Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Mon Jul 28, 2014 3:24 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 44 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Apple Macbook
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 9:02 am 
Hi - I was thinking of moving to Apple and the new 13' Macbook:

- Any forum members who use one for their photo capture & editing?
- Any comments on whether the 1GB RAM would be enough? I would probably install Lightroom or PS.
- Any comments on the screen IQ?
- Would the entry level (2.0GHz) model be sufficient or would be spend the extra on the 2.16GHz model? I see that the entry level model doesn't have the DVD writer.

The machine would not see very intensive use.

Thanks!


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:11 am 
I've got a 15" MacBook Pro and I sometimes find the screen sometimes a little small in certain situations, although mostly it's fine. With that in mind, I suppose a Macbook Pro is out of your budget?

Whichever model you go for I would definitely recommend upgrading to 2gb RAM (although you'll save a fair bit of money by buying the memory yourself and installing it, rather than getting Apple to do it).

I'm not sure on the advantages of 2.16GHz over 2GHz. I've got 2.16GHz MPB and have never noticed any problems. When you're talking about images, RAM is the most important thing. The CPU will come into it if you plan on doing a lot of advanced editing in Photoshop like HDR or something but if you had to go with one or the other I would go for RAM instead of the slight CPU upgrade.

The screen quality is excellent but you need to make sure you change the color profile from the default Apple standard to PC/TV standard (I can't remember the specifics off hand but It's dead easy to do). The reason? Apple screens have their gamma set at 1.8 and natively they render colors a lot lighter than PC's (which have gamma set at 2.2). If you don't, it means that when you come to send you nicely edited images off to print, they will come back much darker than you expected (because the machines they use to do the printing, expect that everyone is using a Windows PC).

More info is here;- http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=302827

If you do go the Mac route, I would really recommend checking out Aperture as well - at least on trial. Personally, I haven't found anything to rival it for image/keyword/workflow management.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:14 am 
I use a MacBook Pro. 2gb of ram would be better if you can afford it especially if you're going to be using PS. My only concern with the screen is that 13" might be a bit small? I find 15" is a bit pokey at times.
If you can afford it you may as well get the faster one with the dvd writer!
You'll probably use it a lot more than you think when you get it. I hardly turn my desktop pc on these days.
There's a new version of Apple's OS scheduled for release this month so might be worth waiting for that.
Apple do a hefty education discount if there's any way you can swing that...


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:21 am 
Apples are the equivalent of film slr's almost extinct and doomed to irrelevance due to their reputation (in Australia) of high price, tremendously slow and expensive repair and up keep costs. I believe they have started using intel processors in an attempt to remain competitive with pc's.
My question is--- why pay twice the price for the same if not less quality than the opposition?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:48 am 
AndrewC wrote:
Apples are the equivalent of film slr's almost extinct and doomed to irrelevance due to their reputation (in Australia) of high price, tremendously slow and expensive repair and up keep costs. I believe they have started using intel processors in an attempt to remain competitive with pc's.
My question is--- why pay twice the price for the same if not less quality than the opposition?


Please. Stop talking complete rubbish. This isn't the forum to start a Mac vs PC fanboy war, especially when most of your comments suggest that you haven't got a clue what you're talking about. The OP asked for advice on Macs and that's what we're trying to give him.

As for Macs being "tremendously slow"; I've had mine over a year and it still takes a mere 30 seconds to boot and runs a lot faster than any other PC I've ever owned. I'll agree, they *are* very expensive and that is annoying when you can get a comparative spec PC for much less money. On the flip side, the OS *is* a lot better than Windows in my opinion so it's really comparing apples with oranges.

They are FAR from extinct.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:12 am 
TelexStar wrote:
AndrewC wrote:
Apples are the equivalent of film slr's almost extinct and doomed to irrelevance due to their reputation (in Australia) of high price, tremendously slow and expensive repair and up keep costs. I believe they have started using intel processors in an attempt to remain competitive with pc's.
My question is--- why pay twice the price for the same if not less quality than the opposition?


