How much computer do I need? Photography and Video

nwoods

Expedition Leader
I'm trying to decide (justify) how much to overspend my budget on a new MacBook Pro Retina.

At long last, I have an opportunity to replace my aging desktop computer. It''s pretty much a dinosaur at 8 years old, and though I've upgraded it over the years, it just flat out can't handle what I toss at it. I'm running a Dell XPS mid-tower, currently with a 3.2 Core 2 Duo CPU with an upgraded 8800 GTX video card and 4GB 1033mhz no-name RAM on a 32bit Win7 install (yes, that means I can only access 3GB of RAM, I know). I have two 7200rpm harddrives for 2TB of storage, and about 1.5TB is used up, mostly on photos. It runs Aero on Win7 fine, and gets a 5.6 on the Window's Index, mostly due to the crap processor.

Because of the older XPS tower, all the components are proprietary, including the motherboard and power supply. This box is just been pushed as far as it's going to go, and I'm done with it.

My wife has a 2009 15" MacBook Pro. My son has a 2011 13" MacBook Pro, and I find myself lusting after them daily. It's gotten to the point where I don't even power up the old PC unless or until I shoot some photos, and that's only once or twice a month, and that's only because I have what used to be considered a nice 24" display (another relic, with DVI only unfortunately). I prefer editing photos on the bigger screen connected to the PC. But for daily use, the instant on with the MacBookPro's (MPB) just can't be beat, and the keyboards are fine for typing on.

So a full zoot 2012 15" MPB with Retina, sporting a 2.6GHz quad-core i7 processor, with 16GB of 1600Mhz RAM, and 512GB SSD and the AppleCare warranty costs about $3400, and I would need to upgrade my old Photoshop CS5 Suite and replace my MS Office 2007 suite from Windows PC to MacOSX format (or install Windows, but on a Retina, that's not a good solution because the dpi resolution scaling only works on updated software, not my older programs). Figure a cool $4000, PLUS an external display and an external 2TB USB 3.0 hard drive for storage, now we are hitting $4500 easy.

That's twice my budget.... and then some.

Which leads me to my question (finally, right?). How much computer do I need?

I want the Retina because I will travel a lot over the next 18 months, working remotely several days a week every week. The Retina form factor is over a pound lighter than the previous 15" models, and actually meets the dimensional Spec for a 13" Ultrabook. No one else has anything like it, and I have looked at them all. The Dell XPS 15 laptop comes closest, but is 1.5 lbs heaver, and is notably bulkier in all physical dimensions, though it looks good and has similar speedy components except for a more conventional 1900xwhatever HD screen instead of the Retina 2880xwhatever screen.

So now I go into "justification mode": The 15" screen allows me to NOT use a larger display for most tasks, (I think?), and the Retina form factor allows me the portability of the 13" MPB without sacrificing screen size.... Is it good enough for editing photos and videos (Canon 7d, 1080p footage, 5200px sized, 8MB RAW images) on just the 15" screen?

Is the 2.3GHz quad-core i7 enough, or will I really lament not having the 2.6, or even the 2.7GHz processors? I haven't used anything fast and new in a while. Is the Quad-Core i7 at any speed significantly faster than the 2.4GHz dual core i5 in my son's MBP?

Is 8GB of fast RAM enough? I'd run a 64bit OS on it (either Windows or Max), so all that memory is available, and my Adobe suites definitely know how to use it. But the Retina's cannot be upgraded, ever. if you buy it with 8GB instead of 16GB, you are stuck for the life of the machine. Will I wish I had 16GB? I will be doing more video in the near future (I hope. Its painful on my current machine, so I hardly ever bother, and it's still kinda slow on my son's fairly new 13" MPB with 4GB of RAM on a Core i5).

Storage: Is 256GB of storage in SSD even close to being useful? Jumping up to 512GB costs another $500, and that's a painful pill to swallow. The SSD's are supposedly upgradable, but they are not industry standard drives, but are simply chips soldered to a proprietary board. Someone would have to mfr an all new board, not just a standard drive config. There aren't any replacement drives on the market yet that I know of, but its probable that someone will, someday. The question is, will it benefit me to wait for that "someday", or go whole hog now. Do any of you have just the 256GB drives? Are they full yet? Any regrets? A baseline 15" MPB with Retina and 3 year warranty is $2548, about $800 cheaper than the higher spec version quoted above. A full 25% less expensive. But will it be good enough to last me a while? I just don't know.

Alternatives:
The Dell XPS 15" is about $2500 with warranty, while not nearly as convenient to travel with, I would NOT have to replace all my software, saving quite a lot of money actually. But's its just not that comparable a machine, IMHO. I have owned about 7 Dell laptops over the years though my various places of employment. I have never had one who's battery lasted more than 30 minutes. Ever. Dell can't find a good battery if it hit them in the nose. I know first hand that the MBP's batteries are magical, and just last forever on a charge.


Thoughts? Experiences? First hand knowledge that you can share?

