Mac vs PC for photography (AKA Silly money vs bargain)

F4810

F4810

F4810

Associate
Joined
8 Nov 2004
Posts
138
Hi all

I am not a photography expert but my brother thinks he is and is setting up a studio. He told me he is needs to by a Mac Pro desktop and a couple of EIZO monitors. He says he needs a Mac becuase all the pros use them and people using his studio will want the familiarity of the Mac.

My arguments with him were:

- Isnt Adobe Photoshop the same on a Mac or Windows 7 PC.
- Why pay £2000 min for a Mac pro desktop when you can by a PC for the same spec for about £500 if you build it yourself.
- Why buy EIZO for over £1000 each when you can buy NEC, DELL, or HP and calibrate them to give you the same picture quality.

He still seems intent on wasting £5000 on a set up which could probably be bought for £2000 if he went down the PC route.

Am I wrong and does he have a point? Are Macs worth it for photo work? Will customers turn their noses at a good PC set up?

Please help.
 
Dell U2711 for monitors and a PC of similar spec to the Mac for lower price.
No the Mac Pro is not faster at multimedia than a PC. Benchmarks actually show that it is slower despite the dual xeons and what not. A PC with any Intel 6 core will **** all over the Mac at image processing.
Have a look at the photoshop benchmark for the latest Mac Pro (8 core xeon)
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3969/apple-mac-pro-mid-2010-review/6

and now compare it with the photoshop benchmark here
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3937/...thlon-ii-cpus-balance-price-and-performance/2

So basically you are paying an arm and a left for something that is slightly slower than a single CPU PC. Great deal huh?

As for the U2711, anandtech also has a review.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2922

Hope this helps.
 
I think unfortunately this is a trend and misleading opinion held by photographers and people who work with photographers. I don't think your brother is implying that they are better, I think he's just saying to appear more professional to his colleagues and clients,he may have to get the mac setup because it's what everyone else uses and it's what people are accostumed to. Which makes sense, you don't want your clients suspecting that you aren't informed or prepared for your line of work.

Although I am the first person to say macs are overrated and overpriced, it's the principle behind it that counts. Not everyone is a computer expert, and if they see 9 photographers using mac and 1 using windows, their not going to think the windows user is a genius, their going to think he's an idiot first.
 
Macs *are* superior for heavy-duty graphical design work, and I should imagine it's slightly more user-friendly for photographers, but a £2k Mac Pro and 2 EIZOs...

 
I think within the photography/graphical design community you are seen to be more 'in' with your job if you own a Mac even though Windows can do the same thing for less money. It probably stems from the 80's when Mac had the edge with these kind of programs.
 
My girlfriend is interested in Graphic design and I think most people would advise her to buy a mac just because it's what everyone uses, it kinda sucks because I believe a PC would do the same job for half the price :(
 
Tell him to get a 27" iMac, they're relatively well specced with one of the best screens on the market.

You'd be hard pressed to buy a 27" screen of the same quality and build a base unit for less money, particularly if you use the HE page. An i5 Quad core is £1450, it would cost £850 for the monitor alone.
 
Rereading the OP, it sounds like your brother is setting up a studio so that various people can come in and use his equipment- is this correct?

If so, I can see his point. The photography community is largely a bunch of pretentious idiots who believe macs are king, more money means better, and they're top notch photographers because they spent £5k on a camera. [There are skilled photographers out there of course, it is a gift that some people possess, but the idiots are far greater in number]

For this reason, super-expensive Macs do kindof have a point to them. I'd get a 27" Mac like Raikiri suggests, and get the SSD upgrade, so it feels faster. I have no idea what your brother thinks extra screens will yield for photography work.
 
hybrid572 said:
Rereading the OP, it sounds like your brother is setting up a studio so that various people can come in and use his equipment- is this correct?

If so, I can see his point. The photography community is largely a bunch of pretentious idiots who believe macs are king, more money means better, and they're top notch photographers because they spent £5k on a camera. [There are skilled photographers out there of course, it is a gift that some people possess, but the idiots are far greater in number]

For this reason, super-expensive Macs do kindof have a point to them. I'd get a 27" Mac like Raikiri suggests, and get the SSD upgrade, so it feels faster. I have no idea what your brother thinks extra screens will yield for photography work.
Click to expand...

This is what I was trying to say:)

As Raikirri show if your brother is dead set on splurging out on big show off screen then the 27.5in imac is actually not too bad in cost. You could still save about £300-£400 by going PC but if his being stubborn just let him :P
 
franco_22 said:
My girlfriend is interested in Graphic design and I think most people would advise her to buy a mac just because it's what everyone uses, it kinda sucks because I believe a PC would do the same job for half the price :(
Click to expand...

It does, I use a pc and worked with a mac for 4 years in my other design job. Both the same.
 
Why not buy an average PC to tie him over for 6-8-12 months until he has some money from the business to buy a nice mac setup. With experince he also may have a better feel for what he wants.
 
StephenLawUK said:
compromise: find a mac case and put a PC inside it lol. nobody will ever know ;)
Click to expand...

Haha, yeah. Doubt the client-sheep will notice ;)

Seriously, what's up with certain professions and Macs? Does my head in, honestly. Will fan-boyism ever stop?

Just go for whatever does the job at greater efficiency/cost ratio, where efficiency is at least the bare minimum required.
 
MikeHunt79 said:
Macs probably have a better efficiency/cost ratio... :p
Click to expand...

I think the iMac linked before looked good, let him have it. Why does he need 3 EIZO monitors so bad?

By the way, he's just starting out and is already willing to put £5k worth of equipment into it :P ? Don't put the cart before the horse.
 
MikeHunt79 said:
Macs probably have a better efficiency/cost ratio... :p
Click to expand...

May well be, in that case he should go for it.

But most of the people I meet get Macs when they could have saved like £500 and get a PC that does the same job perfectly fine.

But I don't know photography, and it may well be Macs are more effecient for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom