LCD Monitor for Video Editing: Resolution Concern

I am trying to select an LCD monitor for my newly built computer. I have zeroed in on the DELL SP2309W, 23" Full HD Widescreen Flat Panel Monitor with Webcam. The optical resolution is Higher than Full HD at 2048 x 1152.
It is my understanding that Higher than HD Resolution is good for multi-tasking (but DVD movies get stretched and therefore the quality of your videos goes down.), but is it good for video editing with Premiere Elements 7 or 8? Should I be looking at monitors with 1920 x 1080 resolution?

If you run in anything other than the LCD's native resolution your graphics card will be resampling the image. This inevitably distorts the image as pixels must be discarded to create the display. Typically this softens the image.
Cheers,
Neale
Insanity is hereditary, you get it from your children

Similar Messages

Dual 17'' Displays and an NTSC Monitor for Video Editing

I am trying to hook up two 17'' apple monitors and an NTSC television monitor for video editing, but all I have on the back of my G5 tower is one ADC plug and one DVI plug. Any advice on how to make this work would be greatly appreciated.

If you run in anything other than the LCD's native resolution your graphics card will be resampling the image. This inevitably distorts the image as pixels must be discarded to create the display. Typically this softens the image.
Cheers,
Neale
Insanity is hereditary, you get it from your children

What is the best Monitor for Video editing & Graphic Design?

Hi every one,
I would like to find out what is the best monitor for video editing and graphic design that you recomend, I am trying to buy one but not sure which one is good and not expansive.
Thanks very much

I don't want 2 monitors, so a single 27inch model just what I need... plenty of room for PPro, or I can have a Word document and a Text file open and side by side
John,
That is personal taste and there is no discussing taste. However, from my perspective, and that is personal, I prefer 3840 x 1080 resolution with dual monitors over 1920 x 1080 with a single monitor, but that is because I very often have Firefox, Filezilla, Dreamweaver and some other applications open at the same time, switching between the Adobe forums, Gmail accounts, Notebook results from the PPBM5 data submissions, PPBM5 form submissions, MySQL access, phpadmin pages to update the database, the PPBM5 results pages and various DW .php pages for the maintenance of our database and switching back and forth between various versions of PR. I occasionally really run out of real estate with all these applications and could not consider a single monitor with only 1920 x 1080 resolution, even if it were a 105" screen. In the future I would even like to have a four monitor setup (with MPE hardware support) in a two by two configuration, so that I can freely move my application screens around.
If that happens, notice I say if and not when, my preference for a monitor would be something like 4 Samsung F2380 monitors. Small bezel, great display and panel, affordable.

Best Monitors for video editing??? NEC LCD2690WUXi² Vs 24"Apple GLOSSY LED

I am so stuck finding the right monitor for video editing in my price range i just cant afford the 30" apple cinema display, what is next best solution out there...?
Is Anyone using the NEC LCD2690WUXi² Monitors? from what i can tell they are better than the 24" apple LED displays for video editing as...
a) anti glare screen & can be properly colour calibrated
b) 26" screen Vs 24" screen size
c) got DVI-I & DVI-D Connectors so compatible with NVIDIA GT 120 outputs (1 Mini DisplayPort and 1 dual-link DVI-D)
i would love the 30" apple but the NEC comes in at 1/2 the price so i can eventually buy two & i would have definitely taken the 24" but its just not suitable for professional video editing from everything I've read - mainly due to glossy screen, colours & calibration
pls can anyone help with any display solutions/setups
warmest regards
graeme
Oh PS do the NEC LCD2690WUXi² work flawlessly with the latest "Nehalem" Mac Pros?

