Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
Thread started 23 Jan 2014 (Thursday) 11:47
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Imac 2.7 OR 2.9

 
N2bnfunn
Senior Member
Avatar
719 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 62
Joined Dec 2010
     
Jan 23, 2014 11:47 |  #1

Hello I am thinking about getting a IMAC just for photo's editing and printing using Photoshop CC, my question is which IMAC is better for doing editing the 2.7 or the 2.9 mac.


I know the price is around 3 hundred dollars difference and it is that much different with editing pictures on the two?


Feel free to share anywhere they have the best prices on a Imac..


Canon EOS R EF 70-200 L 2.8 L 24-70 2.8L II Canon Pixma PRO-1 3 Canon 600EX-RT Speedlites

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
ShotByTom
Goldmember
Avatar
3,021 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 105
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Indianapolis
     
Jan 23, 2014 11:59 |  #2

I would prob go with the 2.9 just because of the video upgrade. I have the 27" i5 version and my daughter has the 21.5" and for photo editing I would suggest spending the extra money to get the 27" if that's possible.


Gear
Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MCAsan
Goldmember
Avatar
3,836 posts
Likes: 68
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Atlanta
     
Jan 23, 2014 12:15 as a reply to  @ ShotByTom's post |  #3

Always check the AppleInsider price guide before making a Mac purchase.

http://prices.appleins​ider.com (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tony-S
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,903 posts
Likes: 201
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
     
Jan 23, 2014 19:48 |  #4

N2bnfunn wrote in post #16629966 (external link)
Hello I am thinking about getting a IMAC just for photo's editing and printing using Photoshop CC, my question is which IMAC is better for doing editing the 2.7 or the 2.9 mac.

If no, or only light, video editing, I'd go with the 2.7. It's plenty powerful enough for photo work. But personally, I'd go with a Mac Mini over an iMac because of its display and lack of upgradability.


"Raw" is not an acronym, abbreviation, nor a proper noun; thus, it should not be in capital letters.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
N2bnfunn
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
719 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 62
Joined Dec 2010
     
Jan 23, 2014 23:49 |  #5

Thanks for all your help and suggestions.


Canon EOS R EF 70-200 L 2.8 L 24-70 2.8L II Canon Pixma PRO-1 3 Canon 600EX-RT Speedlites

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FarmerTed1971
fondling the 5D4
Avatar
6,260 posts
Gallery: 66 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 3680
Joined Sep 2013
Location: Portland, OR
     
Jan 24, 2014 00:09 |  #6

27" all the way. Thank me later. I love mine. They are al capable, but screen real estate is golden. Bigger is better.

Or do the Mini... but now is not the time to buy the Mini.


Getting better at this - Fuji Xt-2 - Fuji X-Pro2 - Laowa 9mm - 18-55 - 23/35/50/90 f2 WR - 50-140 - flickr (external link) - www.scottaticephoto.co​m (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tony-S
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,903 posts
Likes: 201
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
     
Jan 24, 2014 07:37 |  #7

FarmerTed1971 wrote in post #16631855 (external link)
27" all the way. Thank me later. I love mine. They are al capable, but screen real estate is golden. Bigger is better.

Unfortunately, the displays on the last two versions of the iMac do not cover sRGB gamut, which should dissuade many photographers from buying one.


"Raw" is not an acronym, abbreviation, nor a proper noun; thus, it should not be in capital letters.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MCAsan
Goldmember
Avatar
3,836 posts
Likes: 68
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Atlanta
     
Jan 24, 2014 08:01 |  #8

Relax and go see the 30 years of Mac movie on the Apple home page www.apple.com (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
georgesm
Mostly Lurking
11 posts
Joined Nov 2011
Location: OHIO
     
Jan 24, 2014 08:35 |  #9

N2bnfunn wrote in post #16629966 (external link)
Hello I am thinking about getting a IMAC just for photo's editing and printing using Photoshop CC, my question is which IMAC is better for doing editing the 2.7 or the 2.9 mac.


I know the price is around 3 hundred dollars difference and it is that much different with editing pictures on the two?


Feel free to share anywhere they have the best prices on a Imac..

Go with the 27 inch. Consider buying a refurb from Apple (http://store.apple.com …/specialdeals/m​ac/imac/27 (external link)).
I've purchased several refurbs from Apple and all of them looked and behaved like a brand new machine. You get the same 1 year warranty as a new one. I'm emailing right now from my 27 inch refurb. Love it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kirkt
Cream of the Crop
5,858 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 646
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA USA
     
Jan 24, 2014 12:42 |  #10

The recent iMacs are capable enough computationally, but as Tony-S points out, the display is not the most effective device for photo editing. Glossy displays in general are more difficult to calibrate and profile and are an eye strain to use in a room that has lighting that reflects off of the glossy surface. You may be better off going with a Mini (or MacBook Pro) and a more appropriate display for photo editing. The iMac has the "wow" factor and the 27 inch display is a monstrous desktop piece of equipment, but a color capable 24in display will serve you just fine.

