Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Computers & Peripherals => Topic started by: woof75 on March 18, 2009, 06:29:11 am
-
Anyone know how good the screen on the new macbook pro 17 inch is and if it will be good enough for critical color use? I'm thinking of getting one. Seems like a pretty impressive laptop.
-
Anyone know how good the screen on the new macbook pro 17 inch is and if it will be good enough for critical color use? I'm thinking of getting one. Seems like a pretty impressive laptop.
I would say these new laptop screens of Led technology are good enough but not as good as proper desktop reference monitors. You can see changes while looking the monitor over a certain angle, but it couldn't be otherwise on such a thin screen. Anyways, I ve placed an order for mine with a matt screen (only optional on 17" ones), so I ll get back on this subject soon...
-
I would say these new laptop screens of Led technology are good enough but not as good as proper desktop reference monitors. You can see changes while looking the monitor over a certain angle, but it couldn't be otherwise on such a thin screen. Anyways, I ve placed an order for mine with a matt screen (only optional on 17" ones), so I ll get back on this subject soon...
Macbook pro 17 inch with SSD drive is what I think I'll be getting, should be super nice.
-
Hey Geotzo,
Once you get your 17" with the "Anti-Glare" option, do confirm it that is the same as the "matte" screen of the yester-models ??
Thanks,
Jai
-
Hey Geotzo,
Once you get your 17" with the "Anti-Glare" option, do confirm it that is the same as the "matte" screen of the yester-models ??
It's not the same. New from front to back.
-
If you want a great laptop for photography then don't get the "cheap" MBP17" get the Lenovo W700 or HP 8730W. While both the Lenovo and Hp are substantially more expensive they are substantially better in all regards. I bought the 17" MBP and then saw the HP and it was a no-contest.
http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF...04-3791660.html (http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF06b/321957-321957-64295-3740645-3329741-3784202-3784204-3791660.html)
http://shop.lenovo.com/SEUILibrary/control...400957242FCF7F8 (http://shop.lenovo.com/SEUILibrary/controller/e/web/LenovoPortal/en_US/systemconfig.runtime.workflow:LoadRuntimeTree?sb=:00000025:0000236E:&smid=F10AD59D781A47888400957242FCF7F8)
-
If you want a great laptop for photography then don't get the "cheap" MBP17" get the Lenovo W700 or HP 8730W. While both the Lenovo and Hp are substantially more expensive they are substantially better in all regards. I bought the 17" MBP and then saw the HP and it was a no-contest.
http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF...04-3791660.html (http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF06b/321957-321957-64295-3740645-3329741-3784202-3784204-3791660.html)
http://shop.lenovo.com/SEUILibrary/control...400957242FCF7F8 (http://shop.lenovo.com/SEUILibrary/controller/e/web/LenovoPortal/en_US/systemconfig.runtime.workflow:LoadRuntimeTree?sb=:00000025:0000236E:&smid=F10AD59D781A47888400957242FCF7F8)
it is twice the weight and size and the screen is not even as good as a older mbp 15" screen...only larger and more uneven....there are several tests floating around.....the battery life is about an hour......the only advantage at first glance would be the second HD, but that is easily done with the apple...same as with the last generations, just take the DVD drive out.....
i think the mbp 17 is very nice, but i think i will wait for the quad core chip version....and they will probably have the overheating video card issue figured out by then....
-
it is twice the weight and size and the screen is not even as good as a older mbp 15" screen...only larger and more uneven....there are several tests floating around.....the battery life is about an hour......the only advantage at first glance would be the second HD, but that is easily done with the apple...same as with the last generations, just take the DVD drive out.....
i think the mbp 17 is very nice, but i think i will wait for the quad core chip version....and they will probably have the overheating video card issue figured out by then....
I have no clue what you are talking about? I own both so I'm NOT guessing here. The MBP 17" is 6.6 pounds and the HP is 7.5 pounds, that's less than 1 pound more, the W700 is about 8 pounds. Add to that all the addional features the HP has and it's a no contest IMHO. And the one thing I can't stand about the MACs, they don't have an integrated numeric keypad, granted if you don't use or need it no big deal, but I like having it. The MACs don't even have integrated card readers, no Blu-ray or HDMI As far as battery life, ok the MAC has it there, but I like being able to replace my battery and the HPs get well over 2 hours per battery (I carry 2) and the MAC gets about 4 hours (they claim 8 under screensaver mode *sarcasm*) I also own a HDX18 and that is a better laptop than a MAC with more features and less money. If you want the ultimate photographers laptop, buy the Lenovo, a friend of mine has one of those and that is the CA.