BTW, here is a terrific in-depth review the rMPB (MacBookPro with Retina):
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6023/the-nextgen-macbook-pro-with-retina-display-review
which includes this great dissertation on how the dpi scaling works on the Retina systems:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6023/the-nextgen-macbook-pro-with-retina-display-review/6
 

hitek79

Explorer
I don't have time to answer all your questions this very minute, but I just purchased a refurbished 17" MacBook Pro. I'm anti retina for a few reasons, and pro larger screen for a few reasons. I just added a second hard drive to my MBP, and I upgraded my own RAM. it's very simple. I now have 16gb of RAM($45), a 750gb storage disk, and a 250gb main drive(SSD)($185). The machine absolutely screams, and I'm in it for about $2400.
 

Chazz Layne

Administrator
Since you're still on the Mac vs. PC fence, I'll throw this out there for you to consider: It takes my quad-core 3.4Ghz Mac (running Mountain Lion) 12 GB of RAM to keep up with my quad-core 2.5Ghz PC (running Windows 7 Pro 64-bit with 4GB of RAM).

I'd also say going to 500+ GB of storage is worth it, even if it means running a slower traditional hard drive. My portable workstation only has a 500GB drive and I can fill that in no time shooting RAW.

On speed, it's all about how much patience you have. A quad 2.5Ghz is plenty for even Panorama Factory, it just takes longer to do things. That said, having experienced Windows 7 unleashed on a quad 3.4Ghz, I hope to never go back. :D
 

haven

Expedition Leader
There are plenty of positive reviews for the MacBook Pro with Retina Display for pro photographers.

Here are Michael Reichmann's notes about the retina MacBook Pro. He uses portable external drives to add storage space, and an external Compactflash reader.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/accessories/macbook_pro_retina.shtml

And here is David Bickley's review
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/8490254071/macbook-pro-with-retina-a-photographers-review

C. David Tobie gives a thumbs-up to the new retina display
http://cdtobie.wordpress.com/2012/06/19/retina-display-macbook-pro-for-calibration-and-photography/

Software is just now catching up with the Retina display. Adobe recently released a version of Lightroom with Retina display support. Rumors are that a Retina version of Photoshop will be released Dec 11. Apple's Aperture photo manager also supports Retina resolution.

Samsung recently showed a prototype ultrabook that had a retina-style display. I expect we'll see more Windows 8 laptops with super high res displays at the CES show in January. And some people are running Windows 7 on the new retina MacBook Pro. So there are/will be choices for folks who have a big investment in PC photo management software.
 

nwoods

Expedition Leader
Thanks Haven, in the links I posted at the end of my discussion, there is an image gallery of Windows 7 and Windows 8 running on a 15" Retina to experiment with the DPI scaling abilities built into Windows. It works, but not quite as well. Here is the page:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6023/the-nextgen-macbook-pro-with-retina-display-review/9

Here are the images:

Windows 7, 150% scaled (1.5x) on 15" MPB Retina
150pct.png


Windows 7, 200% scaled (2x) on 15" MPB Retina
200pct4.png


Windows 8, 150% scaled (1.5x) on 15" MPB Retina
2880-150.png
 

nwoods

Expedition Leader
Since you're still on the Mac vs. PC fence, I'll throw this out there for you to consider: It takes my quad-core 3.4Ghz Mac (running Mountain Lion) 12 GB of RAM to keep up with my quad-core 2.5Ghz PC (running Windows 7 Pro 64-bit with 4GB of RAM).

That's very interesting, and has been opposite my own experience. What program are you running that brings the Mac down to PC level ? (yes, that is a baited question).
It has been my impression that since the hardware is more locked down in the Mac, that machine level program is much more accurate, streamlined, optimized, whatever. And just runs smoother than an open PC designed to the lowest common denominator. Often, the specs for a PC will look better on paper, but runs slower than a "lower spec" Mac.
 

nwoods

Expedition Leader
I don't have time to answer all your questions this very minute, but I just purchased a refurbished 17" MacBook Pro. I'm anti retina for a few reasons, and pro larger screen for a few reasons. I just added a second hard drive to my MBP, and I upgraded my own RAM. it's very simple. I now have 16gb of RAM($45), a 750gb storage disk, and a 250gb main drive(SSD)($185). The machine absolutely screams, and I'm in it for about $2400.

Yes, I have contemplated going a similar route, with a refurbished 13" MPB. You can replace the optical drive with an SSD, and upgrade the spinning disk with a 1TB drive all pretty cheaply. But they are older dual core chips. I know that the SSD is the biggest single performance bump I'll experience no matter what, and none of my current machines have one, so I'm sure I'll be pretty happy with the performance over what I'm using now.
 

Chazz Layne

Administrator
That's very interesting, and has been opposite my own experience. What program are you running that brings the Mac down to PC level ? (yes, that is a baited question).
It has been my impression that since the hardware is more locked down in the Mac, that machine level program is much more accurate, streamlined, optimized, whatever. And just runs smoother than an open PC designed to the lowest common denominator. Often, the specs for a PC will look better on paper, but runs slower than a "lower spec" Mac.

