I am thinking to buy a new MacBook Pro with Retina Display. I need it to edit on the way and show the clients the clips I am editing for them. At home I work very well with an iMac (Mid 2011).
Am I going to achieve good performances with the new Retina? Are they going to be similar with the iMac? Specs below.
Using the iMac I work with 1080p clips at 50fps (clips from Sony Nex cameras) and 2.7K clips from GoPro Hero 3+. I am going to use an external drive, a Promise Pegasus via Thunderbolt connection, where I'll store the clips (and I am going to copy them on the MacBook Pro internal hard drive to work with clients when I visit them).
Intel i7 2600S @ 2.8GHz
24 Gb of RAM
Radeon HD 6770M with 512MB of RAM
2TB Hard drive
Promise Pegasus R4 via Thunderbolt port
MacBook Pro Retina Specs:
Intel Core i7 quad-core @ 2,5GHz
16GB of RAM @ 1600MHz
1TB Flash Unit
Intel Iris Pro Graphics + NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M with 2GB of GDDR5 RAM
Promise Pegasus R4 via Thunderbolt port
I am going to connect an external 24" monitor to edit.
I am interested in triyng the new DaVinci Resolve too, but it's a little slow on my iMac, compared to FCPX. Maybe the Nvidia card is better suited.
Maybe Radeon cards are better for FCPX, by the way. What do you know about that?
I am interested in the 2.5K from the Blackmagic Camera. Any of you ever tried to edit them with the Retina?
It's not important, but I am probably going to buy the Retina with a leasing solution, so I can pay 80€ + VAT every month, instead of 3000 euros right away. Have you ever tried this solution?
Just yesterday I received my rMBP 2.6MHz 1TB with 750M GPU. I haven't put it to any work yet Still getting established with it. The retina display is just beautiful. In a few moments I did export a 20 minute timeline with some titles, effects & generators, using the internal SSD only. The render time was about 10 min. Compared to about 90 minutes on my mid 2010 MBP. Also, the un-rendered timeline played back, even with effects applied, real time without drops. I imagine that would be good for your field work and demo to clients
In terms of comparing to your iMac, the rMBP will encode a bit faster given the 750M GPU.
Have you looked at the BruceX Benchmark thread in this section of the forum?
There are a lot of configurations compared and results posted, but you could search through for your specific comparisons of interest.
If cost is a major concern, you might look around (quickly, they're going fast) for a bit of a deal on the 2.3/2.6 GHz late 2013s in Europe. At least here in the US I got a couple hundred dollars off + free AppleCare my my no longer produced 2.6MHz model. I imagine leasing could be a good option, especially if you want to upgrade to the latest new thing in a couple years.
Andy, you're welcome.
80% of my clips are AVCHD 1920x1080P 59.97fps The balance is 720P 59.97fps. All mostly from DSLR or better quality mirrorless camera.
A Project timeline plays back just fine, at full screen, with the native AVCHD clips. No need for lower quality proxy, or optimized ProRes. Perhaps if you have heavy use of effect/adjustments in segments of your project maybe you'd need lower quality proxy. I doubt it, but as I mention, I just got the rMBP so-we'll see.
Worth noting, I was please to observe that the fan didn't even kick in during the full screen playback test. That was very satisfying
You can even play back in Better Quality mode, see the attached screenshot.
I bet you are having a good time testing the new laptop
So, even if I export my projects and try to watch the Full HD movies, they aren't going to be blurry. Very good, because sometimes new clients want to see my work. I can show them on the Retina display.
My clips are AVCHD as well. Which cameras do you use?
It is fun, for sure. This machine is quite an upgrade from what I've been used to.
What I was referring to was playing the timeline direct from within FCPX-and it works at 1080P. You wouldn't need to export first to present to your client. That is what I think you were asking.
When you export the "blurry" you mention would be a function of your export choices, you know, amount of compression, output frame size, etc. You certainly could export a Project with minimal quality that would not look so good if played back at full screen.
My camera's are Panasonic consumer level cam, iPhone, Nikon D5200. I'm no pro, just an avid hobbyist enjoying photo/video and my career was computer tech which I enjoy in the Apple ecosystem
I know that I'm not very clear, but I meant this: the retina display has a huge resolution compared to my iMac 21,5". When I watch 1920x1080 or 1280x720 movies (my shootings or movies or tv series) everything is fine because the iMac monitor hasn't a huge resolution.
