Computer to handle IQ180 files

[ilayish]

Hello!

My MacBookPro 2013 has kicked the bucket at last and I'm in the market for new machine.

I've got an IQ180 and researching online it looks like people seem to be happy with Mac Mini M2 w/16gb when using GFX100 - Which I'd imagine is a not too dissimilar file size. Does anyone have any experience of using the new gen Mac Minis with IQ files?

Any help much appreciated!

Ta, Isaac

 

[vjbelle]

I have processed numerous 4150 files on an M1 chip without ever a hiccup. You will be just fine although I would purchase a little more memory.

Victor B

 

[MGrayson]

I have an M1 MacBook Pro, with, granted, a lot of RAM, but I just processed an IQ160 file in real time - adjust sliders, apply sharpening or NR - all instant. Export took a few seconds. MUCH faster than the desktop I was using when I was using that back!

You'll be fine.

 

[sjg284]

Note the software package you use matters as well in this equation as they all have varying efficiencies across different CPUs / handling of RAW formats.
So you probably want to mention what your editor of choice is / search for performance feedback inclusive of using that editor.

That said, the Apple Silicon chips are great. I have an M1 Mac Studio, and the M2 Mac mini looks great. The M2 Mac Studio obviously even more performant, but maybe more than you need. Note the Studio & Mini have different capacity to drive multiple external monitors at different resolution combinations if that matters to you.

Given you held your last machine for 10 years, you may want to spec out RAM to 24gb or 32gb just for future performance capacity considering you cannot upgrade later.

 

[Mexecutioner]

Get the max 32GB of RAM it you get an M2 Pro Mini. It’s only $300 extra and the fact that you can’t upgrade later makes it a no brainer.
if you get a model other than a mini then add as much RAM as you can comfortably afford, specially if you’re planning on using this machine for several years.

 

[ilayish]

Thanks all! Super useful to know!

So I see the common knowledge is to get as much RAM as possible, but would 16gb suffice (am aware I can't upgrade a mac mini)? It's quite a big price jump.

@MGrayson, when you say a lot of RAM - Is that 32gb? (or more...?).

Last question would be (if anyone knows) what counts more, M2>M2 pro, or 16>32(or more...)gb RAM.

(I use Lightroom by the way, rather than Capture One)

Thanks again!

 

[tenmangu81]

I would suggest to choose a 32 gb RAM rather than 16, just for (near) future. The graphics capacities of the Apple Silicon chips are awesome. I have a MacBook Pro M1 14", as I travel a lot, and it is just instantaneous to process even 300 MB TIFF files.

 

[MGrayson]

@MGrayson, when you say a lot of RAM - Is that 32gb? (or more...?).

I have 64GB in my laptop, but that's not primarily for photo applications. It was the "it's not upgradeable" plus "large numerical simulations" argument. My desktop is an iMac Pro with 128GB RAM and it's much slower than the laptop . I really have to replace it with something, but the laptop is still so fast that I don't feel the need for an even more powerful desktop. Of course, if I *really* wanted to do heavy numerical stuff, I'd rent processors in the cloud or get a non-Mac box and learn to program GPU's. The laptop is more than enough.

Matt

 

[Mexecutioner]

My previous MacBook Pro (2017) had 16 gigs and dealing with the IQ4 files was painful. Got an M1 Max with 64 GB and it is very decent when working with Capture one, however when working on 16bit TIFFs in Photoshop it is barely enough. Next machine I get will be a minimum of 128GB to future proof it a little bit more.

 

[Ai_Print]

I have a MacBook Pro M3 Max with the CPU/GPU maxed out, 128GB of ram, 4TB SSD and it just devours anything I throw at it. I just had Lightroom stitching about 20 Hasselblad X2D files for a client's 36' foot wide panorama while I processed RAW files in Photoshop and uploaded a job to dropbox, all at the same time...super fast. I could not imagine less than 64GB of ram with files over 50MP.

I have a 2017 iMac Pro 128GB I am going to replace with a near fully built MacStudio M3 when they come out. You get what you pay for.

 

[jng]

I would echo others' suggestion to go for an M2 or M3 chip Mac with as much RAM as you can afford. I've been processing my IQ4 150 files, including some pretty massive stitched images (14,000 x 20,000 pixels) on my first generation M1 Macbook Pro with only 16 Gb RAM. It's a little slow when stacking and aligning images, and frankly chokes when running these larger stitched images through Topaz, but otherwise gets the job done pretty well (I'm never in that much of a hurry). Bottom line is that you'll see a huge boost in performance with any of the new silicone Macs.

John

 

[daz7]

80mp files are not that demanding.
Any desktop produced in the last 10 years will handle it just fine.
Obviously, the newer the gear the smoother processing will be.
With laptops, that's probably 5 years old models that would still manage it OK.

 

[ilayish]

Thanks All! Great help all round

 

[wattsy]

80mp files are not that demanding.
Any desktop produced in the last 10 years will handle it just fine.
Obviously, the newer the gear the smoother processing will be.

Yes, agreed. I'm remember dealing with scanned files of a comparable in size to today's MF RAWs back in the 1990s with a comparatively tiny amount of RAM and I used to get things done then without too much fuss. The biggest step change IMO during the last ten years has been the move to SSD as default in desktops and laptops. In my experience, that has sped things up far more than increases in RAM. I had a base model 12" MacBook back in 2015 (cutdown Intel chip, single USB-C port and only 8GB RAM) that I sometimes used to process files from event jobs (Nikon D810 files) in Lightroom and it worked fine. In fact, I used it as my default portable Mac right up until about three years ago when it refused to turn on and Apple said they no longer repaired that model. I replaced it with the base model M1 MacBook Air and that is just fine and dandy too if I want to process a batch of 50MP files from my CFV 50c back.

 

[SeanThekayaker]

My previous MacBook Pro (2017) had 16 gigs and dealing with the IQ4 files was painful. Got an M1 Max with 64 GB and it is very decent when working with Capture one, however when working on 16bit TIFFs in Photoshop it is barely enough. Next machine I get will be a minimum of 128GB to future proof it a little bit more.

This is my first post here. I want to thank everyone for their comments in this thread as they are very useful. I am in a similar position as the OP. My first digital MF camera is on the way and after a few days I will need a computer to process the images. I have decided on an M3 MacBook (14”, max chip) as I plan to travel over the next several years. The amount of RAM I would need was an issue that I grappled with, but it is clear that the experienced members here recommend between 64 to 128 GB. One also has to bear in mind that the RAM is not upgradable. I will be using Phocus for initial processing of the images but then another piece of software to work on TIFF files if I want to do more. I currently do landscape, macro, portraits and architecture. I expect to be doing focus stacking. I used to play a lot with PS and Lightroom for years when I shot 35 mm so I will probably get one of those software packages. I have no experience with C1.

 

[isteveb]

This is my first post here. I want to thank everyone for their comments in this thread as they are very useful. I am in a similar position as the OP. My first digital MF camera is on the way and after a few days I will need a computer to process the images. I have decided on an M3 MacBook (14”, max chip) as I plan to travel over the next several years. The amount of RAM I would need was an issue that I grappled with, but it is clear that the experienced members here recommend between 64 to 128 GB. One also has to bear in mind that the RAM is not upgradable. I will be using Phocus for initial processing of the images but then another piece of software to work on TIFF files if I want to do more. I currently do landscape, macro, portraits and architecture. I expect to be doing focus stacking. I used to play a lot with PS and Lightroom for years when I dhot 35 mm so I will probably get one of those software packages. I have no experience with C1.

I have a Mac Studio M1 Max with 64gb of ram and I never have an issue with any raw file processing from my X2D (and they are big files). I also have a MacBook Pro M3 Max with 128gb of ram for when traveling and it is lightning fast. I agree with all the recommendations for more ram. Apple boxes you in once you pick the amount of ram you want and you are stuck with it upon purchase so go for as much as you can afford. I would say at least 32gb and preferable 64gb or higher (especially if you will have multiple apps open and processing photo or music files.

 

[SeanThekayaker]

I have a Mac Studio M1 Max with 64gb of ram and I never have an issue with any raw file processing from my X2D (and they are big files). I also have a MacBook Pro M3 Max with 128gb of ram for when traveling and it is lightning fast. I agree with all the recommendations for more ram. Apple boxes you in once you pick the amount of ram you want and you are stuck with it upon purchase so go for as much as you can afford. I would say at least 32gb and preferable 64gb or higher (especially if you will have multiple apps open and processing photo or music files.

Thanks so much. I’m leaning towards either 96 or 128 GB options at this point. But will probably end up with the 128 GB option for the reason you and others have said. I won’t buy it for a couple of weeks as the X2D does not arrive until next week.

 

[isteveb]

Thanks so much. I’m leaning towards either 96 or 128 GB options at this point. But will probably end up with the 128 GB option for the reason you and others have said. I won’t buy it for a couple of weeks as the X2D does not arrive until next week.

Keep in mind another important factor and that is cpu cores. The more cores the better especially when dealing with many files at once or multiple apps which can often be the case. Unfortunately that also comes at a cost but if you can get a cpu option that has as many cores as you can afford or are willing to spend, it will help to lengthen the lifespan of the technology a bit as there is no such thing as "future proofing" in computer technology.

 

[SeanThekayaker]

Keep in mind another important factor and that is cpu cores. The more cores the better especially when dealing with many files at once or multiple apps which can often be the case. Unfortunately that also comes at a cost but if you can get a cpu option that has as many cores as you can afford or are willing to spend, it will help to lengthen the lifespan of the technology a bit as there is no such thing as "future proofing" in computer technology.

Thank you for the advice. I am leaning towards this model: M3 Max chip with 16‑core CPU, 40‑core GPU and 16‑core Neural Engine. I know the M4 may come out in November but I need something in a few weeks and I hope to keep it for at least 3 years. What you said about “future proofing” is true. The pace of technological change these days is astonishing, particularly in the computing and chip sectors. A few years ago the iPhone became as powerful as the desktop computers of a few years before. As the poet William Blake said “Infinity in the palm of your hand”…I do a lot of my secondary research on my phone and then move to the computer for large documents / files etc.

 

[SeanThekayaker]

Keep in mind another important factor and that is cpu cores. The more cores the better especially when dealing with many files at once or multiple apps which can often be the case. Unfortunately that also comes at a cost but if you can get a cpu option that has as many cores as you can afford or are willing to spend, it will help to lengthen the lifespan of the technology a bit as there is no such thing as "future proofing" in computer technology.

I don’t know if this is the appropriate place to ask (and if not, please redirect me) but because I am new here and you are kindly responding……I think that I would eventually like to try out some film simulations. I grew up on film— various Kodaks, Agfas and Fujis and so on. I was looking at the DxO film packs for colour and B&W and they look fascinating. Do you have any experience with them?