New MacBook Pro

<p>Hey Gang,</p>

<p>I've been a PC user since 1984 but I'm thinking about going to the Dark Side and switching to Mac, partly for the fun of learning something new and partly because the rest of my family uses Macs and I would be able to help them more if I was more familiar with the Apple ecosystem. Besides, Macs are cool.</p>

<p>Like everybody else, I was waiting for the new MacBook Pro to come out and I've since read a lot of mixed reviews about it, including a cat fight between a couple of teenage girls in another thread. I know there are a lot of Mac users here, so I would sure appreciate your opinions on a couple of questions. I've asked similar questions before, but that was before the new MBPs were released with Skylake, NVMe and faster memory.</p>

<p>Many thanks,<br />Dave</p>

<p>1. I travel for a living so I really like the idea of having just one computer to maintain. Would a top-end 13" MacBook Pro provide acceptable performance* for processing RAW files from a Canon 5D3 in Lightroom using add-ins like Perfect Photo Suite and Nik? I would use it as a laptop on the road and then dock it to a large monitor and nice keyboard when I got home.</p>

<p>2. If not and if I had to go with both a desktop and laptop, how difficult is it to synchronize files between two Mac computers? I did that for a long time when I had a home-built desktop and a Lenovo laptop and it worked just fine, but it was kind of a nuisance. Does Apple have a really good way to synchronize?</p>

<p>* The trolls will be quick to point out that acceptable performance is subjective, but the rest of you will know what I mean. I'm looking for "Wow, this is fast" instead of "Damn, this is slow."</p>

<p> </p>

<p>1. It could yes but that's a pretty small display to work with. IF you're OK with the size, fine. When not on location, you can of course hook up multiple large displays to the MacBook. Get the MacBook maxed out with RAM! <br /> 2. I used to sync desktop and laptop, easy with the right software. I use <em>ChronoSync</em> which will do this on a per folder or entire drive sync and at any specified scheduled times you wish. <br /> https://www.econtechnologies.com/chronosync/overview.html<br /> There may be lesser expensive options but this is a very good and powerful product you can use for backups as well. <br /> When I stopped using the desktop and MacBook (for location only) I stopped the sync but use this product for daily backup's to an external drive. <br /> As for the so called cat fight between someone with <strong>zero</strong> experience with the new product and someone with actual daily experience? <br /> At least one troll without a lick of experience will be quick to point out anything new MacBook related from Apple stinks. Not so.</p>

<p>The Surface easily handles the 80MB files of my 5DS-R, doing Raw conversion in DxO and LR.</p>

<p>I see that your reasons for switching aren't performance related, but I love viewing my images full-screen on the Surface used as a tablet. It's great for travel and running my business apps.</p>

<p>Surface? You mean the Microsoft Surface? My company just gave me a Surface 3 for work but I don't use it for photography.</p>

<p>Troll post.</p>

<p>Yes Eric, your text above was indeed a classic example of a Troll Post with <strong>again</strong>, zero information for the OP or others and based on zero experience using a new MPB. <br /> Last post I'll direct <strong>your</strong> way on this topic to limit the OP and other's from hearing another dozen or more rants of misinformed FUD from you. Go back to the last topic on this subject and get the last word in since everyone else has left.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Oh what the hell...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Verbal diarrhea!</p>

<p>Oh what the hell...</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I've been a PC user since 1984 but I'm thinking about going to the Dark Side and switching to Mac, partly for the fun of learning something new and partly because the rest of my family uses Macs and I would be able to help them more if I was more familiar with the Apple ecosystem. Besides, Macs are cool.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>How many posts have you started with this intro over the years? Three? Four?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>* The trolls will be quick to point out that acceptable performance is subjective, but the rest of you will know what I mean. I'm looking for "Wow, this is fast" instead of "Damn, this is slow."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Funny. I read this and thought "Hey! It's the annual Dave '<em>I'm thinking about going to the Dark Side and switching to Mac'</em> troll post!" Did you actually ever end up buying that <a href="/digital-darkroom-forum/00cvcq">high-end MacBook Pro?</a> http://www.photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00cvcq or maybe that <a href="/digital-darkroom-forum/00cv8j">iMac with retina?</a> http://www.photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00cv8j</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Would a top-end 13" MacBook Pro provide acceptable performance* for processing RAW files from a Canon 5D3 in Lightroom using add-ins like Perfect Photo Suite and Nik? </p>

