Any photographers use rmb for mobile solution?

Discussion in 'MacBook' started by h00ligan, Apr 20, 2016.

  1. h00ligan macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    Location:
    A hot desert
    #1
    I not really talking about those who dabble with a rebel etc, more people who are batch developing 200-300 photos in Lightroom , swinging out some tiff files for a return trip to photoshop or cracking open on1 perfect photo for final production edits. So we're talking certainly part time working pro or,full time pro opinions.


    'Secondary I am curious for those who use the rmb for ANY video editing.

    I have a surface pro 3 which I super unhappy with due to the fact it overheats etc. but I can't see taking on a machine that's slower than that. Apple have much faster memory and disk access speeds due to their proprietary tech / soldered on solution which certainly makes up for less,grunt in the processor. However some things are going to be processor and video,card intensive. Mine integrated Intel 5000 in the surface pro is pathetic. But many of the apps,I use work better with integrated graphics in OSX.

    I'm currently testing the iPad Pro to see if he can feel the niche for mobile editing obviously for batch editing your little limited to a handful of apps and there is really only one I can think of which allows raw dev properly. But editing with a plan whether it's on the surface Pro three or the iPad is a pleasure retouching eyes etc. I think I probably need to get a MacBook Pro but the problem is they only have one model is really substantially better than any of the other computers they offer and it is $3000 and doesn't meet my expectation for a pro machine


    So,I curious if any used the old rmb for editing and if the new one being 15% faster in processor but 40% in graphics card may work for limited projects away from a desktop machine. That said given the surface pro 3 it's hard to justify $1700 for a ultra mobile unless it performs substantially better which I doubt

    I'm assuming comparatively the new rmb is not going to be as fast as even last yours surface pro but if it is similar that would be ok.
     
  2. deeddawg macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2010
    Location:
    US
    #2
  3. h00ligan thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    Location:
    A hot desert
    #3
    Thanks. I will.

    Fwiw I did search the forum but came up short on that kind of answer. I appreciate it.
     
  4. h00ligan, Apr 20, 2016
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2016

    h00ligan thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    Location:
    A hot desert
    #4
    Interesting results on the link. I wish tend made the files available for others to contribute benchmarks. The first seems a bit slow. The second not so much.

    So how are the speakers? And very light video,editing? It's frustrating cuz the power of the pro iPad is there but software isn't. It's still not pro level even if the hardware is getting there.
     
  5. deeddawg macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2010
    Location:
    US
    #5
    If you have some files you'd like me to push through Lightroom I'd be happy to do so on my 2015 1.2. PM me a Dropbox share or something like that and I should be able to run them in the next day or two. I don't do any video so can't help with that though.

    Also can't really answer the speaker question, I don't typically use it for music and haven't paid attentio.
     
  6. h00ligan thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    Location:
    A hot desert
    #6
    Ill have to see if I can grab some raw files....the benchmarks indicate it's on par overall with the surface pro 3 , a lot of money to spend for perfor,since I have already without a pen input. I going to head to,Scottsdale,quarter today I may take some raw files and a deme of Lightroom
     
  7. zhenya macrumors 603

    zhenya

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2005
    #7
    Speakers are excellent. Much better than the SP3. I own both the MacBook and the SP3 but don't process many photographs on either.

    In general the rMB is every bit as fast as the SP3, but if you will tax the processor for an extended period of time, the SP should pull ahead as it will take a bit longer to throttle.

    I'm not sure what you mean by your comment above about the MBP. Both models of MBP are considerably more powerful than your SP, and any version of the 15" is among the most powerful laptops available that aren't 8lbs. Dell has the new Precision 5510 series which is the first non-Apple laptop to offer the same series of processors in a modern package. I would look to that for guidance in what the new MBP's are likely to offer later this year.
     
  8. April Knight Suspended

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2011
    Location:
    Olympia, WA
    #8
    I only do photography (no film), but I have used my MacBook on occasion to edit a few pictures on the go. I have a Retina 5k iMac for the heavy lifting, but for editing a few shots I took at the park or something along those lines, the rMB has done very well for me.
     