Stop talking complete rubbish. This isn't the forum to start a Mac vs PC fanboy war, especially when most of your comments suggest that you haven't got a clue what you're talking about. The OP asked for advice on Macs and that's what we're trying to give him.

As for Macs being "tremendously slow"; I've had mine over a year and it still takes a mere 30 seconds to boot and runs a lot faster than any other PC I've ever owned. I'll agree, they *are* very expensive and that is annoying when you can get a comparative spec PC for much less money. On the flip side, the OS *is* a lot better than Windows in my opinion so it's really comparing apples with oranges.

They are FAR from extinct.


Aaah, we have an agreement that Macs are expensive?
As an Englishman, Telex, did you read the entire post in its English syntax?

tremendously slow and expensive repair and up keep costs

referred to the speed at which they are returned from repair, service an maintenance shops here in Australia, not , not the speed of the machine.

Irrelevance and dinosaur like status in the market are probably best related to 2 Apple shops in Australian capital cities closing their doors in the last 3 months, they were once mighty, but oh how the mighty have fallen.
As this is a forum , I thought I may be able to introduce another line of thought into the post as to relevance of one format over another and as to your suggestion of fanboy elements, I hope you aren't referring to me in that way because if you had jot of understanding of my views on brand loyalty you would swallow many verbs, nouns and adjectives rapidly.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:35 am 
AndrewC wrote:
As an Englishman, Telex, did you read the entire post in its English syntax?


I did, but the English language being what it is, there are two ways to read the sentence you wrote and I obviously read it the other way. I take your point though.

Quote:
As this is a forum , I thought I may be able to introduce another line of thought into the post as to relevance of one format over another


Of course this is a forum but what you call "introducing another line of thought", I call "taking the thread off-topic from what the original poster was actually asking". He wasn't trying to garner my or your opinion on the advantages of Macs or PC's over the other, he was asking for advice on what spec of Mac would be good for viewing & editing images. While some of your points are valid (Macs are expensive and there's no excuse for it!), they don't actually help the original poster in his question. In particular the hugely generalised comment about paying twice as much for an inferior product; That might be your opinion, but that makes it far from accurate or true and only serves to confuse people who are looking for information.

Quote:
as to your suggestion of fanboy elements, I hope you aren't referring to me in that way because if you had jot of understanding of my views on brand loyalty you would swallow many verbs, nouns and adjectives rapidly.


Fair point. I don't know you and I don't know your views on brand loyalty but I've been involved in countless debates about how "PC's are better than Macs" or "Macs are better than PC's" and frankly, your comments came across as fanboy'ish in a thread that didn't need.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 1:02 pm 
With extreme apologies to roland, I will continue the discussion as above.
Telex, I resent being told that I am talking rubbish!!, I resent being told that I have ignored the original post and taken it off topic, as far as I was aware, the topic originally revolved around I was thinking of moving to Apple and the new 13' Macbook, I think it is rather insulting that you have suggested I present a view about either remaining with or switching to a pc based format as off topic when roland has asked about switching to a new format as in "mac" or just upgrading a pc environment. From roland's post, and this in no way is a slight on roland, it is not clear which format he owns or uses at the moment, although from the original wording about moving to Apple I gathered that he was wondering about converting to the aforesaid format.

As far as taking it off topic and disregarding his initial question as to whether he should "move to Apple and the new 13' Macbook", I think you should maybe examine your own response as purely Apple based and fanboyish in its own right.
I am sorry to drag this on, but my two final points are that in my opinion , Apples cost in most retail environments in Australia, twice the price of pc based systems. I don't regard that as a hugely generalised statement, it was meant as a reasonably well documented point of view about the pricing of Macs in this country and the general publics point of view as to their relevance in the sales market as evidenced by the downward trend of Mac sales. My final point is that as a forum, I had hoped that people would be able to present points of view that were , whilst being contradictory to others, at least acceptable to be read without being told they were talking complete rubbish
Thank you for your time on this forums folks,
See you somewhere taking pictures happily I hope.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 1:13 pm 
I think it's best if we discuss this further in a PM rather than dragging this even further off-topic.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 4:25 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 11:08 pm
Posts: 7923
Location: Germany
Ok everybody :!: You're all somewhat on topic but with a lot of noise in between :?
Please take out the noise and return to the questions at the table.
We may even ask Roland, what his other PC-systems are and what makes him lean towards an Apple.
Roland? ROOOOOOLAND!!!

