Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: New Macbook Pros and Macbooks  (Read 17099 times)
woof75
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 581


« Reply #20 on: October 14, 2008, 04:50:16 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm sort of happy, the lack of FW on the macbook and the MBP being bigger than I like means I can't buy either of the new laptops. Saves me some money. Same thing with all the new backs and cameras. I went into fotocare the other day and picked them all up, HY6 was plasticky and the viewfinder was horribly ugly. The H2 was ugly as ever, massive shutter slap and plasticky grip. The new afd 3 has got a bigger grip which is just too big to be comfortable and I have big hands. The new backs don't seem to be much use unless your shooting billboards that people are going to walk right up to for everything else your going to be downresing a whole lot. It all adds up to me saving myself a lot of money with my P21 and AFD.
Logged
jvora
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 90


« Reply #21 on: October 14, 2008, 05:08:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Hey Patrick :

Totally agree - This was not a good move by Apple - They did not even spare the Cinema Displays from the Glossy Screens - Quite upsetting  




Quote from: terence_patrick
The glass screens are terrible. I once tried using an iMac on a set outdoors in the sun and even with a rigged foamcore shade plus a few floppies behind me, I could see the reflections of people standing around the screen more than I could see the actual photos.

Apple has jumped the shark.
Logged
Leonardo Barreto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 379



WWW
« Reply #22 on: October 14, 2008, 05:16:47 PM »
ReplyReply

has anyone used a FW800 with a Phase back? I know they have cables with 800 on one end and 400 on the other, so it could be the solution... at least for the 15inch, but I agree that there is a big point in having a small portable for field tethered photography... something like an iPhone with FW !
Logged

The important thing is not to stop questioning---Albert Einstein.
My Webpage/LeonardoBarreto.com
Leonardo Barreto alamy
Cfranson
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 95


WWW
« Reply #23 on: October 14, 2008, 05:25:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: John Schweikert
So has something changed that allows a boot volume to work from USB 2.0? I still run 10.4.11 on all machines, so firewire is a must and I use it all the time on my Macbook.
Intel powered Macs have been able to boot from USB 2.0 drives since they were first sold. You'll need to be sure the disk is partitioned as a Mac disk with the GUID option set, but it does work fine. I do agree that the absence of Firewire in the new MacBooks is a disappointment.
Logged
jimgolden
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 405


WWW
« Reply #24 on: October 14, 2008, 06:21:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: woof75
I'm sort of happy, the lack of FW on the macbook and the MBP being bigger than I like means I can't buy either of the new laptops. Saves me some money. Same thing with all the new backs and cameras. I went into fotocare the other day and picked them all up, HY6 was plasticky and the viewfinder was horribly ugly. The H2 was ugly as ever, massive shutter slap and plasticky grip. The new afd 3 has got a bigger grip which is just too big to be comfortable and I have big hands. The new backs don't seem to be much use unless your shooting billboards that people are going to walk right up to for everything else your going to be downresing a whole lot. It all adds up to me saving myself a lot of money with my P21 and AFD.


agreed - i was worried about the announcement, but now no worries...
Logged
klane
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 785

I live in a c-stand fort.


« Reply #25 on: October 14, 2008, 06:25:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Yeah its crap, Ive been waiting too. Apple has forgotten about their original customers ( pro users) and are only trying to meet trendy consumer wants. Its absurd that the mbp only has 1 fw port, its also mind boggling that there is no matte option... who the hell do they think their pro base is? the glossy displays always profile cold and do not calibrate near as well ( or are as stable imo) Not to mention they show dust 10x worse and they reflect everything.  

The 24 inch display... another mind boggler. $900 for a big glossy consumer level display? and no fire wire hub?Huh Oh well its a good excuse for me to buy a high end eizo next year
Logged
Jonathan H
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 115



WWW
« Reply #26 on: October 14, 2008, 07:34:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: klane
Oh well its a good excuse for me to buy a high end eizo next year

Yup Kyle.... same here.  Quite disappointed all around.  I think I'll buy another "old" macbook pro on craigslist this week as the yuppies start unloading them for cheap.


