Lightroom + 42mp files - MBP 13' 2018 enough?

[btt8]

I'm looking to upgrade to the 2018 mbp version but i'm unsure which would be more wise. Would the 2018 13' 2.7ghz 16gb attached to a BenQ sw27000 external monitor be adequate to run lightroom with 42mp files?

I really prefer the smaller footprint of the 13' as well as the extra portability it brings. But if the 15' brings significant speed in processing these files, I would have to consider the 15'. What are everyone's thoughts (especially those who work extensively with lightroom/photoshop)?

 

[nochnia]

I'm pretty much in the same situation. Currently I'm using a 13" Macbook Pro 2016 - base model. Editing and exporting from LR is pretty slow, but I guess the 2018 4core 13" is a different kind of story.

 

[ataq]

The decision factor for me was the 32gb of ram, there is only the 15" with this option. Doesn't Lightroom make good use of more ram, especially when working 42mp files?

 

[maflynn]

Would the 2018 13' 2.7ghz 16gb attached to a BenQ sw27000 external monitor be adequate to run lightroom with 42mp files?

Can the iGPU of the MBP drive that monitor? I think for that need alone the dGPU equipped 15" MBP is the better choice.

What are everyone's thoughts (especially those who work extensively with lightroom/photoshop)?

My thoughts are that the 13" display is too small for LR, I've used 13" laptops before with LR, and I've always regretted the small display - too constraining for me in LR

Doesn't Lightroom make good use of more ram, especially when working 42mp files?

I can't answer about 42mp files, but my iMac has 8GB of ram, and I don't go into the yellow at all when using LR

 

[nochnia]

I'm really interested in, how I can max out my current 16GB of ram (in my 13" 2016 mbp)?!
I just opened up Premiere Pro, Lightroom, Chrome with a lot of tabs, Spotify,... 12GB MAX - is Mojave going to need more RAM?
I'm sure the base clock speed is sufficient, but I'm not sure if the 16GB is. As far as my own stats tell me now it's definitely sufficient... but should I factor in tomorrow and the day after tomorrow a little more?

 

[maflynn]

how I can max out my current 16GB of ram (in my 13" 2016 mbp)?!

You're not maxing out the ram. Look at the memory pressure, its green and that means you're no where near using up all available resources. Additionally, your wired amount is very low, that's on of the important metrics to see how much ram utilization. That's ram in use that cannot be freed up at the moment. Also look at your swap usage, that's rather low as well.

In windows, you need to monitor your free ram, in macOS, free ram is wasted ram.

 

[nochnia]

Exactly. But if I can't maxing out the RAM with all the apps open how can anybody for Photo/Videoediting?

So you wouldn't recommend for me getting 32GB on the 15" MBP right?

 

[defn]

This is me editing a 42MP ARW file from a Sony A7R II with my 2018 13", plugged into a 5K display.

 

[btt8]

This is me editing a 42MP ARW file from a Sony A7R II with my 2018 13", plugged into a 5K display.
View attachment 772876

Nice! So no issues, hiccups, or anything at all??

 

[Giano]

@defn Wow that's exactly the setup I'm planning to use with my a7rII! Is the 5k monitor lagging using Lightroom on the 13"? Image cropping or other Lr gpu specific tasks are glitchy? Did you go with the i7 processor?
Thank you very much!

 

[Glockworkorange]

Can the iGPU of the MBP drive that monitor? I think for that need alone the dGPU equipped 15" MBP is the better choice.


My thoughts are that the 13" display is too small for LR, I've used 13" laptops before with LR, and I've always regretted the small display - too constraining for me in LR


I can't answer about 42mp files, but my iMac has 8GB of ram, and I don't go into the yellow at all when using LR

The 13 inch will drive that, yes. It can drive the 27 inch 5K. The 15 inch can drive two 5K's.

 

[defn]

Nice! So no issues, hiccups, or anything at all??

@defn Wow that's exactly the setup I'm planning to use with my a7rII! Is the 5k monitor lagging using Lightroom on the 13"? Image cropping or other Lr gpu specific tasks are glitchy? Did you go with the i7 processor?
Thank you very much!

I "side-graded" from a 2016 15" i7-6920HQ to the 2018 13" i7-8559U. I wouldn't say it's extremely smooth, but it wasn't on the 2016 15" either.

