[PuxaVida]

Hi all,



I've been searching for a decent laptop to be used for image processing, which should be able to handle the future .nef files coming from the D800. So I'm not a Mac user (except for the iPad I own, which is quite user friendly due to it's unnecessity <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />). I liked the MacBook pro and MacBook air because of the minimalist design. But surely there must be other criterias considered because beauty alone is not enough.



So the setup I need is a small/portable, fast and robust system (both in terms of soft- and hardware), and I want to use my existing 22" IPS monitor. And of course the interfaces are crucial:



- CF / SD card slots (supporting the improved new card versions) should be there. Better on board, at least via adapter.

- My existing monitor has a DVI interface (the panel is 1680 x 1050 and 16:10). And I want to connect it to the laptop.

- Fast interface for external data storage/back up.



I don't have the expertise on new class CPUs (2 cores / or 4 cores needed?)... Would the 4GB RAM enough? What about the graphics card...



MacBook Pro or even MacBook Air looks good, but I have no clue about the software part and I have concerns about the Apple's interface compatibility approach (esp. regarding the Thunderbolt - DVI adapter).



Any suggestions are very wellcome...





Serkan

[IanCD]

[quote name='PuxaVida' timestamp='1330092685' post='16129']

Hi all,

I've been searching for a decent laptop to be used for image processing, which should be able to handle the future .nef files coming from the D800.

So I'm not a Mac user (except for the iPad I own, which is quite user friendly due to it's unnecessity <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />).



I liked the MacBook pro and MacBook air because of the minimalist design. But surely there must be other criterias considered because beauty alone is not enough.

[/quote]



Hi Serkan,

Might be worth looking at [url="http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/forums/thread486-3.htm"]this thread on CinC[/url] - which gives a balance of views between Mac and PC, the thread started in 2008 but has had several recent responses: see particularly Colin's response third from last.



[quote name='PuxaVida' timestamp='1330092685' post='16129']

So the setup I need is a small/portable, fast and robust system (both in terms of soft- and hardware), and I want to use my existing 22" IPS monitor. And of course the interfaces are crucial:

- CF / SD card slots (supporting the improved new card versions) should be there. Better on board, at least via adapter.

- My existing monitor has a DVI interface (the panel is 1680 x 1050 and 16:10). And I want to connect it to the laptop.

- Fast interface for external data storage/back up.



I don't have the expertise on new class CPUs (2 cores / or 4 cores needed?)... Would the 4GB RAM enough? What about the graphics card...

MacBook Pro or even MacBook Air looks good, but I have no clue about the software part and I have concerns about the Apple's interface compatibility approach (esp. regarding the Thunderbolt - DVI adapter).

Any suggestions are very welcome...



Serkan

[/quote]



Definitely quad core now... there's no reason to go for older dual core CPUs.



Second generation i3 Sandy Bridge from Intel seems to be standard fit in PC laptops, i5 is available in many and even i7 (very fast) in top-end. I think there's a MacBook pro with the i7 in.



You'll be able to get a machine with more RAM than 4Gb.

Windows 7 is almost always 64-bit as standard now, which is needed to make use of > 4Gb RAM.

I'd go for dedicated graphics (either NVidia or ATI) though I'm not sure whether this is needed as such for photo editing... (certainly speeds up some video editing)

I can't comment re software, card slots or interfaces - specifics will take some searching..! <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



Good luck with your hunting..! <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

Best wishes,

Ian

[popo]

SD card slots are common. CF card slots are rare and you would expect to carry an external adapter in that case.



DVI is fine. Newer laptops might have HDMI, but they use the same signalling so just get the right cable to connect between them and it should be fine.



On the number of cores, that does depend a bit of if the software you expect to use can make use of them. Most laptop CPUs, even higher end ones, are only dual core since they have to balance processing power with power consumption. Note the intel ones may be 2 core 4 thread, but that's still less than 4 core and 4 or 8 thread. Only the highest end laptops might have physical quad core as an option.



Graphics performance is more important than it has been in the past, even if you are not a gamer. They can be used to accelerate many types of processing, which is becoming ever more common. But like CPUs, there is a tough balancing act on power, so it is harder to find higher end solutions.



For future proofing, try to find one that supports USB3. Without that, there are the usual suspects like e-sata or firewire if you have devices that can make use of them.



