# new 13" MacBook Pro



## hawaiisunsetphoto (Feb 4, 2013)

Aloha! I'd welcome some advice.... I'm advising a friend, an amateur photographer with talent and potential, on what kind of computer setup that would be sufficient for photo editing. Budget is a factor. They are considering a new 13" MacBook Pro for about $1425 with these specs: 2.9GHz dual-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz, 8GB 1600MHz memory, 750GB 5400-rpm hard drive, Intel HD Graphics 4000. 

Given the limited screen real estate of a 13" MacBook, I've advised them that they will need an external monitor if they go that route. 

My question is: Is the video graphics capacity in this MacBook Pro sufficient for LR and PS photo editing? 

Thanks!


----------



## hawaiisunsetphoto (Feb 4, 2013)

I've also recommended that they consider a 17" HP laptop, similarly speced, with dedicated 2GB video card, for $250 less... and buy an ipad -- instead of purchasing the 13" MacBook Pro.


----------



## RLPhoto (Feb 4, 2013)

For serious editing, I'd never use a laptop. too expensive, outdated too quickly, Run too hot, screens too small, too slow.

Desktops are far more powerful for less $$$ and could be built to any spec needed, upgraded, run cool, and can have large screens.


----------



## hawaiisunsetphoto (Feb 5, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> For serious editing, I'd never use a laptop. too expensive, outdated too quickly, Run too hot, screens too small, too slow.
> 
> Desktops are far more powerful for less $$$ and could be built to any spec needed, upgraded, run cool, and can have large screens.



I hear you... I have a dual setup with a 17" HP workstation laptop, plus an HP desktop with i7, 24GB RAM, 2x2TB hard drives, blue ray DVD writers, that I picked up from HP refurbished for about $1100.... Plus a 30" NEC monitor.... But I think she wants the portability. I've also suggested looking for used 17" MacBook Pros, which may be an option.... Or a nice external monitor like a 24" NEC or Dell.....


----------



## Niterider (Feb 5, 2013)

hawaiisunsetphoto said:


> Aloha! I'd welcome some advice.... I'm advising a friend, an amateur photographer with talent and potential, on what kind of computer setup that would be sufficient for photo editing. Budget is a factor. They are considering a new 13" MacBook Pro for about $1425 with these specs: 2.9GHz dual-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz, 8GB 1600MHz memory, *750GB 5400-rpm hard drive*, Intel HD Graphics 4000...



The 5400 rpm hard drive will bottleneck the whole computer. If you do go with a macbook pro, a minimum would be a 7200 rpm drive. Ideally, you would want a 256gb (or larger) solid state drive. They work wonders in laptops. If I remember correctly, the new macbook pros are sealed systems (correct me if I am wrong) which means you have to pay apple to change out the drive. And that sucks because they charge A LOT for those drives


----------



## melbournite (Feb 5, 2013)

Niterider said:


> The 5400 rpm hard drive will bottleneck the whole computer. If you do go with a macbook pro, a minimum would be a 7200 rpm drive. Ideally, you would want a 256gb (or larger) solid state drive. They work wonders in laptops. If I remember correctly, the new macbook pros are sealed systems (correct me if I am wrong) which means you have to pay apple to change out the drive. And that sucks because they charge A LOT for those drives



Agree. SSD is a must!


----------



## Steve Todd (Feb 5, 2013)

Just purchased the 13" MacBook Pro W/Retna display last month. I have been using a 15" Sony VAIO, a AUSA notebook, and a home brewed desktop for the past 9-years to manage my digital images. I made the move to Mac to better (and quicker) view/edit my images. Even though the MBP(R) has a smaller display, it is far better for my needs. The resolution and color accuracy are superior to any laptop, notebook, or desktop models I have used in the past! I originally planned to use it with a large monitor, as I have seen the the 13" used with the Mac, Thunderbolt monitor, by friends of mine and was very impressed. However, after seeing for myself just how good the MBP(R) is by itself, I might put off purchasing a monitor anytime soon! Additionally, I have been extremely happy with Canon's DPP, Image Browser and other Canon Utilities programs for many years. Now, they work even better on my MacBook Pro!