Oh, and by the way. Rule #1 in this forum: You may call yourself a fanboy, but nobody else :wink:
See my signature...

_________________
Thomas (beware: Nikon-fanboy and moderator!) My Lens Reviews, My Pictures, My Photography Blog
D800+assorted lenses


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 4:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 10:23 pm
Posts: 2341
Location: Fife, Scotland
MacBook - I had one with 1Gb ram, 2Ghz and it was FAR to slow.

In my personal opinion, they are not worth it. They have no dedicated graphics card, so the system is beign taxed ram and cpu time to do gpu calculations. Also screen quality has something to be desired, especially for colour critical applications like photoshop etc.

I would however recommend a Windows laptop with a Core 2 Duo T7600, 2Gb DDR2-667 and GeForce 8500GT - This will be able to do almost teh same as the higher end MBP.

There are ways and means to get OS X on your current machine although I can not discuss the methods as they are in violation of the Apple Terms & Conditions for using OS X.

If you must go mac, and NEED portability, get a MBP 15"

_________________
Canon EOS 5DmkII + BG-E6 + Canon EOS 40D + BG-E2N + Canon EOS 33
Canon 17-40 F/4L USM + Canon 24-70 F/2.8L USM + Canon 28mm F/1.8 USM + Canon 70-200 F/2.8L USM IS + Canon 85mm F/1.8 USM
Canon Speedlite 580EX II + Canon Speedlite 540EZ + 2 x Nikon SB-80DX
Cactus V2s Wireless Trigger - 5 x Cactus V2s Wireless Reciever

MY FLICKR!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 9:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 11:10 pm
Posts: 355
Location: Netherlands
I don't think Photoshop uses the graphics card, so using a Macbook (with Core 2 duo) will be about as fast as a Windows laptop with a Core 2 duo and whatever graphics card.

Hans


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 10:23 pm
Posts: 2341
Location: Fife, Scotland
Photoshop does actually run faster on a system with a graphics card in comparison to one without, as the gpu is seperate from the cpu and ram, therefore not using CPU time that photoshop could be using for actual calculations and the GPU can redraw larger images faster from dedicated video memory, along with the fact you get another 256+ MB of ram back rather than it going to the onboard video.

Core 2 Quad Mobile was supposed to be out before Christmas (for Crysis)

_________________
Canon EOS 5DmkII + BG-E6 + Canon EOS 40D + BG-E2N + Canon EOS 33
Canon 17-40 F/4L USM + Canon 24-70 F/2.8L USM + Canon 28mm F/1.8 USM + Canon 70-200 F/2.8L USM IS + Canon 85mm F/1.8 USM
Canon Speedlite 580EX II + Canon Speedlite 540EZ + 2 x Nikon SB-80DX
Cactus V2s Wireless Trigger - 5 x Cactus V2s Wireless Reciever

MY FLICKR!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 12:52 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 3:32 pm
Posts: 9962
Location: Queenstown, New Zealand
Photoshop CS3's latest features can exploit the 3D acceleration on a GPU, but I'm not sure earlier versions could.

The interesting thing is a GPU can in some cases simply be used as extra muscle for certain tasks, and while it's obviously designed for 3D, it could theoretically be used for other processes...

But back to Photoshop - I urge any Photoshop or performance nut (of which I class myself one!) to check out Scott Byer's blog here:

http://blogs.adobe.com/scottbyer/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 7:13 am 
DD_nVidia wrote:
MacBook - I had one with 1Gb ram, 2Ghz and it was FAR to slow.


I would agree with this. If you get a mac laptop at all, get a MacBook Pro.


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 44 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group