I have a choice between the mac book pro and the imac. what would be the better choice for editing film(video)? i will probably be using final cut pro to edit.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
mac book pro or imac for editing film
- Thread starter MasterPride
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
while both are great and can equal in specs, i would go with the macbook pro. simply because of its video card. the MBP is a horse especailly if you max it out with 4 Gb ram.
plus you get the benifits of portablitly when you need it.
plus you get the benifits of portablitly when you need it.
the only problem i see is the screen size. i wont be getting an external monitor until maybe the end of the year. and i dont plan on using FCP's motion which should be the only thing fully using the video card. or am i wrong? im not sure really.
The iMac has a better video card then the MBP and has a nice and large screen.
Forget macbook pro. iMac beats it up and down especially with the 3.06 chip with the 8800.
the only thing it will be used for is editing film, and maybe using FCP's color application and photoshop.
What type of MBP would you be able to buy? If it is the newer models then I would purchase the newer MBP over that 20" iMac. If I remember correctly though from other threads, the Radeon 2600 Pro Video Card in the new iMac's had better benchmarking scores than the 8800 did on Final Cut Pro.
yeah it would be the new MBP but just the entry level one. the thing is i dont plan on moving my mac around anywhere. screen size matters more than portability.
Get the 20" iMac and then buy a 24" external matte display with the savings over the MBP. That way, you can use your iMac's display as your tools display and the external as your viewing display. You can even do 1080 HD on the 24".
If you're looking at the MBP or an iMac, why don't you go for the 24" iMac (which is still $200 less than the MBP). Then you wouldn't need the extra display, plus the 24" screens uses a higher quality panel than the 20" which use a basic TN panel.
Then contact apple as this is nonsence.
24" entry lvl is WAY cheaper than entry MBP.
Definitely the iMac. Faster, bigger screen, and of course a dedicated GPU which makes a huge difference. And its an ATI GPU unless you buy the top end one, which is much better for these applications (mainly due to better drivers).
And in my experience desktops tend to last longer as laptops take quite a knocking when you sling them in your bag etc.
And its been recently updated unlike the Macbook Pro so no buyers remorse any time soon.
Nick.
And in my experience desktops tend to last longer as laptops take quite a knocking when you sling them in your bag etc.
And its been recently updated unlike the Macbook Pro so no buyers remorse any time soon.
Nick.
yeah well where i live. imac entry 24" is about 1500(about $220) more expensive than the MBP. entry level 24" imac costs $2857 and entry level MBP costs $2642. yeah i know, the prices are way more expensive compared to america if i convert the currency.
The 20" iMac will be good enough for you. I have one and it can do everything I want it to do.
yeah i have used a desktop my whole life and kinda gotten used to it. and the design on the imac is priceless. only problem is the high prices in my country for macs
yeah like i mentioned befor, i wont be using motion in final cut pro anyways. and it will be used only for editing and internet and sometimes photoshop. i think the 20" will be good enough. and then i can always get an external monitor later on
I use FCP on an iMac G5, so either machine will be just fine.
What you really need to consider is if you want portability or not.
What you really need to consider is if you want portability or not.
no portability is not on the top of my list. i like to edit in a stable place with proper sound. and i cant imagine dropping a laptop by mistake and ruining the HD and losing all my information.