SportsShooter.com - Laptops for photographers

	Oregon \| WI \| USA \| Posted: 11:37 AM on 10.05.07
	->> I've been using macs for 21 years... can't imagine buying anything else. MacBook Pro 17 inch works for me. 256mb video ram. 2 gb ram. firewire 400/800 USB 2.0, 160gb hd all come standard. They come standard on 15 inch, too.

Mike Strasinger, Photographer

	Nashville \| TN \| USA \| Posted: 12:19 PM on 10.05.07
	->> Mac

Jody Gomez, Photographer

	Murrieta \| CA \| USA \| Posted: 12:19 PM on 10.05.07
	->> Go to the Dell Outlet http://tinyurl.com/ez997 I got my Dell Inspiron 6400 with the fancy screen, 120gb hard drive, 2 gb ram, and all the bells and whistles (this thing screams) delivered from the outlet for under $1,000. It's well worth browsing to see what they have. Hope that helps. Jody

David Johnson, Photographer

	Social Circle (Atlanta) \| GA \| USA \| Posted: 12:30 PM on 10.05.07
	->> If you want to stick with a PC laptop, I recommend sticking with XP instead of Vista. As someone mentioned above, Vista uses a lot of RAM, leaving less for the applications. Vista is also a pain with the extra default 'security' is forces on the users. RAM is your friend. If you have limited funds and you are trying to decide between a faster processor or more RAM, get more RAM.

Stephen Brashear, Photographer

	Seattle \| WA \| USA \| Posted: 12:55 PM on 10.05.07
	->> In addition to what David and Jody mention, consider checking the speed of you hard drive. I have a 7200 RPM hard drive on and that speeds things up as well.

Luke Trottier, Photographer

Bath | ME | US | Posted: 1:05 PM on 10.05.07

->> These specs are ideal for your needs.

Vista can consume more memory then XP but in a few years everyone will have Vista and compatibility for XP will start to fade. You are going to wish you had purchased your laptop with the latest operating system when you had the opportunity. Vista also offers additional security over XP.

Mac's don't offer any functionality over Vista/XP other then a small user base which helps reduce the interest in hackers exploiting their operating system.

Alan Look, Photographer

Bloomington | IL | United States | Posted: 1:16 PM on 10.05.07

->> I purchased a new laptop similar to the one you describe in June from www.cyberpowerpc.com . It screams. I have PS7 and it runs XP.

While Luke is correct that compatibility will begin to fade in a few years, the fact of the matter is that in a few years you will likely have newer cameraware and software and need a new laptop. So don't let what is going to happen a few years down the road scare you off from what is available today. It will all evolve.

Macs - I won't bad mouth them, they have their place. If you comfortable and want a PC, buy it. I checked out the MACs, but making the switch had a number of drawbacks that for me outweighed the benefits.

Thomas Boydston, Photographer, Student/Intern

Georgetown | Tx | United States | Posted: 1:18 PM on 10.05.07

->> I use vista with -no- complaints. In fact, I suggest it to anyone who is looking at a new PC. If you stick with XP you're asking yourself to get left behind. In 2 years you'll be so out of date you won't know what's going on. In my experience (image editing, web design and I do a lot of comp sci related tasks and whatever else my mind cooks up) Vista has outperformed XP on -every- level. The memory hog argument would be true 5 years ago, but in this day computers are faster and hold more. Vista would be terrible on your old laptop, but you're getting a new one. 5 years ago OSX would've driven any mac machine into the ground.

If you're better/more used to PC, why would you switch?

It all comes down to what lets you do your job best.

I say go for the PC.

My laptop's stats are almost the same as yours excluding different brand and a different screen size, and I love it!

David Harpe, Photographer

Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 3:58 PM on 10.05.07

->> In 2 years you'll be so out of date you won't know what's going on.

That's what Microsoft said a year ago when they launched it. XP is still available as a factory installed option from Dell and others. There's a reason for that.

http://www.informationweek.com/windows/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=20210284...