It really comes down to, you get what you pay for, to a point. MACs are very overpriced for what you get, spend less than $2K and get a HDX16 or HDX18, both better than the MACs.
-
I have no clue what you are talking about? I own both so I'm NOT guessing here. The MBP 17" is 6.6 pounds and the HP is 7.5 pounds, that's less than 1 pound more, the W700 is about 8 pounds. Add to that all the addional features the HP has and it's a no contest IMHO. And the one thing I can't stand about the MACs, they don't have an integrated numeric keypad, granted if you don't use or need it no big deal, but I like having it. The MACs don't even have integrated card readers, no Blu-ray or HDMI As far as battery life, ok the MAC has it there, but I like being able to replace my battery and the HPs get well over 2 hours per battery (I carry 2) and the MAC gets about 4 hours (they claim 8 under screensaver mode *sarcasm*) I also own a HDX18 and that is a better laptop than a MAC with more features and less money. If you want the ultimate photographers laptop, buy the Lenovo, a friend of mine has one of those and that is the CA.
It really comes down to, you get what you pay for, to a point. MACs are very overpriced for what you get, spend less than $2K and get a HDX16 or HDX18, both better than the MACs.
Why do you still have the MBP if the PC is so much better?
-
I have no clue what you are talking about? I own both so I'm NOT guessing here. The MBP 17" is 6.6 pounds and the HP is 7.5 pounds, that's less than 1 pound more, the W700 is about 8 pounds. Add to that all the addional features the HP has and it's a no contest IMHO. And the one thing I can't stand about the MACs, they don't have an integrated numeric keypad, granted if you don't use or need it no big deal, but I like having it. The MACs don't even have integrated card readers, no Blu-ray or HDMI As far as battery life, ok the MAC has it there, but I like being able to replace my battery and the HPs get well over 2 hours per battery (I carry 2) and the MAC gets about 4 hours (they claim 8 under screensaver mode *sarcasm*) I also own a HDX18 and that is a better laptop than a MAC with more features and less money. If you want the ultimate photographers laptop, buy the Lenovo, a friend of mine has one of those and that is the CA.
It really comes down to, you get what you pay for, to a point. MACs are very overpriced for what you get, spend less than $2K and get a HDX16 or HDX18, both better than the MACs.
i am glad you found the perfect tool for you....
but just to clear up a couple of facts....the w700 is almost twice as thick, quite a bit larger (for those who like a numeric keypad) and heavier...they don't even sell the original battery anymore, the new one adds weight and even more height to the stats you listed and claims 2 hours (like mac claims 8)....and is now ($600 off!) only a couple of $100 more....without a camera, wifi "n", FW800...and less ram....but with a 64SSD drive (read any SSD drive review to see how those perform)....and we still haven't gotten to the supposedly great screen.....with blueray and other features the price goes way up...
i understand that you prefer the w700 but it just isn't true that the mac is more expensive....
-
Why do you still have the MBP if the PC is so much better?
My son uses it, he likes it a lot. I'll agree that the HP Elite 8730W and the Lenovo W700 are totally different from the MBP
and they are priced a lot higher as well. The MAC just lacks so much and if you want somewhat color acccuracy the MAC is
definitely not the way to go, actually the Lenovo is the best of the best, but with a price tag to match. I love my IPOD Touch
-
i am glad you found the perfect tool for you....
but just to clear up a couple of facts....the w700 is almost twice as thick, quite a bit larger (for those who like a numeric keypad) and heavier...they don't even sell the original battery anymore, the new one adds weight and even more height to the stats you listed and claims 2 hours (like mac claims 8)....and is now ($600 off!) only a couple of $100 more....without a camera, wifi "n", FW800...and less ram....but with a 64SSD drive (read any SSD drive review to see how those perform)....and we still haven't gotten to the supposedly great screen.....with blueray and other features the price goes way up...
i understand that you prefer the w700 but it just isn't true that the mac is more expensive....
The W700 is not almost twice as thick, the MBP 17" is .98" (Let's call it an inch or 25mm) and the W700 is 1.6" or 41mm. I'd say it's more like 50% thicker. Quite a bit larger? The W700 is 16.1" x 12.2" and the MAC is 15.47 x 10.51. I think the Lenovo is rated at 4 hours and the MAC at 8 hours, my friend tells me he gets 2.5 hours from his and the reviews make a similar claim. I'll agree that the MAC is smaller and lighter and if that's all you need it's a nice system, though I don't like the battery situation.