The actual driving of the 5K display becomes choppy when the CPU is taxed on the 13" - but not to the point where it becomes unresponsive. Moving the sliders in the Develop module is very slightly slower than the 2016 15" (presumably due to the GPU?), but it's still a worthwhile tradeoff for me.

On the bright side, rendering full sized previews when you zoom in seem faster on the 2018 13" than it was on the 2016 15", which makes sense given single core Geekbench scores are almost 20% faster.

Note that I'm on the latest Mojave beta which doesn't have the latest CPU fixes though, will update on that next week.

Lightroom is terrible performance wise, even on my 2017 27" iMac. Hopefully Skylum comes up with something better later this year.

 

[Glockworkorange]

I "side-graded" from a 2016 15" i7-6920HQ to the 2018 13" i7-8559U. I wouldn't say it's extremely smooth, but it wasn't on the 2016 15" either.

The actual driving of the 5K display becomes choppy when the CPU is taxed on the 13" - but not to the point where it becomes unresponsive. Moving the sliders in the Develop module is very slightly slower than the 2016 15" (presumably due to the GPU?), but it's still a worthwhile tradeoff for me.

On the bright side, rendering full sized previews when you zoom in seem faster on the 2018 13" than it was on the 2016 15", which makes sense given single core Geekbench scores are almost 20% faster.

Note that I'm on the latest Mojave beta which doesn't have the latest CPU fixes though, will update on that next week.

Lightroom is terrible performance wise, even on my 2017 27" iMac. Hopefully Skylum comes up with something better later this year.

Is Aperture usable or do all of you photos guys (and gals) use Lightroom? What’s the alternative? I’ve been considering a new photo app and have zero desire to use something poorly optimized that I have to pay on subscription.

 

[btt8]

I "side-graded" from a 2016 15" i7-6920HQ to the 2018 13" i7-8559U. I wouldn't say it's extremely smooth, but it wasn't on the 2016 15" either.

The actual driving of the 5K display becomes choppy when the CPU is taxed on the 13" - but not to the point where it becomes unresponsive. Moving the sliders in the Develop module is very slightly slower than the 2016 15" (presumably due to the GPU?), but it's still a worthwhile tradeoff for me.

On the bright side, rendering full sized previews when you zoom in seem faster on the 2018 13" than it was on the 2016 15", which makes sense given single core Geekbench scores are almost 20% faster.

Note that I'm on the latest Mojave beta which doesn't have the latest CPU fixes though, will update on that next week.

Lightroom is terrible performance wise, even on my 2017 27" iMac. Hopefully Skylum comes up with something better later this year.

This sounds promising considering I plan on driving a 4k monitor instead. Please keep us updated sir.

 

[maflynn]

Is Aperture usable or do all of you photos guys (and gals) use Lightroom?

Most people have transitioned off Aperture, though there are still some dedicated souls holding on. I suspect it still works for them, I cannot comment I've moved on once it was official that apple was killing it. Lightroom, is the market leader and so I went with that. I'm happy with the LR, though I'm probably not pushing it as hard as many others.

What’s the alternative?

There's not many apps that provide a great editing experiences, coupled with a very extensive DAM. There's a thread in the photography forum that discusses alternatives Apple Photos v. Lightroom CC v. Other?

My opinion in that was:

I tried for months, last year, and nothing could come close. Some did a good job at editing, there might be a nice browser, that helps with metadata but nothing puts it all together in a seamless product that is greater then the sum of its parts.

 

[Glockworkorange]

Most people have transitioned off Aperture, though there are still some dedicated souls holding on. I suspect it still works for them, I cannot comment I've moved on once it was official that apple was killing it. Lightroom, is the market leader and so I went with that. I'm happy with the LR, though I'm probably not pushing it as hard as many others.



There's not many apps that provide a great editing experiences, coupled with a very extensive DAM. There's a thread in the photography forum that discusses alternatives Apple Photos v. Lightroom CC v. Other?

My opinion in that was:

Thanks for a link to that forum posting!

 

[defn]

Ok so I just updated to Mojave dev beta 5. Some thoughts:

• Scrolling through photos located on the local SSD is WAY faster than my 2016 15". Previously I had to wait for a split second before the photo rendered completely.
• Zooming in to 1:1 mode is also WAY faster.
• Sliders and curves on 42MP files no longer lag after the CPU patch, it's not buttery smooth but perfectly acceptable. This is even when the .ARW is sitting on a Synology NAS that I'm connected to wirelessly.

