imac for phocus & pshop

[shaun]

Hi everyone

I'm considering a 27' imac and will run an eizo ce240w of it. It will be used for pshop & phocus software.

I don't want to spend needlessly for small gains so the question is would I notice much difference between the i3, i5 & i7 configurations.

Thanks
Shaun

[pflower]

Can't help you on the other configurations but my 27 inch 2.8 Ghz i7 with 12 gigs of memory runs Phocus, LR and Photoshop CS3 without problems.  I usually have all 3 open at once and just flip between them.  Sometimes slows down a bit if I am importing/exporting a lot of files in Phocus but otherwise very smooth.

[wildstork]

Pflower:  What size are the files you're working on (raw file size)?  Are they 12 bit or 16 bit?  File size and bit depth can make a significant difference.

Lawrence

[shaun]

Hi

The files are 16 bit from Hasselblad & 39 back, mostly from cards but sometimes tethered.

Shaun

[wildstork]

Thanks Shaun.  That's a big file.  If the iMac will process those... it would have no problems with mine.

Lawrence

[Dustbak]

Why not opt for the base model MacPro? Faster out of the box and much more options to expand in the future. Eg. how about running an e-sata external backup from your imac? Oeps, not possible. Add extra hard drives or upgrade the video card?

Make a calculation what it will cost you upgrading a base model MacPro (via OWC) against the cost of expanding the iMac and you will probably be surprised that the price difference between the 2 is not that big anymore while the MacPro has a lot more flexibility.

You already plan on using an external monitor anyway?

Just thinking out loud. If you are dead-set on getting the iMac please ignore my rant.

[shaun]

Dustbak

Appreciate what your saying and yes there wasn't much difference in price though the ram seems to be more expensive for some reason. However was really looking at an imac as I may take it to shoot tethered on location.

It's really a balancing act of price over performance.

Shaun

[Dustbak]

I use the MBP 15 for shooting tethered on location (also with Phocus). My MBP is pretty fast and a joy to use on location. About 90% of my work is done tethered so I tend to spend well to make sure I can do this smoothly with the least chance of hassle and problems (I still have run into my fair share of those though).

[jduncan]

Why not opt for the base model MacPro? Faster out of the box and much more options to expand in the future. Eg. how about running an e-sata external backup from your imac? Oeps, not possible. Add extra hard drives or upgrade the video card?

Make a calculation what it will cost you upgrading a base model MacPro (via OWC) against the cost of expanding the iMac and you will probably be surprised that the price difference between the 2 is not that big anymore while the MacPro has a lot more flexibility.

You already plan on using an external monitor anyway?

Just thinking out loud. If you are dead-set on getting the iMac please ignore my rant.

The problem is that in this days we can hardly found any benchmarking using multiple applications. Maybe barefeats but normally they don't place imacs vs mac pros running aperture by example. Also in the old days you could see multiple operations perform with each  software package. Nowadays is just one operation and you are lucky if you application is on the extremely short list. Gammer sites are the exception by the way. When they test graphics cards, they actually test them. It's quite a frustration not been able to peek your own conclusions but have to depend on faith. I coincide that the middle of the pack mac pro could be the faster machine (3.33ghz 6 cores, SSD) but is not cheap.
Maybe buying and imac today and change it (with sale of the old one) when needed is a better option in terms of price/performance.
For all that, the question is how much flexibility the user needs.

[bcooter]

Maybe buying and imac today and change it (with sale of the old one) when needed is a better option in terms of price/performance.
For all that, the question is how much flexibility the user needs.

I think the I mac is the greatest computer ever.  They cost very little, are bulletproof and when the time comes just move em on out of the chain.

When we hit the road, even if we use a powerbook for the capture device on location we take one or two Imacs for processing and they're kind of like a big powerbook.

Toss em in a case and go.

I have a tricked out tower in one studio, Imacs in the others and I really don't notice a difference in speed or if there is it's so small I don't care and I work on some files that get way over a gig.

Some people just dig geeked out stuff, with ssds, 10,000 rpm drives, but I can shoot, (and we shoot a lot of images) capture, process, edit video on an Imac anywhere in the world all for the total of less than a real good monitor, less than a full whack powerbook.

Not bad, IMO.

BC

[shaun]

Hi Bcooter

Which imac do you have, did you go for mid range or top spec?