Ram is cheap enough these days, even for a laptop. I don't think there is any good reason to get less than 8GB, unless the manufacturer sells it as an overpriced upgrade where it might be more economic to do it yourself later.



I can't suggest any specific laptop as there's simply too many out there to keep up with.

[PuxaVida]

Thanks a lot for the link Ian... And thanks for the advice Popo...



Actually I partly share the point that guy mentions in the thread. I'm not comfortable with the snob effect around the Apple universe. I mean they seem to have very nice devices doing a very good work. But at the same time I believe they have compatibility issues:



- that back-up utility Time Machine... It's a very good idea indeed. But does it work with a storage device other than the Time Capsule?



- Apple computers are equipped with Thunderbold interface (which is claimed to be faster than USB-3). That's ok but I've read many complaints from users trying to connect Thunderbold to DVI socket on the non-Apple panel. Original Apple adapter usually works fine, but it is twice the price of a 3rd party product.



All in all these two points may seem to be no valid criterias for choosing (or not choosing Apple), but what's all with that Apple "universe"... I stepped into the Appleworld with the iPad, maybe that's why I'm a bit biased <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />...



Any ideas from Apple users?

[anyscreenamewilldo]

[quote name='PuxaVida' timestamp='1330112025' post='16140']

Thanks a lot for the link Ian... And thanks for the advice Popo...

...... I'm not comfortable with the snob effect around the Apple universe. I mean they seem to have very nice devices doing a very good work. But at the same time I believe they have compatibility issues:

.....Any ideas from Apple users?

[/quote]



.....simple ideas from a simple person - i have mac because it's easy (not because it's an expensive snob) and because of friends -



.....my various iMacs have worked a treat for many years, fast, never a problem, but i'm not sure about tying the big screen to the computer although my screen is fine for print grading (....but some say my grading could be better :-)



- no compatibility issues, but i have no other gear :-) ....and windows emulation would be useful, if i used it -



- just one thing - i bought a 13" mac pro for out and about and it has been excellent; useful (saved me a bad lens purchase); and is a power miser at home + it has all the inputs i need and is fast for such a little thing....



-- but --



- it has a good screen but not for grading (due to off centered change of quality) -



- it has imo, tinny sound (but, shock horror, i have vinyl and valves in another larger room = me retro) -



- and go for the i7 +8g ram to hopefully make the processing work even better than the i5 = my one regret is buying i5, the cheapest option

- hope this might help -

[Plochmann]

Yeah, I usually would go mac. But their latest Pro lines are anything but with just two USB and the Thunderbolt connection which hardy works with anything yet. Sigh, but still better than windows. My friend as a Widows Laptop and the ICC profiles are always a mess and the Spyder 3 doesn't play well with it. You end up spending almost as much on a Windows PC as you do a mac by the time you similar parts and the mac monitor is hard to beat. I'd say Dell is the only company I've seen that can build a professional computer on the non-mac side of things.

But I'd still get a Mac because of ease of use and mine is surviving my clumsiness and a toddler... so far.

[PuxaVida]

[quote name='asnwd' timestamp='1330145039' post='16143']

...

- no compatibility issues, but i have no other gear :-) ....



[/quote]



<img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />... I'm sure you're happy with them... And I'm more or less sure that I will be too (after I'm charmed with the Apple toys)... The thing is, before stepping into the Appleworld, it's a bit frustrating when you know the compatibility issues...

and windows emulation would be useful, if i used it -

I think I will need that also... My video editing sofware does not have a Mac version... And I'm not sure if iMovie can handle 50p videos.

[PuxaVida]

I've heard that unlike Windows, Mac's OS has a built in color profile management tool. Is that useful?

[anyscreenamewilldo]

[quote name='PuxaVida' timestamp='1330160148' post='16147']

... My video editing sofware does not have a Mac version... And I'm not sure if iMovie can handle 50p videos.

... I've heard that unlike Windows, Mac's OS has a built in color profile management tool. Is that useful?

