Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: algrove on June 23, 2017, 08:47:52 am
-
It seems Apple notebooks cost about $1k per pound, so I was considering leaving my MBP behind at 4 lbs and acquiring a 2lb maxed out 16GB RAM Macbook with C1 and PS on it with not much else besides Mail and Safari.
Anyone acquired one with use with their 100MP DB yet?
-
I own a MacBook (the original and the new one with 16gb ram) and IQ3-100. I would not even consider it. The Macbook is good for my typical use of medical stuff, email, and browsing the web and even with that it gets a little "bogged" down. I couldn't even imagine trying to process IQ3-100 images on it. I also own a Macbook pro spec out and it does fine for IQ3-100 images. It would be better if they made a 32gb ram version though.
gage
-
I also have the IQ3-100 and the new Macbook Pro with 16GB of ram. For travel, I have no problem processing images, even though it's a little slower than my desktop. My images often reach 2Gs. Obviously, it would be much better with 32gb of ram but for travel it works. My normal workflow is to do to basic processing on my laptop while traveling and finish my images on my desktop.
-
Do you enable OpenCL in CaptureOne? I'd uncheck it and see how your current laptop performs. With the Macbook, you don't have said dedicated graphics hardware.
Personally I was looking at grabbing an Air due to the USB3 and SD ports, and was disappointed that there wasn't a refresh on them (again). Weight & performance you may want to look at the 13" Pro for $200 more (same config, max i7/16gb/512ssd, no touchbar) you get a 2.5ghz i7 instead of the 1.4ghz and you get the Iris graphics rather than the HD graphics.
-
Thanks all. I see some say yes and some no. I have a fast MBP which processes my 100MP files no problem, but I do basic edits and selections while on the road with the occasional PS light use.
If ever the airport ban goes into effect I was looking ahead and collecting information. Would never check my MBP, but if one had to check a computer then I was thinking the Macbook 16GB might suffice mainly with C1 and perhaps a little PS thrown in.
-
using late 2013 MacBook Pro with IQ180 files
with ACR no problem
of course not very quick but absolutely acceptable
(no experience with C1 but I think it's quite much slower than ACR)
-
Why not go with a Microsoft Surface Pro?
-
I have a Macbook (2016) and found that 3100 files were just too much for it. However I set a process recipe in C1 to size the file to 20MP which was just fine for the Macbook. I could use all filters and numerous layers fairly easily. I never needed the full sized file while on the road and the weight differential from my older Macbook Pro was welcomed. Subsequently I have decided to go the PC route with a Dell XPS 13 with touch screen 16GB ram and 512 SSD which easily handles full size 3100 files. The computer was $1400.00 at Costco with full 90 day return. I just couldn't pass that up and am very happy with the computer which has gotten rave reviews. I also have a Surface pro 4 which I found buggy......
Victor
Edit: All of these computers with high rez screens are extremely difficult to use for establishing whether or not an image is in critical focus. This is, after all, this most important use of a computer while out in the field. Finding out that an image didn't meet critical focus when you're back from a trip doesn't do any good. Practice to determine what a slightly out of focus image looks like on those screens......
-
Thanks all. I see some say yes and some no. I have a fast MBP which processes my 100MP files no problem, but I do basic edits and selections while on the road with the occasional PS light use.
hmmm, I didn't see anyone say yes to the MacBook in any of the replies.
I assume you are wondering if the recent processor update to the MacBook might make it a little better for IQ3 100 files. Geekbench specs the 2017 MacBook multicore results at 6714. To compare, the 2016 MacBook specs at 6493. As a comparison, the new MacBook Pro 2017 specs out at 15618, and even 2012 MacBook Pros are around 11,000.
To me it just doesn't seem like enough of a performance gain to realize any significant difference editing IQ3 100 files. Whether it's "acceptable" while on the road, I find the new 2017 MacBook Pro is really nice when traveling.
-
Reply #2 said he uses the 16GB RAM Macbook Pro with IQ3100 files and I read Macbook, not Macbook Pro. Must have been wishful thinking.
I have a MBP and want to leave it's weight behind. The Macbook is half the weight of my MBP. I am not willing to switch to a Microsoft anything.
Still thinking about it.
-
I recently started using a Macbook (1.2 GHz m5 processor w/8 Gb RAM) to tether in the field. Based on the few IQ3 100 files I've futzed with, I'd say that it's serviceable for basic edits in C1 although it's not exactly speedy. I tend to save the heavier lifting for when I'm at home and using my MBP plugged into a 27" color-calibrated monitor, in any case. For me the weight savings over the Macbook Pro are worth the tradeoff and checking focus zoomed in at 100% seems to work fine. YMMV, of course...
John
-
I recently started using a Macbook (1.2 GHz m5 processor w/8 Gb RAM) to tether in the field. Based on the few IQ3 100 files I've futzed with, I'd say that it's serviceable for basic edits in C1 although it's not exactly speedy. I tend to save the heavier lifting for when I'm at home and using my MBP plugged into a 27" color-calibrated monitor, in any case. For me the weight savings over the Macbook Pro are worth the tradeoff and checking focus zoomed in at 100% seems to work fine. YMMV, of course...
John
Thanks. Well, if 8GB of RAM works even though slowly, then 16GB of RAM should be slightly better with 1.4Ghz i7 processor. At home I use a Mac Pro for heavy lifting.
-
Thanks. Well, if 8GB of RAM works even though slowly, then 16GB of RAM should be slightly better with 1.4Ghz i7 processor. At home I use a Mac Pro for heavy lifting.
I wouldn't say it's slow per se, but perhaps not as snappy as my mid-2014 Macbook Pro running an i7 2.5 GHz processor with 16 Gb RAM, which I'm sure is pretty pokey compared to the Mac Pro.
TBH when using the Macbook I typically find myself squinting at the smallish (albeit high resolution Retina) screen to really notice the speed or lack thereof. ;)
John
-
Maybe a 13” MacBook Pro? 3 lbs, so not quite as light as MacBook (2lbs vs 3 lbs), but 1.5 lbs lighter than the 2015 MacBook Pros.
I was surprised dropping the ½ pound from the previous style MacBook pro to the new one was noticeable.
C1 may do better than Ps, as C1 is better at leveraging cores. I think Ps might bog down pretty bad on a MacBook with a tiff from a 100mp back.
-
I agree, the 13 inch MacBook Pro would be fine and well worth it compared to the MacBook.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Based on the new 13" Macbook Pro's increased speed and only 1 lb more than the MacBook, perhaps that's the answer even though my 2016 MBP is very much liked my me.
Wayne's speed comparisons tell the story. Thanks.
-
I took a five month motorcycle trip over three years ago, and brought a 13" MacBook Pro (i7, 16GB). I just checked the speed scores and it is slower than the new 2017 MacBook. While my MacBook Pro was very slow stitching files with 100s of megapixels, it got the job done. I often used it at campsites with no power and it never let me down. I returned home with all my images fully edited and backed up. I would have liked something smaller, in both size and weight. That said, if I were to do it again, I'd take an optioned-out MacBook, and let it grind away at those images...So it's slow compared to the larger "pro" models, it can get the job done.
-
Just as I was thinking of going the 13" maxed out MacBook Pro, you brought me back down to earth and again contemplating a maxed out MacBook. The high end 13" MacBook Pro has 4 c ports which is much more appealing to the one c port on the MacBook, but at a $1k more cost which of course comes with much more speedy CPU, GPU and larger SSD available.
-
Just as I was thinking of going the 13" maxed out MacBook Pro, you brought me back down to earth and again contemplating a maxed out MacBook. The high end 13" MacBook Pro has 4 c ports which is much more appealing to the one c port on the MacBook, but at a $1k more cost which of course comes with much more speedy CPU, GPU and larger SSD available.
Ahhh, the tyranny of having so many choices...