Shaun

[Dustbak]

The problem is that in this days we can hardly found any benchmarking using multiple applications. Maybe barefeats but normally they don't place imacs vs mac pros running aperture by example. Also in the old days you could see multiple operations perform with each  software package. Nowadays is just one operation and you are lucky if you application is on the extremely short list. Gammer sites are the exception by the way. When they test graphics cards, they actually test them. It's quite a frustration not been able to peek your own conclusions but have to depend on faith. I coincide that the middle of the pack mac pro could be the faster machine (3.33ghz 6 cores, SSD) but is not cheap.
Maybe buying and imac today and change it (with sale of the old one) when needed is a better option in terms of price/performance.
For all that, the question is how much flexibility the user needs.

While I do agree in general with you on the benchmarks I would like to add that in this forum you can ask people that are using the things in more or less the same way as you plan to use it.

The topic starter is planning on using his machine with a 39MP hasselblad and Phocus. I happen to work with exactly the same equipment and have a fairly good understanding on what works under these circumstances and what not (or with problems).

Benchmarks don't tell the whole story. I would not want to have the fastest machine if the graphics card drivers are constantly crashing my most important application.

BTW, the processor in the MacPro is different than the one in the iMac. I think even the low end MacPro is going to outpace the iMac. Especially considering Phocus is able to use multiple cores fairly well.

Anyway, treating the iMac as a disposable piece of equipment is another possibility

[eronald]

May be fastest setup to just go with an iMac. Leave the MacPros to people who really need them, unless you need or already own a very good monitor.

Edmund

While I do agree in general with you on the benchmarks I would like to add that in this forum you can ask people that are using the things in more or less the same way as you plan to use it.

The topic starter is planning on using his machine with a 39MP hasselblad and Phocus. I happen to work with exactly the same equipment and have a fairly good understanding on what works under these circumstances and what not (or with problems).

Benchmarks don't tell the whole story. I would not want to have the fastest machine if the graphics card drivers are constantly crashing my most important application.

BTW, the processor in the MacPro is different than the one in the iMac. I think even the low end MacPro is going to outpace the iMac. Especially considering Phocus is able to use multiple cores fairly well.

Anyway, treating the iMac as a disposable piece of equipment is another possibility

[shaun]

Hi

At the moment I run a 15' pbook which I still bring on location, it was top spec at the time (3yrs ago) and will probably die soon, at that time I will go for another pbook.

At the moment I thought an imac would be good for my needs and was just wondering if there was any real time difference in the various 27" imacs.

Shaun

[alastairbird]

I have a CF-39 and a first-generation 27" imac. The 3.06 c2d, with 8GB of RAM and the 512mb video card. It works fine. It's not blazing-fast, but it handles the files perfectly adequately and I don't find I spend much time drumming my fingers, waiting for the files to process.  If you ask it to process 800 files it's going to take a while, but given what it is I cannot, for one second, fault the imac from a speed point of view.

Things to consider, though:  More RAM is better - I went from 4GB to 8GB and the difference was remarkable; you only get one hard drive and one FW 800 port, which is challenging if you're shooting tethered and you want to have a backup running. I use a powered firewire hub from unibrain, and it works really well.

Personally, I would never buy a Mac Pro again.  I had an old G5 which worked great for years but if I want a faster computer I'll just buy a faster imac.  The computer, delivered to my door, all in, was less than $2000.  The additional ram was a bit more, but that's a loooong way from a basic Mac Pro and an NEC or an Eizo monitor.  Or an Apple monitor.  One moment...  Just checked pricing online. Today only (Black Friday) The basic imac with 8GB of RAM is $1918 Canadian, shipped to your door. A basic Mac Pro with 8GB of RAM and a 27" monitor is $4100, shipped to your door. 

It's the best bang for your buck out there. 

Oh, and I also have a 3-year-old 15" MBP.  Running Phocus on it is a triumph of hope over experience...

[shaun]

Thanks Alastair, that's great.

Just took the plunge before I read your post and went for i5 2.8GHZ quad core with 8gb ram.

Thanks everyone for your feedback.

Shaun

[jimgolden]

i have a 27" iMac, I tether a H3 22MP to it and it's great. 8GB RAM, 512 (upgrade) video card. I love it. OWC has super cheep ram prices - get the 4MB from apple, then upgrade from OWC to 16GB.

AND on the road, clients love the huge screen. the screen is a bit too contrasty and color is uneven a bit corner to corner. it's good to have a trusted calibrated monitor for critical color/contrast work