Maybe I wrote it backwards, I'll have to check, but I thought I said that the MAC is much CHEAPER than either the HP 8730W (The unit that I own) and the W700. I also said, "You get what you pay for" in other words, the MAC lacks a lot but it costs a lot less and the other part is I need a pc because of certain software I use. I do dual-boot my IMACS but I'm going back to all pcs again, I've had my fair share of MAC bad luck.
-
The W700 is not almost twice as thick, the MBP 17" is .98" (Let's call it an inch or 25mm) and the W700 is 1.6" or 41mm. I'd say it's more like 50% thicker. Quite a bit larger? The W700 is 16.1" x 12.2" and the MAC is 15.47 x 10.51. I think the Lenovo is rated at 4 hours and the MAC at 8 hours, my friend tells me he gets 2.5 hours from his and the reviews make a similar claim. I'll agree that the MAC is smaller and lighter and if that's all you need it's a nice system, though I don't like the battery situation.
Maybe I wrote it backwards, I'll have to check, but I thought I said that the MAC is much CHEAPER than either the HP 8730W (The unit that I own) and the W700. I also said, "You get what you pay for" in other words, the MAC lacks a lot but it costs a lot less and the other part is I need a pc because of certain software I use. I do dual-boot my IMACS but I'm going back to all pcs again, I've had my fair share of MAC bad luck.
Just to add fuel to the fire.....
MacBook Pro: Longest Battery Life, Smaller, Lighter, Mac OS, screen not too bad
Lenovo: Fastest (with quad core), Optional Dual display, optional colormeter built in, optional Wacom panel built in, better screen.
BUT the best display in a laptop actually belongs to this:
http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores...ategoryId=16154 (http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CategoryDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&categoryId=8198552921644588896&parentCategoryId=16154)
With 137% of the aRGB colour space it's the clear winner. Full matte screen too (fulllHD) with triple LED backlighting. It's staggaringly good. And it has Raid 0 HDD, 8GB ram, runs CS4 in 64bit, comes with a full version of Lightroom (and Permiere Elements and Elements), has multiple high speed card readers and a Bluray burner.
Not everyone likes/needs the same thing. That's why we have choice.
Gordon
-
Hi,
I have been on PC for last ten years and finally got word today that I can pick up my MacBook Pro 17 this afternoon, after over two months wait.
Originally I was impressed when W700 was announced, except too expensive, too large, and too heavy. I was ready to buy a W500 in early November last year, but Lenovo here in Hong Kong did not provide on time, and then not with proper specs on time, which included the better display, SSD etc. Checking their website just now... no more SSD option for W500... and prices on Lenovo considerable higher here than in USA, while Mac is same as USA!
More so... the crux of the W500 was its DisplayPort since I was going to get a 30" display for it, which requires Dual Link DVI. In November last year I managed to find an early such adapter in China which I have not yet tested, but it appears to be correct because I researched. It is a dongle. I will not need that one now, so if anyone has need for me, email me an offer!
With the MacBook Pro 17 I plan for a 26" display instead which saves me money!
Instead of W500 I went for the MacBook Pro 17 because it was about same price here in Hong Kong, but gave me following:
1. No need for Windows XP, no Windows Vista, no Windows 7!!!!! I have had much enough of MS Windows which always have problems and bugs and makes slow. The more I researched of Mac, the more I realized Mac OS is ten years ahead of Windows... seeing MS Windows 7 on Youtube with two guys show off what they labeled as cool features..., that indeed is not what I need,but instead as compared to Mac OS have I need useful features, which with Mac OS were precious icing on cake. Seeing my Aptus 65 RAW files read from a one year old MacBook Pro and scroll through them in iPhoto over USB was more impressive, it is like can work with the files!
2. 17" over 15" and better display (anti glare)
3. Only slight more weight than W500.
4. Higher reliability than PC (Lenovo notebooks are top of PC but Mac rated higher).
5. 256GB SSD.
6. Ability to later upgrade to 8GB RAM.
7. Simple OS that has so much built in!
Above said I work in engineering field, but... I can still run Windows on Mac, just use Mac for all useful!
Looking forward to my Mac today!
Regards
Anders
P.S Downside of the MacBook Pro? No second HDD. That is no problem since Pretec recent announced a 128GB SSD, we can assume to soon see larger capacities...