[/quote]



1....unfortunately in a previous life i worked in broadcast tv (you know - flying logo's, ahem [size="1"]sony[/size], that sort of thing) - so - since moving on, moving pictures have held no interest for me at all (no tv, no movies, nothin'), so i can't help you with video editing - i'd have to look at imovie and i can't see it and can't remember anything....just the thought of it gives me heart flutter (and there is a complete other story in helping to fix problems since, so.....) - sorry, but as movies are the latest thing for still cameras i'm sure someone else can help you there -



2....for monitor calibration on my mac i use a pgm called SuperCal from bergdesign - i find it works very well and makes my monitor match my prints, and the monitors do appear to be quite stable - but read the above, unfortunately i've had a wasted lifetime of looking at screens, so it's not too hard for me to setup a screen now

[joachim]

[quote name='PuxaVida' timestamp='1330160148' post='16147']

I've heard that unlike Windows, Mac's OS has a built in color profile management tool. Is that useful?

[/quote]



Hi Serkan,



A few pointers from my end (moved from Windows XP to MacOS in the last year - did use Windows 7 at work for a bit) on the questions you raised. At work I have a 15" inch MacPro (2010 model with dual core i7) and at home a 21.5 imac 2.7 GHz. For image editing I use Apple's aperture and Olympus Viewer 2 software. I did some movie editing on the proBook but didn't really get a go on the iMac.

• If you don't need the portabitliy for what you want to do you should be looking into an iMac. These have a far superior thermal design. I never got the imac to heat up, while macbooks get hot when you put computation load to them. You will burn your legs if you use is as a "laptop"! iMacs have desktop components (e.g. 65W processors or more in case of the top of the line 27" inch model), while the laptops have, as the name says, laptop compenents (e.g. processors top out at 45W of head dissipation). The graphic cards and disks are also of different breed. Memory parts are the same across both product lines (1333 MHz, so there will be no difference here). You can hook your existing monitor to the iMac and use a dual display setup. In general I feel iMacs offere the "best bang for your buck".
• If you indeed need the portability, you need a 15" or 17" inch model. In the small case of a 13" or 11" model they do not manage to put in a proper graphics card (even more severe thermal design constraints). Only the 15" and 17" models have quadcore processors.
• While in the pro books and iMacs the memory modules are user servicable they are not in an Airbook. An airbook has 4 GB max, which might be insufficient. My advise would be to start out with 4 GB and buy more memory (not from Apple, they still charge insane prices and Steve is not around any more to put his blessing hand on it - sorry for the cynicism) if you are badly swapped (can be monitored).
• Airbooks have reduces spec thunderbold connectors. For what you describe (external disks and monitors) you might need a full spec one in the long run.
• To compare performance between the Mac lines I found http://www.macworld.com/article/162105/2...suite.html very helpful. You have to study the details. Many of their benchmarks are heavily influenced by the transfer speed between the internal disk and the processor. Since you intend to use external disks you have to account for that effect.
• On graphic intensive work, small iMacs get a slight advantage over similar spec-ed (same processor & graphic card) 27" models since they do not need to serve that huge monitor. On the other hand on a large monitor you just have more work area. A 27" monitor is huge.
• iMac monitors are very good. Macbook monitors are not really suitable for imaging work. As most (all?) laptops they change brightness when changing seat position
• An Apple monitor adapter is about $30 - don't bother with aftermarket.
• For my iMac I use a 2TB Hitachi USB disk, for my work laptop I have a 1TB Western digital firewire disk, which I use for time machine. That works - in my experience USB is fine for time machine. A lot of the time, when writing backups, the software is not cooking at the bandwidth limit. If I do major changes, e.g. OS-upgrade, a back-up can take time, but then this is a fully automatic process running in the background and typically doesn't interfere. Don't buy an Apple product here. Enjoy http://timecapsuledead.org/
• Yep there is a colour engine build into a mac. In my experience it works and all software I have is using it. Not sure I understand your question correct, in case you are new to colour management: Without a colour engine you are wasting your time. I had colour managment also under windows XP. It is a must have for serious photographers.
• 15" and 17" macbooks are that heavy, that I wouldn't like to carry them on a daily basis - you might want to look into a double solution. An iMac at home for serious work and something really light (airbook or ipad) to show your work while on the move.
• To get windows access, you can have boot camp or install a virtual machine (macbooks and air books get hot if you do serious stuff in a VM).
• After some learning curve I don't miss windows at all and don't have it any of my Macs. You can have office for Mac - that would for me be a reason to install windows. I don't like office but for work I have to use it. The days I could ignore emails with office attachments are over - I got away with that a long time.
• Macs don't offer good blueray support. If that is important you are a bit lost. Airbooks require external DVD drives.

Ok, I think you got a few pointers here.





Best wishes

Joachim