Best Mac for photography...?

bevoholic

TPF Noob!
Joined
Jul 29, 2010
Messages
135
Reaction score
6
Location
Round Rock, Texas
Website
www.stephenanthonyphotography.com
Can others edit my Photos
Photos NOT OK to edit
I will be starting photography school this coming spring and I would like some recommendations on a Mac. I don't need portability, but I won't rule that out. I have my iPad if I need it as well for things away from home if I go the iMac route. Is there any difference between the iMacs in terms of color accuracy? If I go the MacBook route I don't want anything larger than the 15". Would you suggest the anti-glare screen? I know I will need as much memory as I can get as well, which is one of the things drawing me towards the MacBook.

Any help will be appreciated.
 
I have a MacBook Pro. I have had it for about 4 or 5 years now. It has been the best computer I have ever owned. I have a 15" with a non-glare screen. I would recommend both the 15" and the non-glare. You could get a smaller screen, but the little bigger is so much nicer to see your work on. The MacBook should do everything you would ever need it for. Way worth the money! My friends have one and love theirs as well. She does photography and he has a degree in and teaches computers. It has done everything they have ever wanted. Best thing is ...... they last!!!!
 
A G-5 tower and an Apple Cinema Display would be the best.
 
I have a 15" Macbook Pro (2009 version). This is my primary Mac, which I use to manage all my photos (using Aperture 3) and editing. I have a 24" Asus HD monitor for external use.

I highly recommend Mac's, both for personal use and professional (be it photography or music... I'm a musician as well).

And no, I'm not biased. I'm a Windows developer by trade ;P
 
I would recommend the Macbook Pro 15 inch as well. I have a 13 inch *2010* model and you can't really see your work on here. Unless you don't photo editing on the go much, I would suggest getting the '10 Macbook pro 13 inch and get a nice bigger LCD monitor to edit on. *My macbook pro with 26 inch samsung TOC look amazing on 1920x1200* No point getting the iMac when you can do everything an iMac can do. Plus you can take it anywhere you want. If you're on a budget, I would not suggest the new 15' macbook pro because it's 1800$ since it come with i5. You don't need the i5 to do photo editing. I would get a '09 model with Core 2 Duo, 4g ram, 512mb dedicated video 15 inch macbook if screen size is an issue. Good luck hunting, I've been using mac for over 5 years and love every minute of it. It's just not for gaming, I have a PC for that.

Bottom line if screen is not an issue = new 13 Macbook pro and use that student discount and free ipod, printer and get a LCD monitor. Reason why I recommend the new 13 inch Macbook pro is better video card, 4g of rams. Most old 13 inch is 2g of ram unless they got the 2.53?? processor which most people will sell more expensive than the 13 with 2g of ram. Also the '10 macbook pro have better battery life and mini display port to HDMI have both video and sound.

Screen is a big issue - Get used 15' Macbook pro. 08 or 09 is fine. Make sure you get one with a dedicated Graphic card. You might regret not getting it later on.

Either way I think you still need a LCD Monitor, 15 inch just doens't cut it to edit all day on, really.
 
Last edited:
any laptop wont be powerful enough to do anything serious with photos.

I have an overclocked i7 PC that prolly smokes any mac out there and I still struggle with FX in photoshop with onOne tools.

I guess it does depend on the resolution of the pictures you're working with (21.1 mp shots from 5d mk ii will eat up any pc/ mac) but even if they're not that big now, you never know what you'll have in the future.

I wouldn't recommend any laptop simple because it really wont be that powerful. Yes, it's nice that you can take it with you and show off pics, but you can do that on your camera anyways.

A G5 tower with 30" cinema display is probably the best choice, but also, the most expensive one.

You could also look at those core i5/i7 iMacs.
 
any laptop wont be powerful enough to do anything serious with photos.

I have an overclocked i7 PC that prolly smokes any mac out there and I still struggle with FX in photoshop with onOne tools.

I guess it does depend on the resolution of the pictures you're working with (21.1 mp shots from 5d mk ii will eat up any pc/ mac) but even if they're not that big now, you never know what you'll have in the future.

I wouldn't recommend any laptop simple because it really wont be that powerful. Yes, it's nice that you can take it with you and show off pics, but you can do that on your camera anyways.

A G5 tower with 30" cinema display is probably the best choice, but also, the most expensive one.

You could also look at those core i5/i7 iMacs.

Yes it's true that an i7 or even i5 PC will smoke most mac for much less but he's trying to knock two birds in one stone since he said he's in school. On laptop I wouldn't recommend anybody but a Mac. If you're talking about games don't even mention it because who plays games on laptop? I only play SC2 sometimes if I have people over. Mac is dependable with no worries and it works for everyday use. If he have a bigger budget then I did suggest him to get the i5 or even i7 Macbook pro. I don't know how much editing you do but I'm sure Macbook pro with i5 and i7 could handle it fine. Unless he does 3d video editing then that's a different story. photo editing does not demand close as much as video, games and 3d editing and Mac have been fine doing those editing and been in the fore front for a lot of inspiring film and musician. I have an overclocked i7 as well to game and burn bluray but for school and laptop wise, I use my mac and wouldn't think twice about switching to a laptop PC. Not biased either.

