New iMac

Switching to Mac. Help for new iMac 27", should I get the base i5 3.1GHz or BTO(Built to order) i7 3.4GHz with 2GB HD and 256MB SSD. Either system will upgrade the ram with after market. Only will use the system for MS office, web surfing and photo editing and not a gamer. Currently use DPP but will order Apeture 3 with the new system. Not doing any video yet but will in future as have 7D. Not in a rush as if go to BTO with SSD is shipping in 4-6 weeks and if I go this path I will also wait for OS Lion. Also not concerned about the extra costs between stock and BTO. As always thanks for the advice








7D, EF-s 10-22, 70-200L F2.8 IS II, 24-105L F4 IS, EX 1.4ii, EX 2 iii

Hi Homer...


I would and as you have confirmed, go with the i7 3.4 and as much RAM as you can afford. I have read that video editing in particular from a DLSR is very CPU intensive and requires a robust system in particular anything to do with HiDef content.


Plan today for tomorrow and in the world of computers that

Homer


Either computer will do the job. When you do the upgrades your just buying more time before you have to upgrade again. But the order I would do the upgrades are this:


Ram first, at least 8 gb


Processor second


As for the Hard Drive. I wouldn't go for the 2tb myself. As the files I have now wouldn't fit on 2tb. I have a 1 tbhard driveon my mac pro, with 200mb allocated to run windows 7. That gives me enough storage to work on my projects for 4 or 5 months before I have to move everything off. I backup to externals and the other 3 hard drives I have on the computer. If I were using an IMac I would probably use a 1tb hard drive and get something like time capsule for time machine to back up to, then get externals to store everything on.


As for Windows I have the Mac version of office. I would suggest using boot camp or VM Ware Fusions and buy a copy of Windows 7. This would be cheaper than buying a new copy of Windows Office. While Office and Word work on Mac, they do not work as well in my opinion. If your just typing letters its probably OK. But certain of the shortcuts you have gotten used to with Windows will not be on the Mac version. The explanation for this from Windows is that these shortcuts are proprietary to Windows. Windows 7 cost me $199 bucks to put it on my Mac, and it was very easy to do. One thing I have noticed, I can take the files off the partitioned areas of Windows with the Mac. But I cant share files from the Mac when in Windows, nor does the Mac part of the hard drive even show up.


As much as you suggested spending, your almost in to a Mac Pro.


Good Luck


Rick

I think the 2 main things that you want to look at when purchasing a new computer for photography and especially for Video is RAM and hard drive size. I would go for the 2TB Drive and the 8GB of Ram and upgrade to the i7 if you could afford it.


SSD drives are very expensive and although they are faster and probably more reliable, I don't think it's money well spent, to spend $500 more for 1/4 the drive space. You still have to back up anyway, and when prices of SSD drives become more affordable, then you could always upgrade later. I would rather put that money into the i7 processor.


I like to look at the upgrade prices and I will usually go for the $100-$300 upgrade on an individual upgrade selection (and these can add up quickly), but I will usually stop short of the $500-$1000 individual upgrade selection.


So, look at your options and go with the reasonable upgrade costs. See where the reasonable upgrade pricing turns into unreasonable pricing.


The key is to future-proof as much as possible at todays prices, but don't future-proof with the latest technology by purchasing futuristic pricing.


Rich

Bottom line is either machine will do the job. Get lots of external storage (2 TB FW800 or Thunderbolt drives). Only other bit of advice is regarding Aperture 3 - it's $200 preinstalled or retail box version, but if you download it from the App Store (built into Mac OS X now), it's only $80.

i7 four core processors are capable of Hyper-threading which means it would create a virtual 8 core processing unit.


Aperture from the App is definitely the way to go. Also MS Office is only $150 which is less than buying a copy of Windows. Another option is Apple iWork. You can buy it in separate packages from the App Store for $20 each. So if you only need Pages (Word compatible) then it will just be $20. Pages allows you to save files as Word docs and also allows you to open and edit them.

I actually just ordered the 3.4 GHz i7 model with the 256GB SSD + 1TB HD and upgraded graphics card. Cost a little more than I really had wanted to spend, but my desktop is over 4.5 years old now, so I wanted an upgrade that would last another 4 - 5 years. I figured quad-core with hyper-threading and awesome graphics card would fill my photographic needs rather than leaving me wanting an upgrade again in a couple years. Even though you

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keith B

Aperture from the App is definitely the way to go. Also MS Office is only $150 which is less than buying a copy of Windows. Another option is Apple iWork. You can buy it in separate packages from the App Store for $20 each. So if you only need Pages (Word compatible) then it will just be $20. Pages allows you to save files as Word docs and also allows you to open and edit them.