Not sure if that model number is here or not, but these are supposed to be very good for color work, though I do know that my old shops are still using their CRT's.
http://www.necdisplay.com/Products/Series/?series=171d9fbb-281e-44d8-be67-14d146 e8ada0
Third party monitors are having some trouble with the new Macs. Mostly because of the mini-display ports on the newest Apple supplied cards, but there seem to be other issues as well. You can definitely expect to use the DVI port and leave the mini display for whatever Apple will force on us next.
Apples 24"? Well, it works fine for most but in Apples own description of the display it was made to connect laptops to.
Edit: I'm sorry, for video work? Most anything in the upper end is fine.
Message was edited by: Samsara

Is a ATI Radeon X1900XT (512 MB) card enough to drive a single monitor for video editing

My son just given an older mac pro.
2 x 3 GHZ Quad Intel Xeon.
OSX Lion
The video card installed is an ATI Radeon X1900XT (512 MB)
Is this video card sufficient to drive a single monitor for video editing and basic graphics work in PhotoShop, etc?
Many thanks.

nothing I guess
Just noticed that you can add emoticons to these posts.

Best Monitors for Video editing?

Hey guys. I'm looking at an NEC monitor for editing my stills, and am wondering if this will be suitable for video editing?
Models I'm considering are:
http://www.necdisplay.com/p/desktop-monitors/pa241w-bk
http://www.necdisplay.com/p/desktop-monitors/pa242w-bk
http://www.necdisplay.com/p/desktop-monitors/pa271w-bk
These monitors are great for stills, as they cam emulate paper types well, but do I need a more "vibrant" monitor for video? Just worried that my video will look a bit off on these monitors, as it's such a different medium?
If they aren't suitable, what brand/models are considered good? (Professional level).
Cheers,
Ben

Hey Fuzzy, sorry about the format of this reply. Not sure to quote on here the way you did. Your points are addressed numerically.
1. I haven't seen the user manuals, but using http://www.necdisplay.com/p/desktop-monitors/pa271w-bk for example, under color gamut, there's no mention of Rec709. Compare that to: http://www.eizo.com.au/products/coloredge/cg276/index.html#tab02, under preset modes. Not to mention this entire page: http://www.eizo.com/global/solutions/graphics/video_editing_and_post_production.html.
Just seems like NEC isn't playing up their video editng credentials, and I wonder why?
If you can link me to a user manual for any of the above models, which shows that it ships with Rec709 I'd appreciate it.
2. I couldn't find that artcle, unless you mean: http://www.videomaker.com/article/15133-nec-multisync-pa271w-color-correct-lcd-display-rev iew. In any case, I meant NEC's marketing.
This page has nothing: http://www.necdisplay.com/p/desktop-monitors/pa271w-bk
The incedibly detailed marketing PDF here: http://www.nec-display-solutions.com/p/download/pr/File/cp/Products/LCD/Shared/Brochures/P DF-PASeries.pdf?fn=PASeries.pdf actually contains the phrase "A range of Professional Desktop Displays that are ideal for users in the Photography and Media, Architecture, Engineering, Industrial Design and Precision CAD fields. " (No mention of Video, although it is the first NEC document mentioning "Built in Rec-BT709")
You have to understand that for a comsumer such as myself, not spelling these things out is going to make me look for answers. Or go to a company that does spell it out.
3. Got it, thanks.
4. I think I get that. I'll read the article. But... do these NEC monitors comply?

Best monitor for video editing?

Hi,
I have been saving up for a Mac for sometime now and have decided to buy the new Mac Pro when it comes out this December.
I understand that it doesn't come with a monitor so I have been looking into which one would be best to get. I have never had to buy a separate monitor before as I have always had an iMac so maybe there is one that is very popular that most people use that I don't know about. It would mostly be used for video editing on Final Cut and a little bit of Motion and then other general things like music, photos, documents etc.
Ideally 24" or 27" and under £400.

I don't want 2 monitors, so a single 27inch model just what I need... plenty of room for PPro, or I can have a Word document and a Text file open and side by side
John,
That is personal taste and there is no discussing taste. However, from my perspective, and that is personal, I prefer 3840 x 1080 resolution with dual monitors over 1920 x 1080 with a single monitor, but that is because I very often have Firefox, Filezilla, Dreamweaver and some other applications open at the same time, switching between the Adobe forums, Gmail accounts, Notebook results from the PPBM5 data submissions, PPBM5 form submissions, MySQL access, phpadmin pages to update the database, the PPBM5 results pages and various DW .php pages for the maintenance of our database and switching back and forth between various versions of PR. I occasionally really run out of real estate with all these applications and could not consider a single monitor with only 1920 x 1080 resolution, even if it were a 105" screen. In the future I would even like to have a four monitor setup (with MPE hardware support) in a two by two configuration, so that I can freely move my application screens around.
If that happens, notice I say if and not when, my preference for a monitor would be something like 4 Samsung F2380 monitors. Small bezel, great display and panel, affordable.

Using external monitor for video editing.

Hello all,
I own a IMAC that I use for video editing on FC7. I was wondering via Thunderbolt to VGA (or any other way) if there was a way to use an external moniter as my canvus and the internal comands to do so. Also the opinons of doing this. Good? Bad? any good ideas?
Thanks.

Eeewww! Oh, the horror of what you are trying to suggest!
No. A video signal for a computer display and a video signal intended for TV are very very different things. If you want to PROPERLY see what the video you shot looks like, a computer monitor is the LAST place to look. You want to use an HDTV at least. I'd even say avoid computer displays with HDMI inputs...but even those are better than VGA. VGA is a very low quality connection. DVI, HDMI...those are better.
But if your intention is to view your video at full quality...an HDTV is your better option.

Best display profile for video editing

Among the choices you see under Display Profile on a Mac, what is considered "best" choice for video editing, so that you can assess color, exposure, etc. in your footage as you edit? I have always used Adobe RGB (1998), but realize that I have no knowledge about whether that's a good choice.
What do the 'good' editors use (to differentiate them from guys like me)? Do top editors calibrate their monitors for video editing? Any insights into this would be greatly appreciated!
-- Mark Strand

what is considered "best" choice for video editing
there is only one setting for Final Cut; Generic RGB
This is an apple stipulation, its how Final Cut must be set up, choosing any other profile will cause problems with any out put files you create.
Do top editors calibrate their monitors for video
ICC colour management is designed and can only be used for still image files eg. so while you can calibrate a computer monitor it can only be used with still image files; TIFF CRW JPEG PSD. ICC profiles are not recognised by Final Cut Pro or QuickTime.
The colour management system used in video involves using video scopes, an accurate PAL or NTSC colour monitor and tools like the 3 way colour corrector.

Mac Pro for Video Editing?

So I have an awesome Mac Pro computer at work all well equiped with all the bells and wistles for video editing and now I'm looking to upgrade my machine at home which is currently just a macbook pro with a second monitor.
My one concern is that the Mac Pro has not been updated in sometime. Obviously the mac bro route would be best for me being in video production so I can easily upgrade component with the never ending technology that keeps changing. Now the concern about buying a Mac Pro right now is the possibilites of it being upgraded. Now I understand things are obviously always being upgraded and things are never up to date for very long. However I'm concerned that if in like 3-4 months they came out with something and changed the decision that I maybe screwed for upgrade components along the way.
Just thought I'd get some insight from some of you and what your suggestions maybe?
Thanks in advance.

budget, time-line, stomach for 1.0 revamp (every new model, 2012 could be 3x), lack of Rosetta of course.
production never = bleeding edge, go for a mature well tested proven design - expect to see firmware change, compatibility issues, and 3-4 months for a unified build and drivers rolled out, no?
a nice $2200 "hold me over the hump" for the next 6-12 months for now, W3690/X3690 DIY (the w3680 3.33 6-core is mere $620)
no easy answer that I see with all the products Intel has on their plates.

Which of these macs would you choose for video editing?

The main difference is the MBP has an Serial ATA drive, and the Air has a Flash drive. Also the MPB has 2.9Ghz, and the Air has only 2.0Ghz. Which one would you pick for editing with Final Cut Pro X? (Also curious which one you would pick even if video editing wasn't a concern for you, thanks!)
MacBook Pro 13.3” - Dual-Core i7 2.9Ghz ($1269 refurb, or $1399 new at BestBuy)
Eligible for OS X Mountain Lion Up-to-Date Program
Originally released June 2012
13.3-inch (diagonal) LED-backlit glossy widescreen display, 1280-by-800 resolution
8GB (2 x 4GB) of 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM
750GB Serial ATA @ 5400 rpm
8x double-layer SuperDrive (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
Intel HD Graphics 4000
Or
MacBook Air 13.3” - Dual-Core i7 2Ghz ($1449 refurb)
Eligible for OS X Mountain Lion Up-to-Date Program
Originally released June 2012
13.3-inch (diagonal) LED-backlit glossy widescreen display, 1440-by-900 resolution
8GB memory
512GB flash storage
720p FaceTime HD camera
Intel HD Graphics 4000

