Reference Monitor is 100 nits. Its not a limitation of the brightness technology but of color accuracy and meeting those standards.

Many pro photographers work in 100 nits (I think it varies between 70 - 140 nits). If a photographer works on a monitor that is 300 nits, their photos will print dark, so photographers are trained to work at 100 nits.

Sony is releasing a 4000nits reference monitor this year at the request of the movie industry.

 

[nStyle]

miniLED display on iPad Pro has two big problems:

1. For 120Hz displays to work properly (ie. crystal clarity during motion) the pixel response needs to be 8.3 milliseconds or lower. Guess what the pixel response is on the 12.9-inch iPad Pro? Answer: 37.53 milliseconds (source). That means its 4.5x too slow. Result: instead of clear imagery, you get smearing and loss of detail during motion, which is the opposite result of what 120Hz is supposed to bring to our computing experience. Here is a gif showing what smearing looks like on an iPad Pro (try to read the text, or see icon detail, while its moving).
2. The main sell of mini LED backlighting is that dark scenes in movies and TV shows are supposed to no longer distract with IPS glow (the light behind the panel, which is why black looks more like a very dark gray). The problem is Apple's implementation and algorithm isn't good enough on such a thin device. So instead of perfect cinematography, you'll watch dark scenes get halos and blotches of light around people and light objects. Here is an image of the iPad Pro displaying blooming during AppleTV's own Severance (great show by the way!). Also when people move, a trail of light follows them (which I'll call ghosting). Here is a gif of the MacBook Pro doing it, which also has mini LED backlighting.

How does OLED solve this?

1. 120Hz needs a pixel response of 8.3 ms or less. Well OLED has a pixel response of less than 1 ms. This is why ProMotion on OLED iPhones are crystal clear.
2. OLED pixels are self-emissive, so there is no backlighting behind the pixels to create blooming. This is why OLED iPhones have no blooming.

[By the way, these issues apply to the MacBook Pros. In fact, the MBP pixel response is 2x worse than the iPad Pros. Apple will resolve that when they move to OLED in 2026]

OLED does have better motion clarity - this will be a welcome improvement. Though, 120hz still looks better than 60hz regardless of the response time.

Regarding blooming, it’s not that I don’t notice it, it’s just that the occasional blooming is still always better than looking at dark grays.

I believe that screenshot of Severance is extremely disingenuous. That’s not even a hard scene for MiniLED to display, relatively speaking, especially with 2500 zones on a 13” screen. If I pull that exact scene up on Apple TV I am almost 100% sure it wouldn’t look that bad in person. I’ve watched a variety of things in HDR and non-HDR in “difficult” situations for a MiniLED display and the iPad always does a great job.

When I say I’m not convinced OLED is a worthwhile upgrade for the iPad I’m mainly referring to the fact that MiniLED still is generally superior for impactful HDR (much brighter brights) and there is no worry about burn-in. Again, if Apple’s OLED panels come close to the peak brightness then it won’t be a concern.

My 12.9“ iPP looks better for HDR content than my C3 OLED due to brighter highlights. And, as I’ve said already, I’ve never noticed a distracting amount of blooming in difficult scenes where there’s lots of black and small highlights.

I mean if people are buying MiniLEDs over TVs in some situations regardless of price, it’s obvious blooming isn’t a dealbreaker for most people. It’s not that I or anyone else never sees it, we know it’s there if we know anything about the tech, it’s just that it’s still a massive improvement over dark grays and gets much brighter. And TVs don’t even have nearly the amount of zones as the iPad in a tiny 13” screen.

Here’s a picture I just took. That’s as difficult if not more difficult to display without blooming than that scene from severance, and I barely notice any blooming here. And no, it’s not a screenshot, it’s a picture from my phone.

 

[Jim Lahey]

OLED does have better motion clarity - this will be a welcome improvement. Though, 120hz still looks better than 60hz regardless of the response time.

Regarding blooming, it’s not that I don’t notice it, it’s just that the occasional blooming is still always better than looking at dark greys.