</blockquote>

<p>How long is a piece of string? If you do 17 files a month while arguing from Starbucks on internet forums, then I suppose even an iPad is fast enough. I come home three or times a week with 700/800 raw files at a time. I then cull down to 500 or so, convert to jpg and dng and then FTP to the client, and go to bed. I had my fingers crossed that the 2016 MBP would have Rubylake, 32gb of ram and a discrete gpu. I like that I can dual boot my MBP with Bootcamp and run Windows. I guess I'm waiting a bit longer for a pro machine from Apple.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Last post I'll direct <strong>your</strong> way on this topic to limit the OP and other's from hearing another dozen or more rants of misinformed FUD from you. </p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

Andrew, I wish we could take your word for it</p>

<p ><a href="/photodb/user?user_id=7649396">Dave Collett</a> , said:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Surface? You mean the Microsoft Surface? My company just gave me a Surface 3 for work but I don't use it for photography.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Dave, mine's the laptop. It's unfortunate that they didn't give it a unique name.</p>

<p>It's excellent for the software that I mentioned. I also use Photo Mechanic to preview and select my images for processing. You do need the 16GB of RAM and the best video card.</p>

<p>I don't think you're a troll. I also considered Apple in the past. I find their file management systems infuriating, but plenty of people find a way to get along with that.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Funny. I read this and thought "Hey! It's the annual Dave '<em>I'm thinking about going to the Dark Side and switching to Mac'</em> troll post!" Did you actually ever end up buying that <a href="/digital-darkroom-forum/00cvcq" rel="nofollow">high-end MacBook Pro?</a> <a href="/digital-darkroom-forum/00cvcq" rel="nofollow">http://www.photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00cvcq</a> or maybe that <a href="/digital-darkroom-forum/00cv8j" rel="nofollow">iMac with retina?</a> <a href="/digital-darkroom-forum/00cv8j" rel="nofollow">http://www.photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00cv8j</a></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Nope, not yet. I'm still doing my homework and asking for advice from other photographers. And, hey, the only thing I ever rushed into was getting married and that was a disaster. I learned my lesson. (grin)<br>

Cheers!</p>

<p>Thanks, David. I didn't realize the laptop was called a Surface as well. I know my Surface tablet can't handle 80 MB files.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>I also considered Apple in the past. I find their file management systems infuriating, but plenty of people find a way to get along with that.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>My situation exactly and it's causing a lot more angst than it should. Lots of people love iOS, but it just doesn't sing for me, at least not yet.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I'm still doing my homework and asking for advice from other photographers.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The nerve of <em>some</em> people, asking peers for advise (those who <strong>can</strong> provide it), asking the same question <em>maybe</em> more than once over the course of a few years. Do you know how much work it is for some to post here? The forums are designed to provide some people with an agenda of FUD, how can you come here and ask for advise? ;-) (grin)</p>

<p>Dave --</p>

<p>I'll treat your questions as legit.</p>

<p>I use a MacBook Pro 15" laptop all the time, carry it everywhere. I often do my photo post-processing on this machine, but when I'm at my home base, I use a 5K iMac. (My laptop is mid-2015, and the mid-2013 was good as well. I have not tried the new one with the touch bar.)</p>

<p>All these laptops are plenty powerful enough for the RAW processing you are talking about. I like to have 16G of memory; things slow down if you don't have enough. I very rarely say, "Oh shit, that's taking too long."</p>

<p>I generally put all my current projects on an external disk, a Thunderbolt SSD 256Gig, which is lightning fast. That way, I can switch easily between working on the laptop or the iMac. From time to time, I move project files to a larger hard disk for archival storage. I put the finished images onto a Dropbox folder which I can access from anywhere and selectively share to convey finished images to others.</p>

<p>DropBox sync is fast, transparent, and reliable. On the other hand, I might have 15Gig of files on a project; I don't want to try to sync this much data on DropBox. Hence, my use of a portable hard drive for all the RAW's and Lightroom catalogs, and DropBox for the finished images.</p>