  9. deeddawg macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2010
    Location:
    US
    #9
    It's also probably worthwhile to define what one means by "editing"... For some it's simply culling keepers from the rest, tagging/ranking/etc, and maybe making minor adjustments at the RAW level with Lighroom or similar. For this purpose I find my 2015 1.2 rMB works well within the constraints of its 12" display. It lets me get a bunch of this sort of work done wherever I am rather than putting it off until I'm back in the office.

    On the other hand, if I'm doing a five RAW image merge into Aurora HDR the rMB slows down a good bit. Not unusable, but definitely better suited for my quad-i7 mini.
     
  10. h00ligan thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    Location:
    A hot desert
    #10
    I'd maybe agree with that for the model with discrete graphics - without discrete graphics, I don't consider any of the pro machines to be particularly powerful. The 13" alienware blows the 13" macbook pro out of the water, at roughly the same weight. There are several machines with proper i(x) processors that run windows - i'm not sure why you don't believe that. The surface book is one - which runs about two times the speed of the current macbook pro - in some cases it's even,, in some cases it's 3 times faster.

    I Don't believe for three grand the top 15" is worth buying and i'm not looking for a screen or machine that large. It's quite possible the update will blow me away, but given the reliance on gpu by most pro apps, surely you can't consider anything under the top level 15" a truly pro machine. Most pros are loathe to even limit themselves to that machine look at the 13" air vs 13" pro at this point the main difference is retina

    I'd like to see a proper pro like they used to make, you could get the 1999 with discrete graphics and the hard drive could be upgraded by apple or by yourself The higher model added more ram to the gpu and processor speed - as well as disk space, when it was traditional drives not solid state. When they moved to soldering everything to the board, preventing upgrades as time passed, limiting ram to what was there when ordered, preventing drive swaps, and removed the discrete graphics from all but the 3k $ model, the truly lost the plot regarding what a pro machine should be, again in my opinion. I'm sure some are more than happy to chunk down 3k for a machine with no upgrade path, no user repair path, and limited lifespan. I'm not one of them. When i could get out for closer to two after tax that was one thing - for a machine i thought would last five years- where i could add capacity as it became more affordable, and ram as it became affordable.. but thre grand for a machine which right now has a two year old processor and video card and no upgrade path, I can't buy that right now.. and anything below that top end machine is really considered based on form factor. The air and pro machines for most uses outside video editing are all pretty even across the board, and for photo editing without discrete graphics the extra cores don't offer much benefit/

    I really hope they bring back discrete graphics across the pro line - it's the ONE thing they can do that doesn't compromise performance of other portions like memory and disk speed.
    For the record I am aware of the advantages in speed of the decisions apple have made - but the gpu removal from the lower 15" was rubbish, just like it was rubbish to not offer one in teh 13"

    Right now the alienware 13" is looking like the best machine for what i need - but I am curious if the macbook can work well enough for now.

    at the end of it - pro in an apple name in almost all situations means next to nothing, whether it's the laptop or tablet line, it's a marketing term whose meaning has been diluted to mean slightly higher spec... rather than for professional users. There's not much pro about any of their pro devices now, except the mac pro - and even then/// eh
     
  11. zhenya macrumors 603

    zhenya

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2005
    #11
    Most constraints people will run up against are more likely to be CPU bound than GPU bound. Your definition of 'pro' is in fact, a particular niche. I'm not saying it's not important to people who rely on graphics capability, but that those who really need it are an extremely small segment of customers. In that case, the Macbook Pro, even in 13" guise, has a significant advantage over the vast majority of PC laptops - Surface, Alienware, Razer Blade, whatever, that almost universally use 15w U-series processors. Try to find one using something more powerful. You'll eliminate about 98% of the options right off the bat.

    I understand that at this point, if you really want a new Mac laptop, it's a poor position to be in. I do, however, expect that to be rectified by June. We'll see what happens. I expect people will be more pleased than not.
     