P.S.2 For HP, check the lack of reliability of their products. Had both notebook and pocket PC mobile, will not buy again. For Sony, check the very wide display which means is less tall! My current notebook is Fujitsu, due problems what appears due faulty design I will not buy again, have had 3 HDDs damaged and one 2GB RAM. Indeed looking forward to Mac!
-
SSD or standard hard drive? 128 GB option is only 300 dollars but I'm not sure it's quite big enough. I have 120 GB at the moment and I'm always down to my last 15GB.
-
P.S Downside of the MacBook Pro? No second HDD. That is no problem since Pretec recent announced a 128GB SSD, we can assume to soon see larger capacities...
this (mcetech optibay) (http://www.mcetech.com/optibay/index.html) is the solution...very easy to install...
i would strongly recommend to NOT get the SSDs apple and the others sell....they charge way too much and the SSDs are older much slower types.....check the other thread about the huge SSD review.....the only ones worth buying right now are the intel x25 E with 80bg or the ocz vertex.....
-
this (mcetech optibay) (http://www.mcetech.com/optibay/index.html) is the solution...very easy to install...
i would strongly recommend to NOT get the SSDs apple and the others sell....they charge way too much and the SSDs are older much slower types.....check the other thread about the huge SSD review.....the only ones worth buying right now are the intel x25 E with 80bg or the ocz vertex.....
PSS,
The Optibay indeed is interesting! Thanks for posting that they have for unibodies. By chance, do you have one in a 17" unibody or know of any review?
I am happy I went with SSD from Mac, because more durable, possibly less heat, silent etc. Time will tell. Prices will fall, and specs will become better though.
Regards
Anders
-
Anyone know how good the screen on the new macbook pro 17 inch is and if it will be good enough for critical color use? I'm thinking of getting one. Seems like a pretty impressive laptop.
Seems most threads on LL go off course so let me bring this back to the OP's question: How good is the screen? I've been using the new 17" matte for a few weeks now, and I'm not blown away. I've always thought the 15" screens were better for uniformity and viewing angle. To bad Apple doesnt see fit to put a Matte screen in them. I'd Really like to compare the Matte 17" with a 15'' with a Tech Restore Matte screen in it...
http://www.techrestore.com/xcart/product.p...467&cat=273 (http://www.techrestore.com/xcart/product.php?productid=18467&cat=273)
-
Instead of W500 I went for the MacBook Pro 17 because it was about same price here in Hong Kong, but gave me following:
1. No need for Windows XP, no Windows Vista, no Windows 7!!!!! I have had much enough of MS Windows which always have problems and bugs and makes slow. The more I researched of Mac, the more I realized Mac OS is ten years ahead of Windows.
Nonsense - I use both systems and find the Mac staggeringly useless at times compared to the PC. Finder gakkk!! - how retarded and time wasting is that programme? It's 15yrs behind the File Manager I use in Windows. At other times I find the PC really irritating as it's not like OSX. Both are good in places and both are crap in other places and if I was forced to choose just one, it would be the PC as bottom line, I can work faster. Plus I've also reinstalled OSX 10.5, 5-6 times in under a year due to problems, bugs and general issues. It fell over completely tonight and had to be powered off manually - not unusual sadly and less than a week after the latest reinstall. That and the fact that the beachball of doom is constantly spinning, whilst the sluggish machine crawls on. This recent [2008] Mac is the most unreliable and buggy computer I've ever used and am toying with buying a PC laptop when I update my current one, not a Mac laptop. The lack of a Mac laptop with Firewire that is actually a sensible size for travelling is another reason, not to mention the compromised keyboard compared to even a much more compact 13" PC laptop. Yet the Macs have the nicest trackpads, so what ever I get, it's going to be a compromise.
-
hi
For a review on my blog I did a measurement of the screen and let's say I was no dissapointed.
For the review and measurings see www.doorhof.nl/blog
-
Nonsense - I use both systems and find the Mac staggeringly useless at times compared to the PC. Finder gakkk!! - how retarded and time wasting is that programme? It's 15yrs behind the File Manager I use in Windows. At other times I find the PC really irritating as it's not like OSX. Both are good in places and both are crap in other places and if I was forced to choose just one, it would be the PC as bottom line, I can work faster. Plus I've also reinstalled OSX 10.5, 5-6 times in under a year due to problems, bugs and general issues. It fell over completely tonight and had to be powered off manually - not unusual sadly and less than a week after the latest reinstall. That and the fact that the beachball of doom is constantly spinning, whilst the sluggish machine crawls on. This recent [2008] Mac is the most unreliable and buggy computer I've ever used and am toying with buying a PC laptop when I update my current one, not a Mac laptop. The lack of a Mac laptop with Firewire that is actually a sensible size for travelling is another reason, not to mention the compromised keyboard compared to even a much more compact 13" PC laptop. Yet the Macs have the nicest trackpads, so what ever I get, it's going to be a compromise.