---

It depends on which version of MS Office you get wheter it is cheaper or not. From a reputable dealer I have seen windows for $179, But that isn't really the point. Word and Excell do not work the same on a MAC as they do on Windows. You loose alot of the ease and short cuts you have gotten used to. If you make your living using these programs you will notice a diffrence, and to me time is money and if it takes a few extra steps on a spread sheet using excel on a MAC its not worth it.


If you are a casual user, once in a while you use office then it probably doesn't matter. For everything else though, go with MAC. The only reason I have windows on the homeMAC is for some online video games we play.

Rick, I agree about some of the shortcuts - for example, it

I bought at the end of December 2010 the 27" Imac i3 processor and upgraded to 12GB memory for an additional 110 dollars (Newegg) on top of the 1,550 dollar price that I bought the computer for. My computer runs fine with big photo projects like having 10 full res 5D2 TIF images open at once in Photoshop along with all the other stuff I have it do. I don't do any video editing and probably never will so I can not advise you on that. All the extra stuff that you have your eye on will just be the extra icing on the cake. The only bad thing about the imac's is the glare that comes off the screen but that is minor really as the screens are amazing. Just don't have your work station in a room with a bunch of big windows or a really bright light in the ceiling. I feel that the lighting around your work station should be controlled/limited anyways but to each is own.

sorry to jump on this thread, but thinking of getting an imac this summer.


freelanceshots - are you using either lightroom or aperture? i

I do not use aperture or lightroom rusty. DDP has done everything I've ever wanted as far as image browsing and RAW processing and its free with a canon camera. If I do anything with a photograph its through photoshop. No need to spend more money on things that I've already got covered. LR and AP might be better in some areas but I just don't think I use the additional features to justify the added cost. Once I got my iMac I try and do as little work on a PC as possible as its just that much nicer and easier to use. Any upgrades that a person does or extra processing speed that one adds to these computers is just an extra benefit as they run well even as a base model. I didn't notice a big difference on how my imac ran after I upgraded to the higher level of memory but I'm sure it improved on some level. I feel that with the additional money that you spend on the higher level models you will see small difference/gains that may or may not be noticed. As long as my computer turns on fast, wakes up from sleep mode quickly and open programs quickly I'm going to be a pretty happy user plus the need not to have to buy/load malware software and update that all the time. When I searched online about the actual difference between the i3 and the i7 processor (Youtube for example) with the parameters i mentioned there were very small differences between the 2. The only item that I think would make a bigger difference in speed would be to add a solid state hard drive for the programs and for general short term storage and access. Firewire 800 harddrives and a FW 800 card reader are a decent upgrade and that's where I'd spend the extra money. Maybe they will come out with a Firewire 1200 in the short future.


One idea would be to save your extra money for the insane price of gas, utilities and groceries which is only going to get higher before this years end. How much higher, we will have to see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by freelanceshots

DDP has done everything I've ever wanted as far as ... RAW processing

---

I thought that as well...then I tried DxO Optics Pro, and I must say that it does a much better job at noise reduction and lens correction than DPP (and better than Aperture at NR; Aperture doesn't offer lens corrections).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by freelanceshots

Any upgrades that a person does or extra processing speed that one adds to these computers is just an extra benefit as they run well even as a base model.

---

Agreed. A processor upgrade will buy about 6 extra months of real-world computer lifespan (in terms of technology advancements), and a relatively small amount of real-world performance gain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by freelanceshots

I didn't notice a big difference on how my imac ran after I upgraded to the higher level of memory but I'm sure it improved on some level.

---

Or not... Actually, Mac OS X does an excellent job at memory allocation and management, much better than Windows, IMO. It's really hard to get a current Mac to be RAM-limited (as judged by the amount of memory actually in use and the ratio of PageIns to PageOuts). Honestly, the only situation in which I think more than 4 GB of RAM is currently necessary is if you're running Windows or another OS as a virtual machine (I run a Windows VM for work, which is why I have 8 GB of RAM, but when the VM isn't running, I don't ever go over ~3 GB of RAM in use). But RAM is cheap, and does future-proof you a bit as well. Definitely a worthwhile upgrade.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by freelanceshots

Maybe they will come out with a Firewire 1200 in the short future.

---

They did much more...it's called Thunderbolt, and it's like Firewire 10000.