  12. magbarn macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2008
    #12
    Tried just using my wife's 2015 rMB exclusively on a trip with my D810. It 'works' but less than half the speed of my 2012 rMBP when processing 36MP RAW files... If you only take a dozen pictures or so on a shoot it'll work ok. But batch processing a few hundred.... SLOW. Even going from pic to pic on preview was also SLOW... I also had to carry a USB 3 hub to go with the $80 Apple 'dongle' that should've been included with the laptop... (So I can plug my CF reader + USB 3.0 backup drive) By then I was carrying more wires and crap than if I just took my rMBP 15 with me...(I use my rMBP 15 built in SD card reader instead and just use the CF for backup)

    Not so sure the extra SSD speed on the 2016 will make a such a big impact or the 15% greater CPU performance... considering my ancient 2012 rMBP SSD is slower than the 2015 rMB SSD.
     
  13. deeddawg macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2010
    Location:
    US
    #13
    Just curious, why did you need the hub in addition to an AV adapter (guessing you had that since the Apple USBC to USB adapter is $20 I think)

    Personally I use this $11 USBC to USB3 adapter and then either direct-to-camera cable or $7 USB3 card reader. The nonda dongle is very small and light.
     
  14. magbarn macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2008
    #14
    When I import into Lightroom I load it internally to the SSD and also the backup HDD before I start editing. It's not too much fun to keep disconnecting and reconnecting the devices. I also want the battery to charge at the same time. Kinda hard to do when Apple insists on keeping one port only. I was really hoping the 2016 model would have 2 USB C ports. It's not a big loss to resell for me as it's a tax write off hehe.
     
  15. davys macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Location:
    Lanark
    #15
    You have a similar camera set up to me (and workflow as well, it sounds like). I was planning to get the MBr for location work - transferring files from my SD card and also on to a portable drive. Maybe a bit of culling and very light processing in Capture One and Photoshop on the road, but the serious processing would be done back at base on my 27" iMac.

    Based on your recent experience, do you think you would be happy to use the 2016 MBr for the tasks I've just described? I'd be interested and grateful for your feedback before I take the plunge!

    Best wishes,
    David
     
  16. magbarn macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2008
    #16
    Read what I just posted above. If you don't mind disconnecting/reconnecting (stingy Apple with the single USB-C port!) you'll be fine with a cheap adapter. I like to able to charge and read the memory card/put it in on HDD backup at the same time so I had to pony up for the expensive $79 splitter. It's just as fast as my rMBP 15 importing, but if you're going to do much previewing/editing RAW files, the rMBP is superior IMHO. Just waiting for the pics to load on screen is excruciating at times haha. (The cpu has to load up and decode the RAW file/JPGs don't need anywhere near the amount of CPU) Anyways, it was just an experiment to see if I could use the rMB on a trip, but I'll be taking my rMBP 13 or 15 next time...
     
  17. davys macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Location:
    Lanark
    #17
    Thanks for the super quick response, bud, much appreciated. I now may be firmly back on the fence and wait to see what the 13" upgrade will bring!
     
  18. deeddawg macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2010
    Location:
    US
    #18
    There was no way that was going to happen without a chassis redesign and/or eliminating the headphone jack in favor of a 2nd USBC port. If you look at your rMB you'll see there's no physical place to put a 2nd port as it's currently built.

    There's a few options for small multiport hubs with power passthrough that may do what you need to do, and often at a lower price than the Apple adapter (big surprise, right?) See the referenced USBC Accessories thread sticky at the top of this forum. I've not had need of one so I can't suggest one in particular.

    The reality is that it seems the rMB is really aimed at folks with very limited need for external devices, thus the design decisions resulting in the single port. It may be that a future larger version with more ports may be a better fit to your needs.
     
  19. kis macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2007
    Location:
    Switzerland
    #19
    Without knowing which processor his SP3 has, that's a rather unqualified argumemt. The rMB is most definitely not faster than an i7 SP. Even my i5 SP4 is drastically faster in day-to-day operations than my previous 1.2ghz rMB. And the speaker also sounds better on it. Unfortunately, battery life on the SP4 is so appalling that I'll likely go back to the rMB, despite a larger number of drawbacks.
     

Share This Page