P.S. Building a PC is really not that cheap if you buy quality parts. Yes you can build an i5 and i7 for a lot less if you use cheap parts. My i7 cost over 1500 or even more if you count my monitor. So really the only downside I see on Mac desktop and computer is their cheap ass video cards and hard drive. Beside that, their engineer is second to none.
 
any laptop wont be powerful enough to do anything serious with photos.

I have an overclocked i7 PC that prolly smokes any mac out there and I still struggle with FX in photoshop with onOne tools.

I guess it does depend on the resolution of the pictures you're working with (21.1 mp shots from 5d mk ii will eat up any pc/ mac) but even if they're not that big now, you never know what you'll have in the future.

I wouldn't recommend any laptop simple because it really wont be that powerful. Yes, it's nice that you can take it with you and show off pics, but you can do that on your camera anyways.

A G5 tower with 30" cinema display is probably the best choice, but also, the most expensive one.

You could also look at those core i5/i7 iMacs.

BS. A MBP with an i5 or i7 chip will be more than adequate unless you're hooking it up to a 30" display and then you'll see some speed issues.

I was using a 2.53 C2D MBP to edit photos for a while, and although slow doing large batch processing, it was decent at pulling PhotoShop duty.

I will be starting photography school this coming spring and I would like some recommendations on a Mac. I don't need portability, but I won't rule that out. I have my iPad if I need it as well for things away from home if I go the iMac route. Is there any difference between the iMacs in terms of color accuracy? If I go the MacBook route I don't want anything larger than the 15". Would you suggest the anti-glare screen? I know I will need as much memory as I can get as well, which is one of the things drawing me towards the MacBook.

Any help will be appreciated.

MBP with IPS flat panel display would work. Then you could calibrate the display.

Or you could build a PC and install OS X on it. That can be a pain though if you're not familiar with computers. I have a self built PC with an intel i7-920 OC'ed to 3.8ghz with 6GB of RAM and a 1.8GB GPU that I put OS X on. It'll smoke most of the previous single processor Mac Pros out there and only cost me $1700.
 
A G-5 tower and an Apple Cinema Display would be the best.

I think I understand your suggestion, but running PS under rosetta is painful. Also, I'm not too sure any of the recent management software like Aperture 3 or LR3 work on anything but Intel processors. Maybe a used early intel Mac Pro. You can get 4 core machines for pretty reasonable prices and the 4 bay storage is great.
 
Well, my home PC is about six years old so I was looking to try and kill 2 birds here...Like I said portability isn't really an issue. I'm mainly trying to figure out if there is a difference between the two sizes of imacs in terms of color accuracy.
 
A G-5 tower and an Apple Cinema Display would be the best.

That's a great idea. Let's recommend old techonology that's slowly being phased out.


He's a college student....

I hear a "whooshing sound" coming from the other side of the country....can he afford a brand-new,expensive top of the line machine and monitor, without deflating his budget balloon? Or should he drop another $2,000 so he can shave 4 seconds off of a save operation??

You young guys kill me with your idea of where money ought to be allocated! It's no wonder you're always broke. There was a time when one of
L.A.'s top graphics shops used 100 megahertz Macs with 8 megabytes to as "much" as 16 megabytes of RAM to create large 100-megabyte graphics combining as many as 10 or 12 images...back when you were in junior high school...

You have no idea what "aging technology" means. Back to your video games now,boys!
 
To be fair Derrel, he never mention his budget and he's asking for Mac. He didn't mention used or new either so most of us assume new since he's looking at new iMac and MBP.

To the OP, it would be nice if you suggested your budget.
 
Last edited:
You young guys kill me with your idea of where money ought to be allocated! It's no wonder you're always broke.

I'm guilty of this Darrel! I won't even lie to you! :lol:
Hey but he's got a $500 (or $700) junkpad w/ him so he may have money :) (sorry man I can't stand the iPads)
 
There was a time when one of
L.A.'s top graphics shops used 100 megahertz Macs with 8 megabytes to as "much" as 16 megabytes of RAM to create large 100-megabyte graphics combining as many as 10 or 12 images...
Good thing this isn't 1993 anymore! That must have been absolute hell working on those computers. The last image I worked on was a 700mb psd file, and I was getting annoyed with the minor slowdown! (while concurrently running LR3 with ~300 18mp raw files up). Us young whipper snappers don't know how good we have it! *hugs my computer*

But yeah, if someone has the money to invest in a giant iPhone that doesn't fit in your pocket and can't make calls (sorry for the cheap shot! I hate that thing too...) an expensive Mac probably wouldn't be out of the question. Then again.... when was the last time you ever heard the term "inexpensive Mac"?
 

Most reactions

Back
Top