kirk


Kirk
---
images: http://kirkt.smugmug.c​om (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Codda
Member
222 posts
Likes: 5
Joined May 2011
     
Jan 24, 2014 12:50 |  #11

27" iMac is not a monstrous piece of desktop equipment...it's an all in one that's as thin and comparable in footprint size as any other 24 or 27" monitor. The new iMac anti-glare monitors are...anti-glare. Very rich yet not nearly as reflective as previous models...Not making an argument for or against...just saying it like it is.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FarmerTed1971
fondling the 5D4
Avatar
6,260 posts
Gallery: 66 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 3680
Joined Sep 2013
Location: Portland, OR
     
Jan 24, 2014 12:53 |  #12

Codda wrote in post #16633182 (external link)
27" iMac is not a monstrous piece of desktop equipment...it's an all in one that's as thin and comparable in footprint size as any other 24 or 27" monitor. The new iMac anti-glare monitors are...anti-glare. Very rich yet not nearly as reflective as previous models...Not making an argument for or against...just saying it like it is.

True. They are in fact very tiny. Look at the profile and it's razor thin. Amazing that all that surf fits in there.


Getting better at this - Fuji Xt-2 - Fuji X-Pro2 - Laowa 9mm - 18-55 - 23/35/50/90 f2 WR - 50-140 - flickr (external link) - www.scottaticephoto.co​m (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kirkt
Cream of the Crop
5,858 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 646
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA USA
     
Jan 24, 2014 17:00 |  #13

27" is 27" - hard to argue that that is tiny. Glad you like the iMacs. I have two of them for my business a 27" and a just bought a 21" a few months ago - maybe it is 75% less reflective (that is a good thing). I do not use them. But hey, whatever floats your boat!
kirk


Kirk
---
images: http://kirkt.smugmug.c​om (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
phantelope
Goldmember
Avatar
1,889 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 40
Joined Sep 2008
Location: NorCal
     
Jan 24, 2014 17:19 |  #14

the way my workspace is (patio door to my left) the shiny reflective imac would drive me crazy, unfortunately they don't make it non-glossy or I'd have probably gone that way.


but, I like to have two screens, so I just got me a MacMini (the time to buy one is when you need it, can't wait for if/when Apple might make changes to it) and two Dell 27 inch screens running at 2560x1440 resolution. I went with the top of the line Mini, 2.6GHtz i7, added 16 GB of memory myself (crucial brand, takes a minute or two and anyone can do it).

to run two screens at this full resolution (which online mac store chat AND in store techs told me is no problem - a lie) I had to get a dongle that turns one of the 3 USB 3.o ports into a display port, little "external video card" by StarTech (got via Amazon, but check their site for info) and it works like a charm. I'm just used to having two displays from my macbook pro with extra screen I just retired. LR supports dual screens, I can either have the grid on there or a 100% zoom or just regular size while zooming in on the other screen where all the tools are. Works like a charm and for photo editing I'll never even get close to the limits of the machine, it's not that much computing, compared to say 3D rendering or video, but even for video it'll be just fine. Much cheaper too, all in all about $2500 or so. Close to $700 less if you don't need two screens.

The dell screens are matte, already nicely calibrated for all I can tell, haven't plugged my calibration tool in yet. Both look exactly the same if I have a photo overlap onto both screens.

iMac is great, definitely less cable salad, just can't deal with the shiny surface.

Neither can really be upgraded I believe, but I'm not concerned about that. I don't play games on it so a faster video card etc is not an issue I'll ever encounter. I have all photos on external drives, I doubt I'll ever fill up the 1TB hybrid drive I got installed. Added a USB3 hub to have more than two inputs. (Dell screens also have usb hubs, not sure if usb3 though, and I prefer a box on the table instead of cables hanging out the side of my screen.

Very happy so far, snappy fast.

Anyway, just what I bought after looking into this since last summer, laptop was starting to choke on the 5D3 files and at close to 7 years old it's an antique.

I run LR, PS, assorted plugins from OnOne/Alienskin/Nik and everything is fast and smooth.

this will easily work for quite some years to come, files will get bigger again, but not until I can afford a new camera and as far as I can tell, the mini will not choke on larger files either. Not talking PhaseOne ditigal backs though, LOL

Oh, the screens are Dell U2713HM, I'm very happy with them.


40D, 5D3, a bunch of lenses and other things :cool:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tony-S
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,903 posts
Likes: 201
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
     
Jan 24, 2014 19:10 |  #15

phantelope wrote in post #16633957 (external link)
to run two screens at this full resolution (which online mac store chat AND in store techs told me is no problem - a lie) I had to get a dongle that turns one of the 3 USB 3.o ports into a display port, little "external video card"

My understanding is you only get native 27" resolution on dual displays throughout Thunderbolt. Did you try two 27" Apple Thunderbolt displays?


"Raw" is not an acronym, abbreviation, nor a proper noun; thus, it should not be in capital letters.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1,970 views & 0 likes for this thread
Imac 2.7 OR 2.9
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is cery333
942 guests, 329 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.