Will you be tethering in the field? I can easily hold my Macbook in one hand while making adjustments to the camera with the other, which for me at least wouldn't be feasible with the 13" Macbook Pro. I just tried this with my wife's MBP - it's as dense as a brick and that extra pound makes a big difference. If you won't be shooting tethered, in terms of processing speed and functionality the MBP is the better solution *if* you're willing to pay more and schlep the extra weight. So, it seems that the decision hinges on how you weigh the factors before and after the "if."
FWIW, on my last photo trip I brought both my Macbook (used mainly for tethering and not much else) and 15" MBP (for post-processing and work-related tasks when back in the hotel room). The added weight was a pain but I figured that's what rolling carry-on bags were designed for. :P
John
-
It is a shame that you're not more flexible regarding a Windows based computer but I will respect your choices. The weight of the Macbook is so appealing that I encourage you to stay with that decision. The screen is easily color calibrated and the new processor should be able to handle a 50MP file. That's a pretty big file for out in the field and easily obtained from C1. I can't imagine tethering - but that's just me. Way too much stuff and I've never found it better for focus accuracy than my loupe. I've never needed more than 100gb for image processing but again that's just me. Flash thumb drives are relatively cheap, fast and large enough to be used stand alone if needed. I always back up everything to one when I'm traveling. I found the keyboard on the Macbook difficult to use and I'm not alone but with practice it becomes more usable.
Good luck......
Victor
-
Not planning on tethering.
My current MBP has 3.5 gHz and 16 GB Ram. Never have had any issues with 100MP files with that machine.
The best MacBook offered has 1.4 gHz. That and the lack of better video card might be the killer even with 16GB Ram for 100MP images massaged in C1.
Still not sure yet.
-
I keep putting myself into this equation and come up puzzled. Is the goal to completely replace your home based desktop and process the files in the field? If so then a MBP or PC equivalent is a must. If the goal is to check the files to the point that they are acceptable for further processing once back home then I think that a MBP is overkill and way too heavy. Again...... this is how I look at this. I don't process anything for keeps in the field and am much more concerned with the ability to check my files while on location to make sure I don't have to re-shoot. I do all of my serious processing on my workstation.
Best of luck......
Victor
-
Victor
I do all my serious processing at home on my 31" monitor and Mac Pro. This is for field use, but never thought I would tether with it and instead use the Zacuto for focus.
Sometimes I am gone for 4 weeks and as such the temptation to lightly process is present. For sure I like to edit on the road with star ratings and possibly selects,but anything like big processing is not at all accomplished on the road.
2 lbs versus 3 lbs for what I can get on a MBP touch versus a MB becomes significant to me.
-
FMPOV everything you want to accomplish could be done on a Macbook. Granted I would downsize my 3100 files to 20MP but at that size I could apply any and all filters, have layers and actually see what a finished file would look like when finally processed at home. Its really important to calibrate the screen but once done its really fairly accurate as is my XPS.
I also have a Zacuto but don't use it as I find it way too big and no better than my Peak which is light as a feather and fits into a pocket.
I really recommend you try one..... you can always return it.
Victor
-
I also have a Zacuto but don't use it as I find it way too big and no better than my Peak which is light as a feather and fits into a pocket.
I really recommend you try one..... you can always return it.
Victor
Victor
I see Peak makes many various models. Which one do you prefer? Do any have soft bases so they will not scratch the LCD?
Thanks.
Lou
-
Lou..... its the Peak 4x Lupe NO 2038. I like mine so much that I bought a spare. It has a 2 inch square base which works great on the 3100. They are a little difficult to find but they are/were on Ebay. I protect the LCD on my 3100 with either TrueVue screen protector or ScreenPatronus. The LCD screen should be made out of Gorilla glass but that's another issue. The base is hard but its a great Lupe which I can't imagine you not liking..... and with the screen protectors I don't worry at all about the LCD. I highly recommend that you get either of the Screen protectors I mentioned..... google either and it should get you to either of their sites. I never order less than three......
Victor
-
Lou..... its the Peak 4x Lupe NO 2038. I like mine so much that I bought a spare. It has a 2 inch square base which works great on the 3100. They are a little difficult to find but they are/were on Ebay. I protect the LCD on my 3100 with either TrueVue screen protector or ScreenPatronus. The LCD screen should be made out of Gorilla glass but that's another issue. The base is hard but its a great Lupe which I can't imagine you not liking..... and with the screen protectors I don't worry at all about the LCD. I highly recommend that you get either of the Screen protectors I mentioned..... google either and it should get you to either of their sites. I never order less than three......