Take note that I have FileVault enabled on my main drive, which is probably made a lot faster with the T2 chip. The observations above also took place when the 2018 13" was connected to my LG Ultrafine 5K display.

Will post an "experiential" review on my blog soon...

 

[Howard2k]

I moved from Aperture to LR too. Not a professional and did so somewhat grudgingly, but I was using both Aperture and iPhotos and one weekend dumped both into Lightroom.

It wasn't incredibly clean but all things considered it went pretty smoothly.
[doublepost=1533046172][/doublepost]

This is even when the .ARW is sitting on a Synology NAS that I'm connected to wirelessly.

Once the photo is initially loaded off the NAS and into RAM, then there is really not much network usage at all. I keep mine on a NAS too and moving the sliders has no impact on the bandwidth used once the photo has loaded. Which is actually pretty amazing. The performance impact is far less than I thought it would be.

 

[nochnia]

For photo editors, I didn’t notice a difference in either Photoshop or Lightroom Classic in a wide variety of tasks. Exporting 100 42MP edited RAW images from the Sony A7Riii did take 17% longer using both the base model and the mid-spec compared to the i9 with 32GB of RAM. Since processor and graphics performance is very similar between the mid and top model MacBook Pro‘s, the speed improvement is actually due to higher RAM. For all of you photo editors, I would definitely suggest springing for the RAM upgrade, but the CPU and Graphics can be left alone.

This is from the Max Yurev test where he tests all three 15" MBP models.
What do you think about that? In my opinion - as long as the RAM is not needed this is totally ********. Why should a machine be faster if it has more RAM. If there are plenty of application open - maybe, but in any other case?!

 

[powerslave12r]

Here are some raw samples in case anybody wants to try it out in Lightroom. (Of course, if you care enough to benchmark and don't have lightroom, you can always get the demo version of lightroom.)

https://www.photographyblog.com/previews/sony_a7r_iii_photos
https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/galleries/sony-a7riii-sample-images/

 

[btt8]

Ok so I just updated to Mojave dev beta 5. Some thoughts:

• Scrolling through photos located on the local SSD is WAY faster than my 2016 15". Previously I had to wait for a split second before the photo rendered completely.
• Zooming in to 1:1 mode is also WAY faster.
• Sliders and curves on 42MP files no longer lag after the CPU patch, it's not buttery smooth but perfectly acceptable. This is even when the .ARW is sitting on a Synology NAS that I'm connected to wirelessly.

Take note that I have FileVault enabled on my main drive, which is probably made a lot faster with the T2 chip. The observations above also took place when the 2018 13" was connected to my LG Ultrafine 5K display.

Will post an "experiential" review on my blog soon...

Link to your blog?

 

[nochnia]

Are there any lightroom benchmarks with the 2018 MBP 15" available?

 

[syrcular]

This is a really helpful thread. I'm in the same boat. I'm upgrading from the 2016 MBP 13 inch, and looking to upgrade to either a base model 15 or a souped up 13. I prefer the 13 size as well, but on the fence about whether the screen real estate on the 13 is too constrained. I have felt it's too small in the past, but just dealt with it.
I do find it interesting that it looks like 16GB of RAM is the sweet spot going up or down with the config.
Now just trying to decide whether it makes sense to sacrifice a little more portability for a dedicated GPU and more screen real estate on the go, or stick with a 13 inch since it's a secondary machine for me anyways as I have an iMac Pro at home that I do the majority of my work on....

 

[HyperliteG4]

Good thread. I'm considering upgrading my 2015 15" MBP (2.5Ghz i7, 16GB, 1TB), but actually considering going with a smaller screen for portability. I plan on getting a new 27" iMac on the next revision (October? fingers crossed.). This would be mostly for travel and working remotely. I just can't decide if $300 is worth going from an i5 to i7. I'll stick with 512GB HDD and just get a portable SSD that I can use for storing my files rather than spending an extra $400 on upgrading to a 1TB HDD.

Thoughts?

 

[btt8]

For everyone with imacs at home, if I were you, I would totally get the 13.

I've been using the 15 for a few days now and it is nice. I had the 13 a couple of weeks ago as well. Before, I was using a mba from 2013 to edit photos . A couple of things :
-the 13 is very portable and plenty fast
- screen real estate didnt bother me much since I came from a 13 MBA
-the 15 is VERY nice and the extra space has made me really consider it
-the 15 is somewhat a bit faster
-the 15 to me, feels a bit more cumbersome

I still can't make up my mind