<p>Macs are secure. Just take the Apple and Adobe updates immediately (I wait till x.x.2 for the major OS versions). </p>

<p>I use the Adobe photography program (Lightroom and Photoshop). </p>

<p>Many thanks, Sebastian. My questions are legit, but apparently I've asked them too often. I was just hoping for new answers now that the new MBPs are released. I also confess that I like thinking about and chatting about this stuff. I think I'll jump over to the MacRumors forum instead of this one.</p>

<p>Great information. I've considered the 15" MBP because it has the dedicated graphics card, although, interestingly, the new 15" MBP has a slower top-end processor than the new 13" MBP. I like the larger screen, but I'm kinda planning on the 13" MPB for easier travel.</p>

<p>Thanks again.<br />Cheers.</p>

<p>I just read a piece in my local paper today about going with the prior version of the MBP, for the faster processor and SD/USB ports. The writer complained about the emphasis of the new MBP leaning more toward form factor that performance and user convenience. The author said that the deals on the prior version are very compelling, but not the only reason to go with that version.</p>

<p>I have a Macbook Pro on order, a 13" mainly for travel and location audio recording. Traditionally laptop displays are difficult to calibrate properly. The only controls are in software, there are no serious options for other display cards, and the color and brightness vary strongly with the angle of viewing.</p>

<p>In terms of processing power, I'm sure this laptop will do the job. I use external drives to store images, audio and video, but the largest internal drive is probably the best option. Programs will grow as they evolve, and the new MacBook does not have a replaceable drive.</p>

<p>The biggest problem with the new MacBook is that it has only Thunderbolt 3 (USB-C) ports, four of them. There are very few compatible peripherals, so you need a full set of "dongles" to use them. Thunderbolt 3 to 2 adapters are in short supply.</p>

<p>There are many display monitors, large ones, which work with Thunderbolt 2. The Apple 3 to 2 adapter is not compatible with these monitors.</p>

<p>I also find my aging X-Rite Pro calibrator will not work with the latest OS (Sierra). Perhaps others can relate how the MacBook responds to calibration (or the iMac). Without calibration, adjusting color is a guessing game.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I also find my aging X-Rite Pro calibrator will not work with the latest OS (Sierra). Perhaps others can relate how the MacBook responds to calibration (or the iMac). </p>

</blockquote>

<p>All is fine on this end with an X-rite i1Display Pro. </p>

<p>I have an older MacBook Pro (15") that I take with me when I travel. There are comments about the use of the small screen for editing, but consider the following idea. When I travel to my cottage, I take my MacBook Pro, active pictures on a USB external drive and plug the computer into a 27 inch Thunderbolt display. I now have a full fledged screen and computer with a wireless keyboard and mouse. I also use my Wacom Tablet with it. I use it to edit Sony a7RII uncompressed pictures (82MB a piece) and process video with Final Cut Pro X so there is plenty of horse power. <br>

I have heard rumors that Apple is coming out with a new 5K Thunderbolt display, but have not heard anything specifically and the old one is discontinued.</p>

<p>Actually there is some information on the display<br>

http://www.apple.com/shop/product/HKN62LL/A/lg-ultrafine-5k-display</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>There are many display monitors, large ones, which work with Thunderbolt 2. The Apple 3 to 2 adapter is not compatible with these monitors.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Thanks, Edward. Is there a solution if you have a Thunderbolt 2 monitor? I don't, but I'm curious. I assume there is a Thunderbolt 3 to DisplayPort or HDMI adaptor so I could run my current Dell monitor.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Is there a solution if you have a Thunderbolt 2 monitor?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Keep in mind that "<em>Thunderbolt</em>" and DisplayPort have the same cabling but there are differences internally! The Thunderbolt adaptor from Apple <em>should</em> work on their <strong>actual</strong> ThunderBolt displays but it didn't work on my NEC SpectraView (as DisplayPort). This adaptor did perfectly and cost less than Apple's anyway:<br>

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B017TZTMBG/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1</p>

<p><a href="http://www.apple.com/shop/product/HKN62LL/A/lg-ultrafine-5k-display" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.apple.com/shop/product/HKN62LL/A/lg-ultrafine-5k-display</a></p>