I believe that screenshot of Severance is extremely disingenuous. That’s not even a hard scene for MiniLED to display, relatively speaking, especially with 2500 zones on a 13” screen. If I pull that exact scene up on Apple TV I am almost 100% sure it wouldn’t look that bad in person. I’ve watched a variety of things in HDR and non-HDR in “difficult” situations for a MiniLED display and the iPad always does a great job.

When I say I’m not convinced OLED is a worthwhile upgrade for the iPad I’m mainly referring to the fact that MiniLED still is generally superior for impactful HDR (much brighter brights) and there is no worry about burn-in. Again, if Apple’s OLED panels come close to the peak brightness then it won’t be a concern.

My 12.9“ iPP looks better for HDR content than my C3 OLED due to brighter highlights. And, as I’ve said already, I’ve never noticed a distracting amount of blooming in difficult scenes where there’s lots of black and small highlights

I mean if people are buying MiniLEDs over TVs in some situations regardless of price, it’s obvious blooming isn’t a dealbreaker for most people. It’s not that I or anyone else never sees it, we know it’s there if we know anything about the tech, it’s just that it’s still a massive improvement over dark grays and gets much brighter. And TVs don’t even have nearly the amount of zones as the iPad in a tiny 13” screen.

Largely agree in principle. I’d rather suffer clouding and blooming than a silver rectangle. But I’d prefer OLED over both. Disagree about the HDR brightness, because brighter highlights are of little practical benefit when they bleed into adjacent pixels. For viewing in bright environments, yes, otherwise the Nit Wars are only beneficial for spec sheets and burning retinas 👍

 

[nStyle]

Largely agree in principle. I’d rather suffer clouding and blooming than a silver rectangle. But I’d prefer OLED over both. Disagree about the HDR brightness, because brighter highlights are of little practical benefit when they bleed into adjacent pixels. For viewing in bright environments, yes, otherwise the Nit Wars are only beneficial for spec sheets and burning retinas 👍

Depends on the scene and how complicated it is. Starfields, Christmas lights, and distant city lights are going to show more blooming than any other scenario and light is more likely to “bleed” into the blacks. But how often do those scenes come up? I have an OLED laptop, OLED TV and I’m buying an OLED monitor. I still think Mini-LED is better for HDR content.

 

[Jim Lahey]

But how often do those scenes come up?

Well I guess that depends on the type of stuff one watches most frequently, so it’s subjective. Each to their own 👍

Biggest issue I have with mini-LED isn’t static blooming. The real pain arrives when it gets confused with dark scenes where milky clouds start following the content around. Thankfully this is less common.

 

[6749974]

Sony is releasing a 4000nits reference monitor this year at the request of the movie industry.

Right on. Because the standards of the last 30 years have changed to now include HDR. Different tools for different standards, industry niches and so on. I was never saying all OLED is 100 nits; I was showing one example that came to mind of how despite early OLED being dim it was still being used by professionals.

Another example is how a lot of newer OLED only reaches 200-250 nits sustained and those are bought by professionals (not normal consumers) because they edit in low light. Just showing that profesisonal industries were always the early adopters of OLED.

[I’m assuming 4000 nits doesn’t mean sustained 4000 nits but peak 4000 nits (because HDR)]

 

[6749974]

OLED does have better motion clarity - this will be a welcome improvement. Though, 120hz still looks better than 60hz regardless of the response time.

Regarding blooming, it’s not that I don’t notice it, it’s just that the occasional blooming is still always better than looking at dark grays.

I believe that screenshot of Severance is extremely disingenuous. That’s not even a hard scene for MiniLED to display, relatively speaking, especially with 2500 zones on a 13” screen. If I pull that exact scene up on Apple TV I am almost 100% sure it wouldn’t look that bad in person. I’ve watched a variety of things in HDR and non-HDR in “difficult” situations for a MiniLED display and the iPad always does a great job.

When I say I’m not convinced OLED is a worthwhile upgrade for the iPad I’m mainly referring to the fact that MiniLED still is generally superior for impactful HDR (much brighter brights) and there is no worry about burn-in. Again, if Apple’s OLED panels come close to the peak brightness then it won’t be a concern.

My 12.9“ iPP looks better for HDR content than my C3 OLED due to brighter highlights. And, as I’ve said already, I’ve never noticed a distracting amount of blooming in difficult scenes where there’s lots of black and small highlights.