----------



## robbymack (Feb 5, 2013)

Yes that should work fine.


----------



## twdi (Feb 16, 2013)

I'm into the same situation. I really like the retina displays cause me also to look for a rMBP.
Are you also running Lightroom 4 and Premiere elements 11? How do they perform on the 13 inch?


----------



## rats181 (Feb 16, 2013)

I use a early 2011 15inch MacBook Pro, and runs photoshop CS6 and Lightroom 4 not a problem, I only have the standard 750gb hard drive and it does slow everything down. 
Friends at Uni have the 13inch models from last yeah running the same software on 4gb ram and its all still fine


----------



## Harry Muff (Feb 16, 2013)

I've been doing high-end beauty retouching on my GF's 2011 13" MBP without any problems. They are pretty upgradable anyway for not a lot more:


8Gb RAM - £35


256Gb SSD - £125


You don't need those upgrades, but they make things a lot sweeter. 


The screen is perfectly acceptable and calibrates nicely too - I usually check my images on my own Mac Pro and 26" NEC WUXI2 when I get the chance and they look absolutely fine.


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Feb 18, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> For serious editing, I'd never use a laptop. too expensive, outdated too quickly, Run too hot, screens too small, too slow.
> 
> Desktops are far more powerful for less $$$ and could be built to any spec needed, upgraded, run cool, and can have large screens.



Ditto. I see this question often about getting a mac on a budget. It's like buying any luxury item cheap. Please understand that the words "BUDGET" and "MACBOOK" don't exist in the same sentence. If budget is a factor, you'll get a lot more value for your money with a desktop system, good display, extra RAM and an SSD drive running Windows 7 Pro x64. Use Lightroom 4 and perhaps the Adobe Elements/Premier package. Get the software with an Academic discount if you qualify.

As has been discussed here over and over, Macs are great if you have the funds but you will pull your hair out trying to get a mac on a budget.

Disclaimer: This isn't a mac bashing statement. It's just a fact. Please don't let this start a Mac vs. PC flame war. I'm merely stating my experience with regard to the OP's point that a "budget" is a factor. Apple doesn't sell anything to people with a budget. Except maybe Apple TV. (Assuming you don't start buying content from them.)


----------



## dolina (Feb 19, 2013)

NatGeo photogs use far more older Macs in the field just fine. So do photojournalists in warzones as well.

So if your requirements are more challenging than theirs then you should buy a large, heavy, clunky and yet cheap PC. 

What's more you can buy a PC to play games!!!!! Macs dont do games that well.  Bad Mac!!!! Bad!!!



hawaiisunsetphoto said:


> Aloha! I'd welcome some advice.... I'm advising a friend, an amateur photographer with talent and potential, on what kind of computer setup that would be sufficient for photo editing. Budget is a factor. They are considering a new 13" MacBook Pro for about $1425 with these specs: 2.9GHz dual-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz, 8GB 1600MHz memory, 750GB 5400-rpm hard drive, Intel HD Graphics 4000.
> 
> Given the limited screen real estate of a 13" MacBook, I've advised them that they will need an external monitor if they go that route.
> 
> ...


----------



## pierceography (Feb 19, 2013)

I have a 15" Macbook Pro at work, and a 13" Macbook Pro at home. Both are connected to external displays. The 13" is an early 2011 model, and is my primary machine for editing photos. It's connected to a 24" Dell IPS display.

You really can't go wrong with a mac. I've been a "power user" for most of my professional career, and flip flop between Windows and Mac OSX (depending on my needs at work). I largely prefer OS X for photo editing for a very simple reason: the native ability for the file browser (Finder) to quickly cycle through and view photos. I'll take a large volume of pictures during a "shoot" and need to tag the keepers. Sure, there's a lot of third party software (including some I've written myself) that can do a good job of this, but I always find myself going back to Finder for the quick, "Do I want to further PP this shot?".

So +1 for the Macbook. Though I would definitely get a SSD for it. Size doesn't matter (I have a 128 SSD in both my macs) since you can get an external USB disk based drive for more storage (or offload to a NAS drive if you have one), and use the SSD for editing your current batch of photos.


----------

