1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Macbook for post processing

Discussion in 'Accessories' started by izTheViz, Sep 1, 2013.

  1. izTheViz

    izTheViz TalkEmount Top Veteran

    537
    May 10, 2013
    Paris
    Yannis Marigo
    Guys,

    Need to replace my old Sony Vaio and I would really like to change for a Mac.
    I am currently doing my PP with LR on my work laptop which is better than ly home PC.
    But I don't know which one to choose
    between the new MBA and the current MBPr. Some people says it is
    worth waiting the new Retina to have the 4th intel generation processor.
    Is the Retina screen a real advantage for PP comparing to the Air's screen.
    I'd go for a 13" and 8go RAM in any case.
    Has anybody some feedback ? Any Mac user who could advise me ?

    Thanks
     
  2. TOGAR

    TOGAR TalkEmount Regular

    26
    Dec 16, 2012
    Go with the Macbook Pro - it is worth the extra cost.
     
  3. Rich

    Rich TalkEmount Veteran

    253
    Nov 20, 2012
    Salisbury UK
    Richard
    Definitely go with the Mac, no question!

    Kind of depends what you expect and what you are working toward and for what purpose.

    I have the pre Retina Macbook, but there is no way I could PP on it. I do all that on an iMac. I believe the Retina display Macbook is pretty good.
     
  4. Poki

    Poki TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Aug 30, 2011
    Austria
    If you don't plan to buy a high quality external screen loke Apples own Thunderbolt display, go for the MBPr because the Airs screen really isn't that good.

    Waiting for the next refresh always seems loke a good idea, until you realize it might be months away. Can you wait this long? If not, just get it now. You won't be disappointed.

    Woot? Why not? I used a 2009 15" MBP for two years in pp. The screen is good enough as long as you don't need total color accuracy.
     
  5. izTheViz

    izTheViz TalkEmount Top Veteran

    537
    May 10, 2013
    Paris
    Yannis Marigo
    Thanks folks. The new MBPr should come out soon, even this month. I can
    wait a little bit. Have a new Dell at work
    with 8Go but a pretty poot screen but that's fine for some more weeks.
    I'll go for the retina in any case.
     
  6. Deadbear77

    Deadbear77 TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Sep 14, 2012
    Northeast Ohio
    Kevin
    I bought a Mac mini with 16g ram and 1tb fusion drive, also bought a aftermarket 2560/1440 27in monitor.

    Works great.




    Sent from my iPhone using TalkNEX mobile app
     
  7. Poki

    Poki TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Aug 30, 2011
    Austria
    Yep, I'm also using a Mac Mini with 16 GB RAM and a 256 GB SSD where my main library is located (I tend to shoot not too many pictures so I have not to sort them all out later, so 200 GB space is plenty for some time) and a few TB space in external drives for backups and older photos.

    The new Minis are really great - as fast as the fastest iMac (in all but the GPU which you don't need for photo editing) and cheap and easy to replace. I use the Apple Thunderbolt Display, which is great, but any 10 bit IPS panel should work good enough for photo editing.
     
  8. bmg123

    bmg123 TalkEmount Veteran

    310
    Jan 15, 2013
    England, UK
    I use the 2011 Macbook pro non-retina. If I had the budget I would definitely go for the Retina model though, the iMacs have brilliant displays which are also retina. Although the Macbook retinas tend to have poor graphics performance because their underpowered GPUs are running at such a high resolution, or at least the first generation ones did.
     
  9. Poki

    Poki TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Aug 30, 2011
    Austria
    I don't want to go into deeper discussions here, but I know quite a bit about display technologies and computers, so in short:

    The iMac screens are NOT "retina". Retina is a marketing term, but by the mathematical definition Apple put up the 27" iMac screen is 'only' 89% 'retina grade'. But it is a 10 bit IPS panel with white full LED backlight which makes it a pretty good display. The retina MBPs have a much higher resolution than the iMacs (in ppi terms), but the overall quality won't be much better due to the same technology being used.

    All retina MBPs have a decent enough graphics card / chip. Even the old Intel HD 3000 didn't have a problem running a 1440p screen. The graphics only seem underpowered once you want to play games at full resolution. Well, okay, at least with the HD 3000 photo and video editing might lag a bit too, but for most general work it's definitely not gonna be a problem.
     
  10. bmg123

    bmg123 TalkEmount Veteran

    310
    Jan 15, 2013
    England, UK
    iMac displays are fairly close to retina resolution, obviously not ppi, that's what I meant. I wouldn't know personally about the Retina MBP's performance but I did see tests when they first came out that showed lag when using integrated graphics on simple things like web pages! Must've gotten better with the 2nd gen but still a thought when it comes to performance vs power management.
     
  11. Poki

    Poki TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Aug 30, 2011
    Austria
    Well, my Mac Mini also drives a 1440p Thunderbolt Display with only a Intel HD4000, and it's even fast enough for some games. Afaik, the lags were a software problem.