If I try to watch a Full HD video on the Retina what happens? Is like watching a DVD on a Full HD TV? Are you going to notice that the 1920x1080 video is in a low resolution compared to the Retina resolution?
If I try to watch a 320x240 video on my iMac the result is, of course, awful. What happens if I watch 1920x1080 videos on the Retina? I don't mean on FCPX. Is the upscaling from 1920x1080 to 2880x1800 any good? Are movies, tv series and my own movies enjoyable? Or are they going to look pixilated?
I started as an IT tech too, following my father's steps, which is a Network Administrator I still work with him. 4 years ago I had a Pentax Kx with the ability to shoot videos and a MacBook white (that I still use). I started thanks to this technology
Your clear, the subject itself is a bit complex. Bottom line, the Retina looks beautiful. I hope the following information from C/Net explains it well for you. I am pasting the pertinent text here that specifically addresses resolution vs. pixel density. Then below is the link to the post itself. The article is 2 years old, but still relevant as it's about Retina.
"MG Siegler, expert in all things Apple, helped me understand through a Twitter conversation that the iPad wasn't upping the display resolution. It was upping the pixel density. The new iPad was displaying the same real estate as before; the extra pixels were being used to bring that real estate into better focus, to make it sharper, clearer.
That's what's happening with the MacBook Pro Retina. Despite what I keep reading repeatedly in various reviews, there is no 2,880 by 1,800 display resolution. There is a 2,880 by 1,800 pixel density that Apple calls the MacBook Pro Retina's resolution, which is being confused with the display resolution by some."
Thank you Bobbyco, I read the article and it's very helpful.
I hope to get my hands on this laptop soon and start "playing" with it. Meanwhile, if you can write your experience after you used it on some projects, I'll be very interested to follow your "adventure"
I've finally got my MacBook Pro 15" 2014 BTO - I went for the 2.8 GHz processor.
It replaces my Early 2011 MacBook Pro 17" with 8GB ram that now has a dicky GPU and needs to be 'baked' now and then to reset it.
According to the 64 bit Geekbench tests, the new 15" MBP with 2.8 GHz processor is 40% faster than the 2011 MBP17", achieving (and this is not a speed test, just a 'run it and see') 3895/15215 over the MBP17" 2866/10655.
The biggest issue for us FCPX editors could be the lack of FW800 ports. I have >75 FW800 drives (mostly LaCie Quadras) and need to access their contents. So I used the BlackMagic Disk Speed Test app to measure performance 'before and after' - I had a Belkin
to provide USB3 on my old Mac.
So, the old MacBook Pro could do USB3 x3 ports on the Belkin Thunderbolt Dock. It could also do Firewire 800 and 1GB ethernet, whilst passing through the Thunderbolt connection to, say, my Black Magic UltraStudio Mini Monitor (HD-SDI output from Thunderbolt - yay!).
But what of the disk performance? The new MacBook Pro does USB3 natively (two ports) but can only do FW800 with a Thunderbolt adaptor, and that soaks up one valuable Thunderbolt port. No loop through. The Belkin does USB and FW800 - AND it has a Thunderbolt loop through.
Here's my rough findings. These are not optimised results, they're just what happens when I connect my various drives through the options I have available to me:
MBP15" 2.8GHz (Read/Write)
• Direct USB3 - 161R/165W
• Dongled FW800 - 75R/72W (counterintuitive, but hey)
• Belkin Dock FW800 - 68R/69W
• Belkin Dock UBS3 - 94R/97W (that's surprising)
but then two years ago I did similar tests on the OLD MBP17" and...
Andy, I am very happy with my new 15 rMBP. This system runs much cooler than my old 2010 MBP. What I edit are 10-20 minute short videos with source clips are recorded AVCHD and H264 MOVs. I do not transcode-no ProRes, no proxy.
Because the system is so fast I now have background render on which helps distribute the rendering load when ready to create final exports. There are times when the fans whirring away and things warm up but generally for me it is 5 minute bursts, not bad.
One tip for you as I see you mentioned an external monitor previously. When your ready to transcode for your exports, disconnect the external monitor and just use the retina display. This will give you maximum GPU cycles available to FCPX and speed up exports.