I do my all my lens distortion correction in CS5 through a highly regarded plug in. Might someday look into DxO Optics Pro but I really don

Is Thunderbolt a hard drive? I guess your out of luck running thunderbolt thingy unless you have the newest imac or macbook pro. It seems to be a lot faster then firewire 800 which is pretty fast. How do you hook up a card reader to run Thunderbolt fast?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by freelanceshots

Is Thunderbolt a hard drive?

---

It's a new I/O technology. There are Thunderbolt hard drives, but no CF card readers yet. An exec inCanon’s Video Products Group, stated that the company is “excited about Thunderbolt technology and feel it will bring new levels of performance and simplicity to the video creation market.” Maybe means a Thunderbolt port on some future Canon products (camcorders, if not dSLRs).
<div></div>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

It's a new I/O technology. There are Thunderbolt hard drives, but no CF card readers yet. An exec inCanon&rsquo;s Video Products Group, stated that the company is &ldquo;excited about Thunderbolt technology and feel it will bring new levels of performance and simplicity to the video creation market.&rdquo; Maybe means a Thunderbolt port on some future Canon products (camcorders, if not dSLRs).

---

It seems that there billing this as a consumers substitute for a MAC Pro.


APPLE Says:


"Now you can create a professional video setup for your MacBookPro or iMac, just as you would for your MacPro. If you&rsquo;re a video editor, imagine connecting high-performance storage, a high-resolution display, and high-bit-rate video capture devices to handle all the post-production for a feature film &mdash; right on your MacBook Pro or iMac. Thunderbolt I/O technology allows you to daisy-chain up to six new peripherals &mdash; such as the Promise Pegasus RAID or LaCie Little Big Disk^{<span style="font-size: xx-small; color: #666666;"]1} &mdash; plus an <span class="nowrap"]Apple LED Cinema Display"


John


Maybe this is what Canon's guy was really saying in marketing speak: "Now professional grade video proccessing will be available to the masses, and more people will buy new Rebel's with video capability because of it."


Its all good though.

Thank you for the suggestion. Curious to hear what Homer plans to buy, but I

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rusty

Out of curiousity, how would the hyperthreading ability in the i7 quad core benefit those utilizing photo editing software? Most of the information I've found concerning photo software uitilize memory and hard drive before truly benefiting from 8 virtual cores.

---

Yes, it will benefit. A better processor means faster image processing. For example, I went from a 17" Core Duo MacBook Pro to a 17" Core i5 MacBook Pro (now the previous generation of MBP with4 virtual cores), and DxO does my RAW-to-JPG conversions about twice as fast (~30 s per image vs. just over 1 minute per image), and spreads the load across all 4 cores. More significantly, with my old MBP, processing a set of images was pretty much all I could do - today, I processed a set of 90+ images while browsing the internet in OS X and dealing with emails in MS Outlook and a flowchart in MS Project running on a Windows virtual machine, with no significant impact from the image conversions running in DxO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

Yes, it will benefit. A better processor means faster image processing. For example, I went from a 17" Core Duo MacBook Pro to a 17" Core i5 MacBook Pro (now the previous generation of MBP with4 virtual cores), and DxO does my RAW-to-JPG conversions about twice as fast (~30 s per image vs. just over 1 minute per image), and spreads the load across all 4 cores. More significantly, with my old MBP, processing a set of images was pretty much all I could do - today, I processed a set of 90+ images while browsing the internet in OS X and dealing with emails in MS Outlook and a flowchart in MS Project running on a Windows virtual machine, with no significant impact from the image conversions running in DxO.

---

John


Now you have me testing this out. 30 seconds per picture sounds kind of slow. Maybe DxO is slower than DPP? Or its doing more functions when it converts?


I just tested how long it takes to convert on the Dell at work using DPP, it has a Intel Core Duo, T9300 @ 2.5ghz and its about 2 and half years old now. It took 16 seconds per conversion. (5D Mark II full size RAW file)


I am going to test this out on the wifes laptop and I Mac when I get home and the Mac Pro as well.


Rick

Yes, DxO is sifnificantly slower than DPP (for JPG conversions; moving from image to image while


making adjustments is faster in DxO). I suppose extra processing time is the price for improved noise reduction, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

(for JPG conversions; moving from image to image while


making adjustments is faster in DxO)

---

John


Are you talking work flow in general with DxO, or the computer opens/closes and moves through images faster with it? Is it a computer thing where DxO just works better on the computer as a program in general.