Victor
I just checked and the Peak 2038 loupe is available on Amazon, at least in the U.S. I also echo the suggestion to use a screen protector from ScreenPatronus (which also does business under the Lexerd brand).
Now about that Macbook...
John
-
Lou..... Amazon does have it but at a highway robbery price. Ebay has it - I got mine on Ebay - for $75.00.
Victor
-
I just checked and the Peak 2038 loupe is available on Amazon, at least in the U.S. I also echo the suggestion to use a screen protector from ScreenPatronus (which also does business under the Lexerd brand).
Now about that Macbook...
John
Thanks both John and Victor.
That 12" MacBook might just become a 13" MacBook Pro as it's, yes, 1 lb more, but at $50 less than a comparable 12" MacBook one gets a lot more computer in addition to the option of specing it much, much higher. Like 2.5 GHz i7 (versus the MacBook 1.4 i7) and 1TB SSD for about $500 more than the MacBook with 2 c-ports instead of one. Also the MacBook Pro RAM is slightly faster than the MacBook with 2133 versus 1866 for the MacBook. GPU is probably better on the MacBook Pro too.
If more c ports are desirable (me), then the MacBook Pro touch at 3.5 i7, 16, GPU 650, 4 c ports, 512 SSD is $600 More than the 12" MacBook, configurable to 1TB SSD which in today's world just might be needed.
-
Thanks both John and Victor.
That 12" MacBook might just become a 13" MacBook Pro as it's, yes, 1 lb more, but at $50 less than a comparable 12" MacBook one gets a lot more computer in addition to the option of specing it much, much higher. Like 2.5 GHz i7 (versus the MacBook 1.4 i7) and 1TB SSD for about $500 more than the MacBook with 2 c-ports instead of one. Also the MacBook Pro RAM is slightly faster than the MacBook with 2133 versus 1866 for the MacBook. GPU is probably better on the MacBook Pro too.
If more c ports are desirable (me), then the MacBook Pro touch at 3.5 i7, 16, GPU 650, 4 c ports, 512 SSD is $600 More than the 12" MacBook, configurable to 1TB SSD which in today's world just might be needed.
I think you should go for it! (the Macbook Pro, that is) Good luck!
John
-
I think you should go for it! (the Macbook Pro, that is) Good luck!
John
Must ask. Do you work for Apple? ;D
Just joking.
-
Must ask. Do you work for Apple? ;D
Just joking.
LOL. No, but perhaps I should have disclosed that I own Apple stock? :P
-
LOL. No, but perhaps I should have disclosed that I own Apple stock? :P
Ha, ha. Sell or pare your holdings as I might not get the Pro.
-
A friend of mine purchased a 15" MacBook Pro a while back. He actually brought some files in to the Apple Store to look at, on the display. Perhaps you could do the same and do some simple edits with the software available to see how the MacBook vs the pro model does. You might be able to store the images on iCloud and just login to retrieve them..? Then you'd have a more educated decision to make. The only issue might be if the machines on display don't have the 16GB required.
-
I use a macbook pro 15" 2014 with 16gb on board it works fine with 100mb files. Weight is not a consideration for me. 32gb is the next goal for many reasons.
Here are the issues
The screen is not good enough for me to have the apps i need open and provide the space to see the image for critical PP.
You can make some big calculations and then wait while you MBP goes into full fan mode and crunches on the data but it gets frustrating after a few images.
A new MBP has nothing I would change for and I cant deal with less holes to plug things in.
A 3 image bracket plus 3 stitch pano will work fine but after that you really cant do major editing 1.5gb images really slow down 2gb are at a crawl and of course to add THE SLOWS TO EVERYTHING I DON'T WORK ON THE HD IN THE COMPUTER ONLY EXTERNAL DISKS SO IT GETS REALLY SLOW.