I mean if people are buying MiniLEDs over TVs in some situations regardless of price, it’s obvious blooming isn’t a dealbreaker for most people. It’s not that I or anyone else never sees it, we know it’s there if we know anything about the tech, it’s just that it’s still a massive improvement over dark grays and gets much brighter. And TVs don’t even have nearly the amount of zones as the iPad in a tiny 13” screen.

Here’s a picture I just took. That’s as difficult if not more difficult to display without blooming than that scene from severance, and I barely notice any blooming here. And no, it’s not a screenshot, it’s a picture from my phone.

My argument was never that it was a dealbreaker for most people but that it has limitations in some scenes and situations (eg. dark backgrounds with well lit people; drawing on a dark background with a white brush). My argument is that the upcoming dual-stacked OLED is Apple's resolution to those limitations.

Because the argument against mini LED is that some scenes really trip up the dimming zone algorithm, its disingenuous to look for scenes where it does works and use that to make your case. It's like saying, "Well, your honor, the defendant doesn't always steal."

Fact is that mini LED is imperfect. Apple is spending billions to move past mini LED because its imperfect. Why is it imperfect your post asks? Because of the two reasons I outlined: blooming and slow pixel response. Apple was using it because its the only way to bring HDR 1000 to iPads, MacBook Pros, and the XDR ProDisplay—but the trade off was always blooming.

Regarding this "disingenuous screenshot" of mine, here is video footage of the MacBook Pro with mini LED showing the same issues, and you can see the halo blooming inside their faces, and the white ghosting following the nanny as she walks around.

And feel free to visit that scene in episode 6, starting at minutes 27:55. Make sure brightness is at 100% because I don't want you watching at 30% to claim you didn't see it.

PS: mini LED blooming is also apparent when turning on closed captioning. OLED cannot come soon enough.

I will say that mini LED doesn't have to show drastic blooming—in the last two generations of mini LED TVs, Sony engineers have gotten blooming reduced and under much more control with only 500 dimming zones than Apple has shown here with iPad Pro and MacBook Pro, and all of Sony's competitors. But those Sony televisions are afforded much more depth and panel layers. Oh, and Sony engineers are the best in the world, clearly magicians. I was hoping Apple would show similar improvements but it looks like their just moving on to OLED rather than improve it further.

 

[sunny5]

I'm not a colorist or video editor but its my understanding that professionals working in video standards like REC.709 work in peak luma of 100 nits. These are standards that they adhere to for many reasons (1) screens increase in inaccuracy the brighter they become (2) overhead lights and sunlight contaminate the screen accuracy, so there is a standard of dimness they need to work in.

That is why the $10K Sony Reference Monitor is 100 nits. Its not a limitation of the brightness technology but of color accuracy and meeting those standards.

Many pro photographers work in 100 nits (I think it varies between 70 - 140 nits). If a photographer works on a monitor that is 300 nits, their photos will print dark, so photographers are trained to work at 100 nits.

Video uses up to 1000 nit especially for colorist and video editor in order to see HDR content. Even normal users require more than 1000 nit to watch HDR contents which mini-LED already achieved up to 1600 nit. Working outside? Then def need high brightness.

Even photographers need to use high brightness as I know that cause I'm a photographer as well. 100 nit is only meant for printing and that's why the brightness is low in order to match with print papers.

Dont forget, burn-in is still a big issue for OLED as they never able to solve it and even OLED TV with bigger pixel and low brightness have burn-in in 1~2 years. Imagine if it's high pixel density and high brightness.

 

[IsaacM]

They really fixed the blooming on the M2 iPad Pro and I also don't see a benefit to "upgrading" to an OLED. I think MiniLED is fabulous.

 

[sunny5]

They really fixed the blooming on the M2 iPad Pro and I also don't see a benefit to "upgrading" to an OLED. I think MiniLED is fabulous.

This is why LCD is still a major display for many, even for professional.

 

[Jim Lahey]

They really fixed the blooming on the M2 iPad Pro and I also don't see a benefit to "upgrading" to an OLED. I think MiniLED is fabulous.

My M2 iPad Pro was riddled with blooming and clouding.