Rick

I recently got the 27" i3 (3.2GHz) with the standard ram, video card and 1TB HD, right before apple released the new machines (1 month ago), and have been extremely happy with it. I use lightroom and it has no issues handling large RAW (25.4 MB) files. As for RAM, it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HDNitehawk

Are you talking work flow in general with DxO, or the computer opens/closes and moves through images faster with it? Is it a computer thing where DxO just works better on the computer as a program in general.

---

This was my comment from my previous 'mini bake-off' between DPP and DxO (on my old MBP): "At the back end, there&rsquo;s a noticeable difference in the time it takes to convert the edited images from RAW to JPG - DxO is quite a bit slower.However, this is not a big deal to me since that&rsquo;s unattended time (I can let it run while I&rsquo;m busy during the day, or even overnight).The actual hands-on editing is faster with DxO (I think DPP applies more &lsquo;on-the-fly&rsquo; which slows it down, or it&rsquo;s just not coded as cleanly).I suspect the total time from start to JPG is similar, but with DxO less of that time is &lsquo;attended&rsquo;.<span>"


<span>Actually, DPP seems snappier for image editing now (might be a differential efect of the new MBP, might be the newer version of DPP), in terms of actually opening and moving through images, about on par with DxO now. From a workflow standpoint, I find that DPP is much better for image triage (in DxO, you need to add images to a project before you can rate them, which isn' really triage), but for image editing, the DxO workflow is better for me (e.g. all your tools are right there - cropping, clone/stamp, etc., vs. DPP's separate windows for each).

Thanks everyone for the input.


I have decided to wait until the SSD versions are out and shipping times for BTO are down from 4-6 weeks to 3-4 days. Also very inerested to see the reviews of the SSD when released. When I do order it will be the i7 -3.4GHz with 2GB vid, 2TB HD and 256MB SSD. I will upgrade the ram myself from 4MB to 16MB. Will buy Apeture online as suggested as cannot beat that price and also will wait to get Apple Care at a later date but will for sure get it.

Finally purchased my new iMac. Bought 27" i5 3.1GHZ 1TB vid and 1TB drive. I did add 8GB ram for a total of 12GB. Came with Leopard and installed Lion. Waited for the refresh then SSD drives and then Lion to make the final decision. SInce the main reason was to edit/process photos I could see no reason to have the extras as all over kill for what i need. I dislike large drivers as just too much data to loose. Could not justify the price for an SSD drive and for the same money I purchased the extra ram, Airport extreme router and Bose Companion 20 speakers. I will be buying an Thunderbolt drive either SSD or HD version when more come on the market at better prices.


I have been with MS systems when we were still using 5 1/4 drives and this is my first Mac. Wow is all I can say. So far very happy to have made the switch. All I can say is everything just works and at blazing speed. The display is one of the best I have used and have it set as Adobe RGB. I have also found from being a Windows user since it first release that switching to Mac is very easy to learn. To me it is just another GUI. What influenced me was having an iPhone and then an iPad that Apple stuff just works.


I have now finally installed most apps I need and files. I did find a few issues. MS office 2011 does have a major issue and that it does NOT sync your iPad/iPhone calendars. Hopefully it does get fixed soon. The latest version of Canon DPP works fine but the EOS utility does not. Version 3.8 does work but took some time to install. NOTE, you will need to delete from the HD any newer version for 3.8 to install.


I edit/process all my photos with DPP (all Raw from Canon 7D camera) but am looking for software to manage/organize all my photos. I have have been a total slob before buying my 7D with managing about 10,000+ photos and sure I must have several copies of the same pictures in the mess of folders I had created. What software would be best work to import all this mess and to clean it up and also can clean up all the duplicates? I would be importing them all from an external HD. Aperture, Lightroom and Elements 10 all may offer what I may need and just need expert opinions.


THANKS

Homer, glad to here you had a positive transition from PC to Mac. I too am strongly considering MAC Book, and stories like this make the decision that much easier.--Thanks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Homer

What software would be best work to import all this mess and to clean it up and also can clean up all the duplicates? I would be importing them all from an external HD. Aperture, Lightroom and Elements 10 all may offer what I may need and just need expert opinions.

---

I am a big Lightroom fan and use it almost exclusively for organization, editing and output---I love it. I hear that Aperture is also great software, but I have no experience with it.


Good Luck

Agree 100% on the lightroom comment. It

Going to use this old thread.... now that imac's are getting the nice color boost...about the two size options on imac. Is the 21.5 usable on editing or is it just really to have the 27 version?