I believe Dell makes a laptop with 32gb that should run much faster than a MBP and maybe we can find a 64GB book which is what is really needed for speed but that will still leave the screen issue 15" just wont cut it for me!
-
I use a macbook pro 15" 2014 with 16gb on board it works fine with 100mb files. Weight is not a consideration for me. 32gb is the next goal for many reasons.
Here are the issues
The screen is not good enough for me to have the apps i need open and provide the space to see the image for critical PP.
You can make some big calculations and then wait while you MBP goes into full fan mode and crunches on the data but it gets frustrating after a few images.
A new MBP has nothing I would change for and I cant deal with less holes to plug things in.
A 3 image bracket plus 3 stitch pano will work fine but after that you really cant do major editing 1.5gb images really slow down 2gb are at a crawl and of course to add THE SLOWS TO EVERYTHING I DON'T WORK ON THE HD IN THE COMPUTER ONLY EXTERNAL DISKS SO IT GETS REALLY SLOW.
I believe Dell makes a laptop with 32gb that should run much faster than a MBP and maybe we can find a 64GB book which is what is really needed for speed but that will still leave the screen issue 15" just wont cut it for me!
I have not checked. but I wonder if OWC now offers soemthing along the lines of 32GB Ram?
-
I bought the latest Dell and hated it. The Spec's were great and I use a PC tower for all of my editing, so I'm fine with Windows. The user experience on the Dell, though, was just awful for me! Went back to my 2015 MBP. I think I'll pick up the new one to replace it. The smaller units have half as many cores and C1P is great at utilizing all the cores, and I already wish it was faster on the laptop (even just for zooming into images)... so I can't imagine working with a lesser machine in the field.
IMHO,
CB
-
Cris I haven't had user experience with the Dell but I believe what your saying and I hate windows we have like ten of those machine in my business and we're constantly rolling with glitches. I just read this article and was thinking 32 gb for 100mb raws converted 600+MB files should run smoother with the extra power.
Read here. https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/macbook-pro-15-vs-dell-xps-15/
-
A friend of mine purchased a 15" MacBook Pro a while back. He actually brought some files in to the Apple Store to look at, on the display. Perhaps you could do the same and do some simple edits with the software available to see how the MacBook vs the pro model does. You might be able to store the images on iCloud and just login to retrieve them..? Then you'd have a more educated decision to make. The only issue might be if the machines on display don't have the 16GB required.
Good suggestion. The store closest to me closed on 25 March for remodeling and with no projected opening date which to me is very imprecise for Apple IMHO. Not even a guesstimate. I found another store perhaps an hour further away and when there I will try that approach. Might even be able to load each machine with a free trial of C1 to see how they behave with my images since whatever they come with from Apple will not help me much.
-
Cris I haven't had user experience with the Dell but I believe what your saying and I hate windows we have like ten of those machine in my business and we're constantly rolling with glitches. I just read this article and was thinking 32 gb for 100mb raws converted 600+MB files should run smoother with the extra power.
Read here. https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/macbook-pro-15-vs-dell-xps-15/
Yeah, I thought 32gb RAM and the better GFX card would put the Dell over the top, but I wasn't seeing a real world workflow improvement. The screen was beautiful, but I hated the physical feedback of both the keyboard and trackpad. I had so much erratic input from the trackpad that I spent twice as much time hitting Cntrl-Z and trying to click on the correct button/object. Also, although the screen was really beautiful, I couldn't successfully calibrate it with the X-Rite until I uninstalled some Dell display software. The article says this machine tops out at $2k. I maxed the thing out and it was $2800. I really wanted to like that machine and kept it a little over a week. :(
-
I certainly know where you are coming from with regards to keyboard and trackpad preferences. However my experiences are different than yours...... my MacBook was so sensitive to any touch of the trackpad while typing that I looked for ways to turn off the trackpad. Absolutely hated that experience. My XPS-13 is just the opposite and a dramatic improvement. I found the screen very easy to calibrate with my Xrite and it was a whopping $800.00 less expensive than a comparable MacBook Pro 13.
Horses for courses.......
Victor