So why is it that your using the mac? Is it just the better trackpad?
-
hi
For a review on my blog I did a measurement of the screen and let's say I was no dissapointed.
For the review and measurings see www.doorhof.nl/blog
Thanks for the review Frank. Any chance you could give us a quick conclusion of the measurement part of your test for oiks like me who dont understand the graphs?
-
Thanks for the review Frank. Any chance you could give us a quick conclusion of the measurement part of your test for oiks like me who dont understand the graphs?
Simply put.
It has a large colorspace and the grayscale tracking is very good as is gamma tracking.
This means that the colorbalance can be done nicely and correct.
But also that the colors can be judged.
I however don't have the coordinates for argb and prophotoRGB here but as it looks I GUESS the display is very close to argb or larger but that's a guess
sRGB is slightly smaller than the NTSC colortriangle and as you can see the MBP is much larger.
You should of course calibrate your display but after that it looks alot better than most normal priced LCDs you see in the stores in the 250-400 US range.
So yes the display is very good, how good only time will tell of course but I did the first shoot today with the MPB and it works flawless and the colors are very accurate when I compare it to the Lacie 324.
For a notebook the screen is very good in my opinion.
I will measure the lacie soon to see how that one plots in the colorspace.
-
Simply put.
It has a large colorspace and the grayscale tracking is very good as is gamma tracking.
This means that the colorbalance can be done nicely and correct.
But also that the colors can be judged.
I however don't have the coordinates for argb and prophotoRGB here but as it looks I GUESS the display is very close to argb or larger but that's a guess
sRGB is slightly smaller than the NTSC colortriangle and as you can see the MBP is much larger.
You should of course calibrate your display but after that it looks alot better than most normal priced LCDs you see in the stores in the 250-400 US range.
So yes the display is very good, how good only time will tell of course but I did the first shoot today with the MPB and it works flawless and the colors are very accurate when I compare it to the Lacie 324.
For a notebook the screen is very good in my opinion.
I will measure the lacie soon to see how that one plots in the colorspace.
As good as the Lacie 324?
-
Don't think so.
But I really should have to measure.
The Lacie has better blackdetail but for the colorspace I must measure both displays.
I will try to do this this weekend and update the review.
-
Don't think so.
But I really should have to measure.
The Lacie has better blackdetail but for the colorspace I must measure both displays.
I will try to do this this weekend and update the review.
Thanks, I look forward to hearing your results.
-
Updated the review with measurements comparing aRGB to the MBP.
-
So after comparing a print from my epson 9800 to my calibrated eizo CG19 to my calibrated macbook pro 17 inch screen I'm geting rid of the eizo as the macbook pro is just as accurate, viewing angle is a little critical but basically I see no reason to have an eizo and the macbook pro screen.
-
So why is it that your using the mac? Is it just the better trackpad?
The Mac is a desktop machine, so no trackpad.
-
Since there has been much discussion between the W700 and MBP 17 Matte screen in this thread, here is a review that considers them more or less equal with a slight edge to the MBP. The Matte screen being offered in the MBP 15 now is the same screen as the MBP 17 matte screen. I too like Lenovo Thinkpads, but the W700 is huge, and just too large. It is too bad the built in colorimeter and screen quality are not offered in the W500. So I am looking at the Macbook Pros instead, because of their edge in portability and battery life, as well as offering among the best screens currently available in a notebook.
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_pag...d=7-10041-10146 (http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-10041-10146)
-
Since laptop screens are only 6bit, I'd say they are not adequate for critical use.
-
Since laptop screens are only 6bit, I'd say they are not adequate for critical use.
Not to mention viewing characteristics. When choosing a notebook, assuming everyone understands their quality deficiencies, the choices and decision you are left to make is which notebooks offer the highest screen quality relative to other notebooks. With new revisions right around the corner it is also worth considering what the next generation of notebook screens might offer....
http://www.oled-display.net/lenovos-t500-t...ch-oled-display (http://www.oled-display.net/lenovos-t500-thinkpad-with-an-15-inch-oled-display)
http://gizmodo.com/5300913/lenovo-consider...itouch-and-oled (http://gizmodo.com/5300913/lenovo-considering-thinkpads-with-multitouch-and-oled)