It's all across the board, even just tooling around in the OS right at boot. It is most noticeable in Adobe InDesign, though it can also be frustrating in Photoshop. Both machines have all updates applied, run minimal services and background programs, and are regularly maintained. If I had to guess, it's probably due to Window's superior resource management strategies, thus not noticeable once you reach "don't-care" levels of physical memory like 12GB. :)

Yes, Windows 7 Pro on the quad 3.4 Mac in question is noticeably faster than on the quad 2.5 PC with that much memory floating around (I loaded Bootcamp out of curiosity a while back).
 

Scott Brady

Founder
buy what you can afford. Just get a base level 15" retina and upgrade to 16gb. That is $2,300 and a fair deal. Nothing wrong with that machine, it will do everything you need for photo and field video work
 

hitek79

Explorer
So there are a few things I don't like about the new rMBP's. First, while the resolution is higher, that doesn't really help all that much for photography IMO. My 17" screen is 1920x1200. That's still extremely high resolution, and I don't can't physically see any issues in reading text at all. No matter what, a 15" screen is just that. To see more of your image, you'll still have to zoom in. It might be slightly more crisp, but I really don't think it's as noticeable as some people make it out to be. Has your wife ever complained about the resolution of her 2009 MBP? I had a 2009 15" as well, and going to a 17" was a MUCH better move for me than going to a higher resolution screen.

Second is that it's not user upgradeable. It cost me $45 to put 16gb of RAM in my MBP. Apple wants $200 to go from 8-16gb. They want $500 to go from a 256gb SSD to a 512gb SSD. That's a total rip off IMO. I'm keeping my 750gb drive for storage and I added a 256gb SSD for $187.

I know the new retinas are lighter, but weight doesn't really bother me at all. I love having all that screen real estate, and I saved enough to pick up a Thunderbolt Cinema Display for when I'm home. For me it's an ideal set up.

FYI, my laptop is an i7 quad core chip. 2.5ghz.
 

nwoods

Expedition Leader
buy what you can afford.
Ha! Where's the fun in that. If I stayed within what I could afford, I'd be trying to live with my 8 year old PC. :)

Just get a base level 15" retina and upgrade to 16gb. That is $2,300 and a fair deal. Nothing wrong with that machine, it will do everything you need for photo and field video work

The base 2.3Ghz i7 may not actually be quad core. I need to research that a bit more to confirm, but I think I read that somewhere. The 256Gb SSD might be okay if I spend on a speedy (USB 3.0) external storage drive.
 

nwoods

Expedition Leader
HiTek, I'm leaning your direction, though I'd probably go with a fast 13" instead of the 17". I will be traveling a lot and working remotely over the next 18 months or more. I just dont relish the idea of lugging the 17" around. My son's 13" is acceptably decent to use (screen size) and a 23" HDMI monitor for $150, or $250 @ 24", seems pretty attractive compared to Apple's $1,000 27" Thunderbolt.

You also have an excellent point about the non retina display. My wife absolutely loves the display on her 2009 15" MBP, and I often use it to compare color on my photo edits, trusting her Mac far more than my PC to be color accurate (I don't own a calibrator), but the bit depth, saturation, and toneality on the Mac just kicks butt.

There is some goodnews about rMBP's. They can be upgraded, sorta. There is a replacement 480gb SSD available third party. Fits both 13" and 15" rMBP models, and,it comes with a UDB 3.0 external drive case to house the origiinal SSD drive removed to fit the 480GHz.

The RAM cannot be upgraded though.
 

SSDDBRONCO

New member
My brother got the mbp retina about two weeks after it was released. He got the 8g memory, 512g ssd. However he got very lucky with the display. A lot of people are experiencing image retention with the retina based laptops and seems to still not be fixed yet and apple isn't doing anything about it, but offering to replace screens if you have IR. Check out the apple community. I was going to buy it after i saw my bros computer but did some research and I'm backing off until they fix the problem. If I'm going to pay $3000 for a computer it sure as hell shouldn't have problems. Just thought i should warn you and give u a heads up.
Check out the forum.

https://discussions.apple.com/thread/4034848?start=5880&tstart=0

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2
 

abruzzi

Adventurer
I have a 15" rMBP. It has absolutely spoiled me, and I doubt I could happily go back to non retina. Photos look like photos, not a pixel grid. I got mine with 16mb which is a drag on battery life, and a 256mb SSD. My only regret is I didn't wait for the 13, which I would have preferred. I don't use photoshop much-which has always run sluggishly on macs (adobe's famous cross platform coding layer makes everything run worse on macs.). I run Aperture for organizing and basic edits and Pixelmator for editing.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
188,028
Messages
2,901,390
Members
229,352
Latest member
Baartmanusa

Members online

Top