Logged

Long walks on the beach, nights by the fireplace, and sushi.
GregW
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 305


WWW
« Reply #27 on: October 14, 2008, 09:04:40 PM »
ReplyReply

How many of you have used a glossy LED display? My MBA display is very good indeed. I've not had any profiling issues in the same way I did with my wife's iMac (Glossy LCD). I was initially very skeptical but I have to say I have been won over. It's by far the best Mac notebook display I've ever used to work with  images. I use it with lightroom while on the road; it's not up to heavy work, but when I do need to start pixel peeping it does an excellent job with color. The LED backlight also eliminates a lot of the glare associated with glossy LCD displays.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2008, 09:22:03 PM by GregW » Logged
rueyloon
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 187


WWW
« Reply #28 on: October 14, 2008, 09:19:06 PM »
ReplyReply

With the laptops moving away from Firewire, I would like to know from the back makers of what do they have in mind, is it possible to power a back with USB ?

cheers

Logged
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2826



WWW
« Reply #29 on: October 14, 2008, 09:28:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: BJNY
Would like to know how a glossy screen is far more useful, and under what conditions?
Thank you.


Your paraphrase sort of takes my comments out of context.  It isn't far more useful in general, and in fact most of the time it is pretty much irrelevant which type of screen it is.  But in fact it is far more useful in a lot of situations, and in fact the brighter the ambient light the more helpful the glossy screen is.

I find the screen usable under any nearly any lighting conditions, including outdoors in daylight.   Reflections are rarely a problem - you normally can't even see them unless the screen is off.   Because reflections are specular, slight screen adjustments can usually resolve them, but to be honest I can't remember the last time I adjusted the screen to avoid a reflection.  A matte screen on the other hand has the same reflections, but it's diffused, killing contrast and making it difficult to see the image.  Sure you can't see a reflection, but you can't see the image either.  The brighter the ambient light, the tougher it gets to see a matte screen.

An example, sitting in the front seat of a car riding to california in day time (which I do several times a year), old MacBook Pro required full screen brightness and still challenging to see and read info.  Glossy screen no problem with screen turned down to 75% to conserve battery.

Obviously these aren't ideal conditions for working on photos, but that's not the main use of my MacBook anyway.

I didn't think I'd like it ... but now I prefer it.  Been using it since Apple first introduced it a couple of versions ago, so this is the third MacBook Pro I've had with the glossy screen.



Logged

BJNY
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1112


« Reply #30 on: October 14, 2008, 09:41:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Thank you, Wayne.
Appreciate the explanation.
Will give it a try.
Logged

Guillermo
richardhagen
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 67


« Reply #31 on: October 14, 2008, 10:05:50 PM »
ReplyReply

i have waited months for the upgraded macs but having read the specs, i must say, i'm very disappointed. the glossy screen turns me off completely. has anyone explored the Lenovo ThinkPad W700 laptop which is specifically geared to pro photographers.

rh
Logged
GregW
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 305


WWW
« Reply #32 on: October 14, 2008, 10:18:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Are we looking at the FW discussion from the wrong perspective?

I say this because FW as a standard has been loosing relevance for some time now. USB and eSATA have replaced it in many applications, consumer and professional. Microsoft as I understand it does't support FW 800 (1394b) in Vista. USB 3 will probably kill off FW in computing and consumer electronics.

A 13" MB would be a very useful machine to tether a MFDB. The problem is that most of Apple's customers, past and present don't even know what a MFDB is. They assume the FW port was there for their old video camera or a Lacie HDD. Apple could argue people should be grateful they didn't leave the MBP without a FW port, as they did with the MB! Will this be the last generation of the MBP to support FW?

I think the issue here is that the MFDB makers have been slow to identify and respond to an important industry trend which impacts their customers. Not exactly unheard of in the MF industry;)

Disclaimer: I'm not anti FW. I've been using Macs for more than 20 years and I've collected lots of FW goodies. I also know that the good old Apple days were not always that good. Like many I've lamented Apples rush to the consumer dollar, but I'm nothing if not a realist.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2008, 10:20:32 PM by GregW » Logged
GregW
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 305


WWW
« Reply #33 on: October 14, 2008, 10:21:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: rueyloon
With the laptops moving away from Firewire, I would like to know from the back makers of what do they have in mind, is it possible to power a back with USB ?

cheers

I think that's an excellent question. Perhaps those here who represent the back makers could be encouraged to comment?
Logged
RSPhoto
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 42


WWW
« Reply #34 on: October 14, 2008, 11:00:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: BJNY
Would like to know how a glossy screen is far more useful, and under what conditions?
Thank you.

I have a MacBook Pro 17 in and a MacBook Air and the Glossy LED screen of the Air is way better for images than the MacBook Pro. You have to see it to understand.
I didn't believe it either but glare is never a problem, actually the matte screen is worse in daylight. Also, the screen on the Air is perfectly grey balanced without calibrating
out of the box. I can't do any serious color work on the Pro but I could on the MacBook Air, although it is not powerful enough.
I'm hoping the next 17 in will have the same glossy LED screen.

RS

Logged
arashm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 142


« Reply #35 on: October 14, 2008, 11:45:11 PM »
ReplyReply

I think the issue here is that the MFDB makers have been slow to identify and respond to an important industry trend which impacts their customers. Not exactly unheard of in the MF industry;)


I don't want to bring up 35mm DSLR's here, but maybe this move to to USB is why Canon dropped FW and replaced it with USB on the 1Ds mk3....
(thinking out loud)  
Logged
Kumar
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 653


WWW
« Reply #36 on: October 15, 2008, 12:13:23 AM »
ReplyReply

I wanted to buy a spare Firewire cable while I was in Fukuoka. So I walked into Yodobashi Camera. Guess what, no FW cables, no adapters, no hubs. Back in Kobe, I checked in Joshin and Seiden, both large electronics chain stores. No go. Incidentally, Yodobashi has a large "Mac only" area in their stores. Finally I found a couple of cables in a second-hand shop. I guess Firewire looks like going the way of SCSI.

Cheers,
Kumar
Logged

NBP
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 184


WWW
« Reply #37 on: October 15, 2008, 01:43:15 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: BJNY
My suggestion is for those who already own many FW400 to FW400 cables.

Sorry BJNY, my sighing tone wasn't meant for you  

I have FW800 on the A65s but when shooting teathered I also stick a ExHD into the 400 and save straight to that no room for that anymore - as I say doesn't affect me at the moment, just scratching my head a bit at the apple logic!

Glossy Cin Displays too  - Huh??x1000
Logged
terence_patrick
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 149


WWW
« Reply #38 on: October 15, 2008, 01:47:55 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: BJNY
Thank you, Wayne.
Appreciate the explanation.
Will give it a try.

Even if one is not working on photos, try surfing the web and reading sites with dark backgrounds like LL's home page on a glass screen in daylight. Sure, if there's shade it might be passable, but otherwise, it's like trying to look at the back of a camera's LCD screen. For photographers, which I'm going to assume most of the people on this site are, the glass screens are simply the wrong choice.

Note that the glossy screens on the Macbooks are different than the glass screens on iMacs and the soon to be out MBP/ACD24 in that the Macbook screen has a bit of an anti-reflective coating, similar to what CRTs had towards the end of its hay day. The glass screens are not to my knowledge coated in any anti-reflective coating. At least the newer aluminum iMac I have at the office isn't. Heck, even the images Apple uses on their website to show off the new MBP/iMac/ACD24 ALL show a glare. Yes, I know it's probably just an illustration, but they're trying to tell us something...it's shiny!
Logged
David Grover / Phase One
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 953



WWW
« Reply #39 on: October 15, 2008, 01:58:48 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: GregW
I think that's an excellent question. Perhaps those here who represent the back makers could be encouraged to comment?

I've copied this chunk from Wikipedia...

USB was originally seen as a complement to FireWire (IEEE 1394), which was designed as a high-speed serial bus which could efficiently interconnect peripherals such as hard disks, audio interfaces, and video equipment. USB originally operated at a far lower data rate and used much simpler hardware, and was suitable for small peripherals such as keyboards and mice.

The most significant technical differences between FireWire and USB include the following:

USB networks use a tiered-star topology, while FireWire networks use a repeater-based topology.
USB uses a "speak-when-spoken-to" protocol; peripherals cannot communicate with the host unless the host specifically requests communication. A FireWire device can communicate with any other node at any time, subject to network conditions.
A USB network relies on a single host at the top of the tree to control the network. In a FireWire network, any capable node can control the network.
USB runs with a 5 V power line, whereas Firewire can supply up to 30 V.

These and other differences reflect the differing design goals of the two buses: USB was designed for simplicity and low cost, while FireWire was designed for high performance, particularly in time-sensitive applications such as audio and video. Although similar in theoretical maximum transfer rate, FireWire 400 tends to have the performance edge over USB 2.0 Hi-Speed in real-world uses, especially in high-bandwidth use such as external hard-drives.

The newer FireWire 800 standard is twice as fast as FireWire 400 and outperforms USB 2.0 Hi-Speed both theoretically and practically.[26] The chipset and drivers used to implement USB and Firewire have a crucial impact on how much of the bandwidth prescribed by the specification is achieved in the real world, along with compatibility with peripherals.[27] Audio peripherals in particular are affected by the USB driver implementation.


So I would imagine USB 2.0 would be hard to implement unless new standards could up power and data through put.  The speak-when-spoken-to protocol would be a serious hindrance as well.


David
« Last Edit: October 15, 2008, 01:59:51 AM by David Grover / Hasselblad » Logged

David Grover
Business Support and Development Manager, Software.
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad