17" MacBook Pro vs 15": A field photographers dilema

bwana

MyBroadband
Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
89,382
attachment.php


So I had a bit of an oopsie this morning and find myself seeking a new MBP. I'm doing a lot more field work now and as a result I'm considering the 15" MBP. The only major difference between it and the 17" is the screen size, correct?

Does anyone do much in the way of image editing on the 15"? If so have you had the 17" and do you miss the extra real-estate?

Getting the 15" and an external is an option, just not a particularly feasible one.
 

Gadget Man

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Messages
717
Hi, it looks like they are both the same, just the bigger screen. I recently had the same issue between a 13" MBP and the 15" MBP. I went for the smaller one on portability alone. I use it with an external T260, which is great. If you can wait 6 or so weeks, the new models should be here (announcement due tomorrow, I think!).

If you have used the bigger screen, I personally think you will miss it.

Saw the pic ... ouch!
 

bwana

MyBroadband
Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
89,382
Hi, it looks like they are both the same, just the bigger screen. I recently had the same issue between a 13" MBP and the 15" MBP. I went for the smaller one on portability alone. I use it with an external T260, which is great. If you can wait 6 or so weeks, the new models should be here (announcement due tomorrow, I think!).

If you have used the bigger screen, I personally think you will miss it.

Saw the pic ... ouch!
I dont know if I can wait 6 weeks but my mother is going to NY later in the week so if they announce and release this week it might be a possibility. Of course I've already enlisted her as a pack horse for my 400mm f/2.8 and other assorted gear. :eek:

Larger screen size vs portability is going to be the big issue.
 

koffiejunkie

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2004
Messages
9,588
Does anyone do much in the way of image editing on the 15"? If so have you had the 17" and do you miss the extra real-estate?

I have the 15" - there are two differences:

1. Screen size
2. The entry level 15" has half the dedicated VRAM that the 17" has (256 vs 512 - it's still plenty for our purposes). The 15" model that sits in-between has the same VRAM as the the 17"

I think there is usually a step or two CPU speed difference too, but to be honest, going from 2GHz C2D on the MacBook to 2.4GHz on the MBP, I can't really tell the difference.

15" screen size is fine for Aperture (13" is a touch too small to use some elements of the UI comfortably, particularly the import tool). After all, when you hit Z, it's still 100% :) I use a 24" 1920x1200 external at home, and when travelling I don't really miss the size. Then again, if you switch to the confusing jungle of an interface that is Lightroom, you need all the screen size you can get :)
 

bwana

MyBroadband
Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
89,382
I have the 15" - there are two differences:

1. Screen size
2. The entry level 15" has half the dedicated VRAM that the 17" has (256 vs 512 - it's still plenty for our purposes). The 15" model that sits in-between has the same VRAM as the the 17"

I think there is usually a step or two CPU speed difference too, but to be honest, going from 2GHz C2D on the MacBook to 2.4GHz on the MBP, I can't really tell the difference.

15" screen size is fine for Aperture (13" is a touch too small to use some elements of the UI comfortably, particularly the import tool). After all, when you hit Z, it's still 100% :) I use a 24" 1920x1200 external at home, and when travelling I don't really miss the size. Then again, if you switch to the confusing jungle of an interface that is Lightroom, you need all the screen size you can get :)
It would be the top level 15". My laptops usually need to last at least three years so it only makes sense to buy right the first time.

There really isnt a place in my workflow for an external display though.
 

koffiejunkie

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2004
Messages
9,588
It would be the top level 15". My laptops usually need to last at least three years so it only makes sense to buy right the first time.

Like I said, the difference between the two is barely perceptible (after I've pimped the HDD and RAM to the max).

There really isnt a place in my workflow for an external display though.

I have mine set up to use the external screen as an alternative, so basically it only shows the image I'm working on - everything else is on the MBP screen. If I hit F, it full-screens onto the external, but I rarely do this because it blanks the MBP screen, and I usually have other stuff going on. I really got the external when I had the 13" MacBook. Right now I'm seriously considering moving it off my desk and hooking it up to my storage server to make a media center out of it (discovered XBMC - nice).

So, in my opinion, unless you have really bad eyes, 15" is just fine.
 

bwana

MyBroadband
Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
89,382
I have mine set up to use the external screen as an alternative, so basically it only shows the image I'm working on - everything else is on the MBP screen. If I hit F, it full-screens onto the external, but I rarely do this because it blanks the MBP screen, and I usually have other stuff going on. I really got the external when I had the 13" MacBook. Right now I'm seriously considering moving it off my desk and hooking it up to my storage server to make a media center out of it (discovered XBMC - nice).
I dont use desks ;)
 

koffiejunkie

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2004
Messages
9,588
I just noticed that the current line-up has three models of 15" - the entry level model lacks the more powerful 9600M GT with dedicated VRAM, so I'd avoid that one.
 

bwana

MyBroadband
Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
89,382
No major announcements from apple today so I'm still looking at either the 15" or the 17" 2.8GHz MacBook Pro . . .
 

Wynsam

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2005
Messages
1,360
Just to continue this thread.... Laptops for photo type people.

Assume for second that I cant be persuaded to go mac what do you think of the the 15.6 inch Lenovo w510?

I am thinking of acquiring the same model but without the touch screen functionality. Dont need that but everything else looks good.
 

bwana

MyBroadband
Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
89,382
Just to continue this thread.... Laptops for photo type people.

Assume for second that I cant be persuaded to go mac what do you think of the the 15.6 inch Lenovo w510?

I am thinking of acquiring the same model but without the touch screen functionality. Dont need that but everything else looks good.
Why? Dont you like photography? That's just crazy talk.
 

Krypty

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2006
Messages
437
LOL, the best part is that I work for IBM, so that Lenovo range is part of our lineup.
 

DotKomrade

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2009
Messages
171
I made the call between the 2 a couple of months ago. I was using a 24" iMac, so I kind of miss the extra resolution, but I find the 17" to be a pretty big computer. I guess I've got used to my 15" but when I used a 17 inch recently it seemed a bit bulky. Also, the 15" is actually faster than the 17". It's the fastest of the laptop line actually, and just behind the Mac Pros. I've gotten used to the smaller screen size, and I use mine mostly for Photoshop and other design stuff. Editing on it is a bitch, as is After Effects, but then, I can use an external monitor for that or my old computer... If you're using it in the field, as you seem to be mostly, I'd recommend the 15" over the 17"...

(I just checked a speed test report in Macworld - the 15" 2.8 MBP is the fastest Mac outside of the Mac Pro line)
 
Last edited:

koffiejunkie

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2004
Messages
9,588
Also, the 15" is actually faster than the 17"

How so? Their the high-end 15"[/url and [url="http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/specs-17inch.html"]17" have identical specs:

  • 2.8GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
  • 6MB shared shared L2 cache
  • 1066MHz bus
  • 4GB (two 2GB SO-DIMMs) of 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM; supports up to 8GB
  • 500GB Serial ATA; 5400 rpm (disappointing, I would expect 7200rpm at this level)
  • NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT graphics processor with 512MB GDDR3; and NVIDIA GeForce 9400M graphics processor with 256MB of DDR3 SDRAM shared with main memory

I don't see any configuration differences that will explain a performance difference :confused:
 

DotKomrade

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2009
Messages
171
It's faster because of it's lower resolution. Well, that's always been my assumption. And to be honest, it's not that much of a difference...
 

bwana

MyBroadband
Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
89,382
After three consecutive 17" machines I'm going to give the 15" a shot this time around.
 

DotKomrade

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2009
Messages
171
You should try get hold of an anti-glare version... Especially for outdoors...
 
Top