XP will be around for quite awhile, so go for whatever performs better for you. I'd go to a store or a friend's house and check out Vista on a laptop and a comparable install on a notebook, then decide. I'd go with XP, but you be the judge.

Patrick Fallon, Student/Intern, Photographer

	Columbia \| MO \| USA \| Posted: 4:07 PM on 10.05.07
	->> check out www.slickdeals.net and their forums.. often there are some major good coupons for dell.. HOWEVER. I am a mac person

Michael Cullen, Photographer

	Wexford Town \| 0000 \| Ireland \| Posted: 4:18 PM on 10.05.07
	->> So, what is the best PC Vs Mac I am a PC boy, I know most graphic people are MAC fans what are photographers fans of...... I also know that Photoshop cs2 can slow your PC a lot, is PHOTOSHOP CS3 faster then cs2 Thanks

Matthew Hinton, Photographer, Assistant

New Orleans | LA | USA | Posted: 4:18 PM on 10.05.07

->> Memory and the screen are the things to look for. Look in the message archive for best laptop displays. I think the consensus was Sony Viao X-Brite displays are the best screens, but also the newer macs with LED technology are highly rated by Rob Galbraith. http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-8741-9027

Also you might want to go to a local department store and look at the screens of laptops to get an idea of viewing angles and color, before you order it cheaper somewhere else. Also try to look at screen outside or in your car to get an idea of what the screen will look like. Many displays are very reflective and you need almost darkness to view them so look for a display that is more matte and less reflective.

When you open ten images in Photoshop it doesn't really matter how fast your machine is, you need lots of memory (ram). So the more ram the better. A larger hard drive with more virtual memory will also come in to play when you open ten images. So a faster hard drive 7200 or 5400 rpm will be better.

Thomas Boydston, Photographer, Student/Intern

Georgetown | Tx | United States | Posted: 4:25 PM on 10.05.07

->> Of course that's what Microsoft said when they launched it, and they were depressingly accurate. Although XP will hang around for a few years, that doesn't make it current and up-to-date.

I don't think the speed of technology can be argued.

Either way, the people that complain about Vista aren't Vista users. And if they are Vista users: They're probably not computer friendly/savvy people.

Once again: I think Vista is -amazing-. I've run photoshop CS2 and CS3 on my machine (over remote desktops and actually installed) while running other various "memory-intensive" programs with well over 15 images open at a time. I have 2 gigs of ram and a pretty core 2 duo, it works for me.

Windows 98 fans said the same thing when XP came out, and I constantly wonder why they thought this. XP was a great step up from 98 [and ME, and 2000, and windows Nice Try (NT)]. And Vista is a great step up from XP.

/end rant

Thanks,
Vista Fanboy

Kirby Yau, Photographer, Assistant

	San Diego \| CA \| USA \| Posted: 4:44 PM on 10.05.07
	->> Michael, I'm a Apple Mac guy, and I'm a graphic designer, and I'm a photographer. But it irks me a little when I hear "Macs are for graphic people" Apple makes great products for everyone and anyone that wants a simple computer that works without much fuss. Something that allows anyone to CREATE. I wouldn't discount a MAC if you haven't tried it.

Michael Cullen, Photographer

	Wexford Town \| 0000 \| Ireland \| Posted: 4:55 PM on 10.05.07
	->> Kirby, I am sorry if I did up set you!! Yes, I know that Apple computers are great, they look amazing. I think I will keep using PCs as all my software is PC ver. I would like to use a mac soemday but I need to get a fast computer M

Mark Smith, Photographer

Elk City | OK | USA | Posted: 5:11 PM on 10.05.07

->> I own 8 laptops. I've been a computer geek since 1981, first with a trs-80, then a badass commodore 64. I'm both computer savvy and computer friendly

I recently bought a laptop and did not have the option to stick with XP, so I thought, well, here we go, fixing something that wasn't broken. XP is one of the view Windows OS's that I've really liked. Anyway, I'm fairly indifferent when it comes to Vista, when I use the one machine I have it on. I get annoyed when I have to hunt things down that aren't where they've always been. I just don't understand changing the user interface. When OS changes need to be made to increase performance, something I'm not certain has happened with Vista, that is one thing, but why move things around? I just don't get it.

Michael Cullen, Photographer

	Wexford Town \| 0000 \| Ireland \| Posted: 5:21 PM on 10.05.07
	->> By the sound of it.. most people are saying.. XP is the best..

Ramsay de Give, Student/Intern, Photographer

	Santa Fe \| NM \| USA \| Posted: 5:23 PM on 10.05.07
	->> Go for the MacBook Pro if you can... if not, then seriously consider a MacBook. They haul serious processor!! I have one with 2gb RAM, and boy oh boy does Photoshop fly on it. Like Chuck said at the top - Mac, nothing else.

Kirby Yau, Photographer, Assistant

	San Diego \| CA \| USA \| Posted: 5:36 PM on 10.05.07
	->> Michael, since you are set with going with a PC. I would say go with Vista, I'm happy with it (I'm running off a windows partition on my Mac) and should be getting better with the SP1 that should be comming out soon. I guess I'm fond of it since its more like a Mac and it runs well, no crashes.. _K

Ron Erdrich, Photographer

	Abilene \| TX \| USA \| Posted: 5:38 PM on 10.05.07
	->> Mac vs. PC Canon vs. Nikon Sportsshooter vs. NPPA Can't we all just get along? -R-

Sam Morris, Photographer

	Henderson (Las Vegas) \| NV \| USA \| Posted: 5:51 PM on 10.05.07
	->> I'm not sure what your budget is, but take a look at Alienware if you haven't yet. I've heard great things about them, and they look baaaaaad.

Andrew Carpenean, Photographer

Laramie | WY | USA | Posted: 6:40 PM on 10.05.07

->> If you're looking at running windows I would consider an HP. From their Web site you can build your own laptop from the ground up, but also consider talking with one of their reps. to configure exactley what you want as there are so many base models to choose from. Many of the hardware upgrades are free and I have a built-in LightScribe DVD burner for only an extra $75.

When you are talking cost of a PC vs MAC there is a huge difference. I don't exactley care for Vista as an operating system, but am getting use to it. Connectivity for getting online is much better than when I use to work on a company issued G4. If you have a lot of MAC files and end up switching to a PC use Macdrive 7 to open those folders and whatnot for $50 out of B&H Photo.

And one other thing I like regarding a PC instead of a MAC is that I can run down to the local Staples and pick something up if need be and couldn't always do this with a MAC as there isn't an Apple store anywhere close to the last two places I have lived.

JohnPaul Greco, Photographer, Assistant

	Milwaukee \| WI \| USA \| Posted: 8:46 PM on 10.05.07
	->> Yep, I used to be a PC boy too.. but Mac is the way to go,... in my experienced opinion.. :-) JP

Andrew Sullivan, Photo Editor, Photographer

	Kissimmee \| FL \| USA \| Posted: 9:39 PM on 10.05.07
	->> I work on an Asus F3JP notebook with the T7200 processor and 15.4" 1680x1050 monitor. It is fantastic and runs through Photoshop with no problem, photos look great on the screen, and it only cost about $1400. Andrew Sullivan www.picandrew.com

Kevin Leas, Photographer

Rochester | NY | USA | Posted: 9:48 PM on 10.05.07

->> Michael,
My two cents would be an Intel-based Macbook Pro (or Macbook, with the right options).
There are two big advantages that stick out in my mind.
1) You can run OS X and Windows on the same computer. This way, if you ever find yourself absolutely needing software that's only available for one system or the other, you're fine.
2) I have never, ever had to run a single anti-virus program on any of my Macs, and have never had any "driver compatibility issues", leading me to a safer and more reliable experience.

I use a Windows XP Pro computer for my desktop (due to budget limitations), but have a G4 Powerbook that I truly love. While the Windows machine has never been so crippled that it's prevented me from doing my work, it has caused me more headaches than the Mac has. In particular, wireless connection with a Mac has never given me a problem, where I have seen dozens and dozens of Windows laptop users banging their keyboards while trying to figure out the connection. Your results *may* vary, but that seems to be the general consensus.

I'll just echo the features that everyone has already mentioned: lots of RAM, a DVD burner, and wireless connectivity. If you go the Windows route, try to get a computer with firewire. A larger hard drive is always nice, but buying externals is cheap enough now that it's not essential to get the biggest available.

Chuck Liddy, Photographer

Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 11:47 PM on 10.05.07

->> say it loud. say it proud. MAC. I know several (who will remain unnamed to protect the innocent) wire service photogs who are forced by their archaic agency to use Dell's. most of the time they want to send those dells flying across the room. crashes, crashes crashes. in fact...in the media rooms we usually start laughing when they're screaming in frustration and say, "Yo, it's a DELL, dude"! the come back is usually "no it's a friggin plastic frisbee, that's aerodynamically unsound." people out there can say what they want about pc's but the only bitchin' I hear about macs from any photographer who has ever used one is their price......but hey, you get what you pay for. wanna buy a cheap piece of crap? buy a pc. just remember, you'll get what you pay for. and when you're crying in agony because the damn thing just won't work.........they'll be a small litle voice in your head getting louder and louder....."mac.......mac..........MAC! shoulda bought the MAC! chuck's an ass, but i shoulda listened to his rants"...............
8)

Matthew OHaren, Photographer

Harrisburg | PA | USA | Posted: 1:16 AM on 10.06.07

->> 15.4" Macbook Pro is what I use. Before purchasing one back in February from the Apple Store, I probably hadn't used a Mac in probably 4-5 years, since I was in high school. Though, I was a bit nervous at first and even after buying it, it sat around for about 2 weeks before I started to learn it and use it, but after using it on a daily basis, life is soooo much easier! If you go with a MAC, be sure to get the MATTE FINISH SCREEN!!

David Johnson, Photographer

Social Circle (Atlanta) | GA | USA | Posted: 9:07 AM on 10.06.07

->> Hey Michael,

What are the specs on your current laptop? Processor, ram, hard drive size, % of hard drive that is being used? Knowing that, some suggestions might be made about how to improve your current laptop at an economical price or at least let you know how much of a difference a new laptop would make.

Check out a couple of easy to use (and free) programs for cleaning up windows PC. You may be able to give your current laptop a quick tuneup and help it perform a bit better. It will not be as good as a new laptop, but it won't cost you anything either!

CCleaner
http://www.ccleaner.com/
CCleaner is a freeware system optimization and privacy tool. It removes unused files from your system - allowing Windows to run faster and freeing up valuable hard disk space.

WinDirStat
http://windirstat.info/
WinDirStat is a disk usage statistics viewer and cleanup tool for Microsoft Windows. WinDirStat reads the whole directory tree once and then presents it in three useful views:

1) The directory list, which resembles the tree view of the Windows Explorer but is sorted by file/subtree size,
2) The treemap, which shows the whole contents of the directory tree straight away,
3) The extension list, which serves as a legend and shows statistics about the file types

David

David Harpe, Photographer

Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 9:32 AM on 10.06.07

->> Windows machines can be very stable if you do just a little bit of gardening on them and use a little common sense. David's advice is great for cleaning up a few things. Here are a few more:

1. When you first get your machine, de-install most of the crapware that comes bundled with the machine. If you are saavy enough, do a complete ground-up reinstall of Windows. Either will help immensely.

2. Buy a copy of Norton's, keep it current, turn off some of the more intrusive features.

3. Install firefox and don't even think about using Internet Explorer for web browsing. Reconfigure outlook/etc. to use Firefox instead of IE.

4. If you're working in the field, you want to turn off all of the "automatic update" stuff. It slows you down because everytime you bring up an internet connection this stuff calls home. This can kill you on a dialup.

5. Don't click on attachments.

6. Stay with XP as long as you can (you'll get more out of your machine, all things considered)

You do those things and your machine will be as stable as any Mac out there. The PCs I use are solid in the field and have no problems.

But honestly, money is the main reason I stay with PCs. It also helps that I have a background in computers, so I can do my own support work. If money were no object I'd switch tomorrow. I have tons of software which would be a pain/expensive to convert to Mac versions, and on average you'll pay around $700-$1,000 more for a Mac machine versus a windows box.

If you are not computer savvy and want to use it like a toaster, and you can afford the extra money for the hardware, go with a Mac.

Joe Nicola, Photographer

Fort Worth | TX | USA | Posted: 10:22 AM on 10.06.07

->> Michael,

I have a Sony Vaio laptop and wish I hadn't bought it...the partitioned hard drive is a pain in my neck. The program files are contained on the C drive and everything else goes on the D drive. Which is fine, I suppose, but the C drive is really small and since I didn't catch that iTunes went on the C drive when I loaded it, I CONSTANTLY get the "Low Disk Space" message...I have added almost nothing to the C drive except CS2, iTunes, FTP software, and a program from my custom lab, yet I have only 100 mb of space left! To get the partition taken out, I would have to pay Best Buy $100 to fix it since I'm not all that confident with that sort of operation myself.

I'm about to buy a new notebook computer and I'm thinking Macbook Pro or one of the new Dell notebooks. Leaning toward the Mac...bought my daughter one and she loves it and I'm pretty impressed with it, as well.

Just my 3.1415 cents...your mileage may vary.

Joe

Svein Ove Ekornesvaag, Photographer

Aalesund | Møre og Romsdal | Norway | Posted: 10:38 AM on 10.06.07

->> I have a cheap Acer Travelmate 2490. Maybe a little big, but it works for me as long as it fits in my Lowepro Computrekker. Bought a cheap laptop so I could use it in rought conditions and bad weather without being afraid for destroying an expensive computer.

Of course I would love an ultraportable laptop, lightweight and extremly small, but for the price of one ultraportable laptop I could use and destroy 3-4 of the kind I have now.

Jim Colburn, Photo Editor, Photographer

	McAllen \| TX \| USA \| Posted: 11:46 AM on 10.06.07
	->> If you're on a budget get a MacBook.

Michael Cullen, Photographer

	Wexford Town \| 0000 \| Ireland \| Posted: 1:49 PM on 10.06.07
	->> The Macbook Pro looks great, but I dont think my Photoshop and office software will work on mac. Its a fast computer, with Up to 4GB main memory, 15.4-inch (diagonal), 1440 by 900 resolution, TFT widescreen, 2.2GHz Intel Core 2 Duo' Not bad at all

Scott Morgan, Photographer

Rockford | IL | United States | Posted: 2:12 PM on 10.06.07

->> I'm not going to jump on the Mac v PC bandwagon here, but one thing that hasn't been mentioned.

The Intel Core 2 Duo T5500 is 1.66 ghz processor.

The slowest Mac laptop you can buy, the base model Macbook, has a 2.0 Ghz processor, known in PC world as the T7200. The slowest Macbook Pro runs at 2.2 ghz 7300 with the Intel 965 Santa Rosa chipset. The chipset lets the processor run at 800 MHz compared to 667 for the other two. This turns into about a 10% performance gain over a chip with a similar clock speed and the slower bus. You can get these processors on PC's too, but you need to look for them. They'll cost you about the same as a Mac though, but you won't need to upgrade your software, so it will save you money.

Get whatever you want. People haven't been to kind to Dells recently from what I read. HP sounds like a good option, and Sony's look cool, but are more expensive. If it were me, I'd probably try to keep the processor up around 2 ghz. Get 2 gigs of ram no matter what, and if you can get a fast hard drive, opt for that too. Check www.dealnews.com for the best prices.

-sm

Larry Clark, Photographer, Photo Editor

Falls Church | VA | USA | Posted: 12:16 PM on 10.07.07

->> A few points...

-- Can you expect 3 years out of your laptop? If you will be in the Windows world then you should consider a machine that allows up to 4GB RAM. Even if you intend to use XP for the near term, don't paint yourself into a corner with a machine only capable of 1GB or 2GB RAM...And that goes for MAC laptops where you might be running Windows as well as MAC OS.

-- As regards Sonys...Flip the machine over and see if you have easy access to both RAM and the hard drive. Some Sony models require an extensive tear-down to get to the hard drive which can be a real pain (and expense) if you are replacing or upgrading the drive.

-- With Vista I know that "Ultimate" gives you the option of bypassing some of its more annoying "security features" such as quadruple confirmations to perform simple maintenance tasks. I don't know if "Business" may also allow this because that's not the kind of information Microsoft posts in easy-to-find locations.

-- It might be more convenient if the laptop comes with 3 USB ports. Many (most?) of the small external hard drives need two USB ports to get enough power to the external drive. If you use a real mouse like I do, then you'll appreciate that 3rd USB port -- or will need to get a USB card.

Lee Love, Photographer

Herndon | VA | US | Posted: 8:50 PM on 10.07.07

->> After 20+ years of being a PC user when Vista came out I was not sure I could go through another couple of years of MS trying to get a new operating system fixed.

So I started doing serious research on what other options were available and after a month I decided to switch to Mac. Six months later I have replaced all of my laptops and workstations with Macs and I have to say this is the best decision I ever made.

A 15" Macbook is a great machine and definitely the way to go in my humble opinion. You wont be sorry.

Michael Cullen, Photographer

	Wexford Town \| 0000 \| Ireland \| Posted: 7:48 AM on 10.08.07
	->> Mac computers, I know a mac can be hard to use after many years on a PC. On a laptop I need to use the mouse, as in photoshop its the only way I feel.

Jason Joseph, Photographer

Dublin | OH | USA | Posted: 9:24 AM on 10.08.07

->> I am sorry if this was mentioned previously in this thread, but I don't have enough time right now to go through it all. IF you are concerned about leaving the Windows world behind and are concerned about not being able to use your current PC version of Photoshop, consider the Windows on Mac route. Get a Mac and install either Bootcamp or Parallels on it so that you can have a Windows machine and a Mac machine to ease the transition. From what I have heard Windows XP runs faster and more stable on a Mac. This would allow you to use your current PC versions of your software until you are comfortable enough to make the full move to Mac. Honestly, I made the transition about 8 months ago with the intent to do this, but I quickly found myself not even thinking about Windows anymore.

Steve King, Photographer

Ann Arbor | MI | USA | Posted: 11:45 PM on 10.08.07

->> Mac.

Many opinions have said it's harder, need a mouse, can't run your software. All those are like internet hoaxes, wrong. It's not harder to use, you can buy a wireless mouse that has two button and roller ball functionality, you can install (or have a geek do it for you) bootcamp to run windows on a mac too.

Here's what you get, (mostly) unfailable hardware that will work for you. Whether you get the MacBook or MacBook Pro you'll get a great screen, matte finish is the best. You will be able to run your system without "unknown errors" or "unexplained" crashes, or random slow downs while running multiple programs, all things that regularly happen to PC users, XP or Vista. ALL the software you need, Photoshop was first written on the Mac, Photo Mechanic or others, FTP software, all word processors or spreadsheets you need (MS of course), very good browsers, etc.

What you won't get is many different "PC makers" to choose from, or the option to build your own. Who cares? Is your work doing PC tech support or making great images? Hmmm...
You may have to pay just slightly more for your system of choice vs. a PC, but that more than makes up for the loss of time, money, and sanity while hoping your system will work for you.

**Disclosure** I use a PC both desktop and moody laptop, my son uses a PC laptop (he's on his third in four years since they end up failing or having serious failures/troubles hardware incompatibilities, etc - IBM and/or HP for him) wife and daughter BOTH use a Mac that I helped set up for them and neither gives me troubles while making me "family tech support". It just works and works well.
My next computer WILL BE A MACBOOK PRO. I'm done with PC's and Windoze.

David Meyer, Photographer

Orlando | FL | USA | Posted: 12:53 AM on 10.09.07

->> While not necessarily laptop related, I haven't had the same luck as the rest of the crowd with Apple products. In fact, I've purchased eight products from Apple over the past few years and have been dissatisfied with seven of them. Two iPods with exceptionally poor battery life and shoddy click wheels, an iMac with a defective video card which caused kernel panics/random shutdown and four photo books - each of which arrived with huge color shifts. In fact, the best thing I can say about Apple is that their customer service has been exceptional during the return process. Otherwise, their quality control has been atrocious.
I've never had the problems that seem to plague other PC users. No issues stemming from malware, no Blue Screens of Death, and no hardware issues that couldn't be solved on quickly on my own.
Also, no Vista for me. I've worked with it and wasn't impressed. I'll be sticking with XP. It has some warts, but it's tried and true and gets the job done.

Wes Hope, Photographer

Maryville | TN | USA | Posted: 1:10 AM on 10.09.07

->> Hey gang, I'm in a similar situation in that I have a 4 year old Dell that's on it's last legs. It has been relegated to an internet and word processing machine only as I have a desktop model that handles all my editing and toning duties. But it would be nice to able to process RAW files on vacation or do PS work on the road again.

I've been reading the gripes about Vista for a while and so started looking at Macs as an alternative. Three months before I left my old paper, we were given the smallest cheapest iMacs, but didn't really use them daily until a few weeks before I left. There were some things I liked and a lot of things I knew I was going to have to get used to and learn (old dog, new tricks sorta stuff). I remember thinking that it ran kind of slow though and wish I had jotted down the specs.

So looking at the specs on your basic MacBook (not the pro... gotta keep the costs down) 2ghz with 1gb RAM, do you think that would be enough to run CS3 and/or Lightroom? I know the Macs handle processors differently (according to what I've read elsewhere and Scott's post earlier) or more efficiently. So do you really need to load it down with more chipset? I mean, realistically I'd get the biggest fastest I could, but I'd also have to win/play the lottery.

I guess the condensed version is this:

Is the cheapest 13" MacBook good enough for a photographer who doesn't need it as a main edit station? (Geez, why didn't I just say that to begin with, right?).

Jeff Stanton, Photographer

Tucson | Az | USA | Posted: 1:27 AM on 10.09.07

->> I'm really torn between mac and pc right now. I'm using a PC laptop (Dell) and it has served me fairly well the last year. I had a Mac laptop and it was great - when it wasn't at Apple repair. I use a Mac G5 desktop at work (not the new Intel one) and it screams with speed. I've been happy with it.

My problem with Apple is they didn't stand behind their product. There are thousands of documented cases of logic board failures with the Apple iBook G4 laptops and Apple chose not to stand behind any repairs that went beyond the warranty period. So you have to fork over another $250 for an extended warranty for something that should last more than a year. In addition, their stuff costs more and I don't think it's necessarily better.

What I do like about Mac is the keyboard shortcuts. The actual reach on the keyboard is better suited to my hands. I like the way iTunes works on a Mac and it works so seamlessly, plus you get software like iMovie which is easy to use for quick video edits, something you can throw together and email someone.

I don't know, I'd say if you're working on a budget, you can't go wrong with a PC. If you have more to spend, the Apple products are nice too. But I wouldn't buy either without an extended warranty.

David Meyer, Photographer

Orlando | FL | USA | Posted: 1:31 AM on 10.09.07

->> Wes,
I think a MacBook will handle the tasks you have outlined if you max out the RAM. The one question that remains is the screen (glossy only). I can't confirm this, but most comments I've seen recommend the matte screen for color correction. This isn't an option on the MacBook.
Of course, I've never seen any definitive research that proves the glossy screen is inferior for color correction. I believe most assume that whatever technology is used to enhance color in glossy screens is likely to adversely effect your ability to achieve accurate results.

Nuno Gonçalves, Photographer

Braga | Portugal | | Posted: 5:55 AM on 10.09.07

->> I have a new 14' Vaio Vaio CR-11R with a T7100, 2GB RAM and 160GB HD. Its very portable and light with a excellent screen, the only problem is "La VISTA" which I'm going to replace by the XP in a few weeks. HP now has some fine laptops at a better price then Sony, but the LCD and the quality of the Vaio is very, very good.

BTW

The only flaw for me in CR-11R is the graphic card that not so powerfull as i wanted (its a ATI HD2300).

Abraço

David Harpe, Photographer

	Louisville \| KY \| USA \| Posted: 7:12 AM on 10.09.07
	->> Glossy screens The biggest problem with the glossy screen is the glare issue. I know when I'm transmitting, a lot of times it's in less-than-ideal lighting situations. A glare-prone screen would be a major nuisance for me. YMMV.

Scott Morgan, Photographer

Rockford | IL | United States | Posted: 2:02 PM on 10.09.07

->> Quick clarification - Macs don't handle processors differently, they just don't use the names Intel gives them in their marketing. PC's use the exact same processors as the Macs, only the "budget" PC's use slower versions that Apple doesn't offer.

That said, my wife has a 2 Ghz Core 2 Duo Macbook with 2 gigs of ram (pre recent speed bump) that is quite fast. I wouldn't hesitate to reccommend it to anyone. I never had issues with the glossy screen other than images looked too pretty on them straight out of the camera. I under-toned them because the monitor looked so good. I think I'd get the middle of the road Macbook though, since it comes with 2 gigs of ram standard.

The only issues with the Macbook for me is that it won't run Final Cut Pro (although it runs Express just fine) and the graphics card isn't so great for Aperture. That being said, it's a great computer.

Ben Mackey, Photographer, Assistant

Columbia | MD | USA | Posted: 12:46 AM on 10.10.07

->> PC World recently reviewed (http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,135062-page,1-c,notebooks/article.html) the 17" Macbook Pro and concluded: "The MacBook Pro outperformed the rest of the notebooks we tested, all of which claim Windows as their primary--nay, their only--operating system."

So - if money is no object and you care most about performance, get the 17" Macbook Pro and run both Win/XP or Vista and OSX (as Kevin suggested above). And get the matte screen. The drawback with the Macbook Pro is that replacing the hard drive is not for the faint of heart. Of course, the Macbook Pro has dedicated video RAM, the Macbook uses system memory so video performance is better on the Pro. The Macbook hard drive is simple to replace but it only comes with the annoying glossy screen. In addition to reflections, you'll get color shifts with the glossy screen depending on the viewing angle.

From my experience, a stock Macbook has enough horsepower to run Lightroom processing D200 RAWs but more RAM is always better.

Larry's advice to flip whichever laptop you're interested in and look to see how easy (or not) it is to add RAM or a new hard drive is a great point. If you can't get your hands on a machine to flip it over, check the manuals on the manufacturer's web site. Also, you don't have to buy RAM with the laptop, you can almost always get compatible RAM from various 3rd parties.

A very good added expense to consider for laptop Macs is AppleCare and AppleCare on a *book is valid worldwide.

This thread has reached the maximum number of posts
If you would like to continue it, please create a new thread.
[ Create new thread? ]

Return to --> Message Board Main Index