<p>This monitor does support thunderbolt 3 cables</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I just read a piece in my local paper today about going with the prior version of the MBP, for the faster processor and SD/USB ports. The writer complained about the emphasis of the new MBP leaning more toward form factor that performance and user convenience. </p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

Yes. This is the consensus on the internet. Almost all benchmarks show the equally spec'd 2013/2014/2015 MBP being faster than the 2016. If one is familiar with Skylake in the 2016, it's hard to argue. Interestingly, the late 2015 MBP's have gone up in value on the used CL market since the release of the 2016. Where the 2016 does shine though, is with rendering video. This is because of the new m.2 ssd drives and they are "lots and lots" faster with read/write than the previous years with sata ssd.<br>

<br>

Dave, I have an old 2013 i7 MBP that's maxed out in ram and ssd but the monitor is truly horrible and I'm tired of plugging in my Dell. I'm also tired of watching paint dry while raws import from sd card and then again when they are exported to dng and jpg. When I get home, the quicker I can finish my beer and get to bed, the better. I wish I could throw more money at the problem, but I can't. Unless I look at Windows laptops. But i want dual boot along with the apple keyboard and monitor. And six weeks ago, I was looking forward to the 2016 MBP and NVMe ssd to help with my throughput but like everyone else after the Apple keynote, we were left disappointed. The 2016 has a crummy cpu, gpu, and a only 16gb of ddr3 ram...in other words, there's nothing "pro" about the MBP. Like (almost) everyone else out there that already has a fully spec'd MBP with i7/16gb/ssd, there is no compelling reason to spend $4500 on the 2016 MBP and have the same performance. And then spend hundreds of dollars in dongles and adaptors that might work. The monitor and the new wider video gamut is nice though. For awhile there, I though the 2016 would have made a great machine.<br>

<a href="https://macperformanceguide.com/blog/2016/20161201_1214-Apple2016MacBookPro-LightroomImport.html"> </a><br>

Lightroom and Ps are relevant to me, not video. I trust diglloyd and he claims both programs run slower on the 2016 than previous years. I wish there was a second trustworthy source around to do similar tests.<br>

<a href="https://macperformanceguide.com/blog/2016/20161201_1214-Apple2016MacBookPro-LightroomImport.html">diglloyd 2016 MacBook Pro TESTED: Lightroom Import RAW Files</a> "Disappointing on two counts: the 2016 MacBook pro and Adobe’s algorithms. 2016 MacBook Pro: Adobe Lightroom Import RAW Files with 1:1 Previews Between the minimal or negative improvements with Photoshop and this inferior performance with Lightroom, the 2016 MacBook Pro surely deserves being sent back to its maker." https://macperformanceguide.com/blog/2016/20161201_1214-Apple2016MacBookPro-LightroomImport.html<br>

<br>

<a href="https://macperformanceguide.com/blog/2016/20161121_2138-Apple2016MacBookPro-Photoshop.html">2016 MacBook Pro TESTED: Photoshop Performance</a> "I am seriously doubting that spending close to $4800 (with AppleCare and tax) on a top-flight 2016 MacBook Pro makes any sense at all. My original premise was that (a) I needed Thunderbolt 3 for testing (still true), and (b) that there would be real world gains for the things I do in Photoshop. The latter premise is proven false, making me seriously consider returning the 2016 MacBook Pro and sticking with my 2013 MacBook Pro Retina, which still performs like a champ and has none of the port hassles." https://macperformanceguide.com/blog/2016/20161121_2138-Apple2016MacBookPro-Photoshop.html</p>

<p>(it's not a cat fight. it's entertainment while watching paint dry)</p>

<p>Eric: Have you tried an external Thunderbolt SSD drive?</p>

<p>I have not tested the 2016 vs. prior models of MBP. I just know I'm happy with both the 2013 and 2015 MBP for Lightroom and Ps.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>All is fine on this end with an X-rite i1Display Pro.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /> <br /> I have an older i1 Photo spectrophotometer. Formerly Gretag-MacBeth, X-Rite does not have a driver compatible with Sierra. It still works on my PC, and I can use it for reflective and transmissive calibration.</p>

<p>I ordered a Display Pro for my iMac and other needs last week. A colorimeter (filtered) device may actually be better for displays, and a whole lot cheaper.</p>