Zenman1969 wrote:
Thanks for the answer. Didn't realize the 13" MBPs differed from the 15" MBPs. I thought the screen was the only major difference.
Apple fools a lot of people with that. The 13" is really a MacBook and not a "Pro" machine.
The best machine for video editing depends upon what your going to do, full on production or casual home stuff.
A 15" MacBook Pro and a iMac for the casual lightweight stuff and iMove can do the job.
The new MacPro coming out for the heavy duty stuff.
The industry seems to be moving away from Final Cut Pro X as it's been consumerized or something, lacking needed features and moving towards Avid on powerful Mac's or Windows 7 towers.
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2011/07/does-apple-still-care-about-creative-pros/
http://www.avid.com/US/
So perhaps a mix of Avid and Final Cut Pro X if your serious about furthering your career.

Which 2013 Macbook Pro for Video Editing? "Help"

Hello, I am new to the Apple forums and this is my first post. I'm a 19 Years Student and I'm actually attending a cinematography and television school
I am looking for a Macbook Pro 15" for Video Editing, the sowftware I'm be using and studying are Avid Media Composer, Adobe AE and Premiere , and Photoshop.
My budget is around 2500 - 3000 Euros, And I've been reading every kind of post about the Macbook Retina 2012 and Macbook Pro 2012, but I Really don't know what to get, and if some video editors here can help me would be awesome! So, Let's getting started:
( Both models "Costs" the same, I don't mind paying 100-200 more Euros for a 2500 Macbook so i'd love to have to find the perfect balance with Performance/Design and everything else!)
I'd Like to get a Retina to be honest, but I know every kind of problem that the retina has at this moment: Expensive Repair Costs, High Framerate Drops, Choppy Interface, Burn-in screen and ghosting. I've seen by myself these errors and I don't know if there's a true fix, my opinion is that the GPU is not enough to use smootly the Retina Resolution, and I'm afraid that If I'll buy a macbook retina, the low and suffering GPU will decrease a lot the performance of these software when Rendering, Exporting, and when working with big files. ( I'm asking you if this is true, because I don't have a macbook so I couldn't test by myself how a rMBP works under pressure for atleast 3 hours with one of these softwares, my experience with retina is limited to an Apple Store Experience ). Happy that Final Cut X and CS6 Suit now Supports Retina anyway!
But, Since the retina has all these problems, I'll not be buying THIS version of the retina. I've readed every kind of rumor and even talked to some Genius in my Apple Stores, in June 2013 the New Haswell processor might come, I don't know exactly how it works but Intel says that the GPU performance might be increased by 20 - 40%. Do you think it will resolve all the problems that this rMBP has? In The apple store I've also heard that in June 2013 the Macbook Pro Line will be RETINA ONLY, and this is going to be a issue for me if the retina will still have all these little problems, because I don't want to buy a machine that makes me work bad
The Macbook Retina I'd Like to get by now is the 15" Quad 2.7Ghz 16 Ram 512 SSD = 2800 Euros
The Other Macbook is the Macbook PRO 2012, It still good looking, but placing inside it an SSD makes it so **** expensive, and apple won't put inside more than 8 GB of Ram inside of it, so, If I'd choose to buy one and buy the 16 GB of Ram from 3rd Part, and is aroudn 200 euros, Plus a 600 Euros Samsung 512 SSD since the Apple one costs 700 euro. And it doesn't come with retina display, remember, it's not needed I know and the screen is gorgeus, but I feel and fear that the Macbook Pro hardware is outdated, and might not catch the other in the next years ( I might be wrong, but I believe that Retina motherboard and Retina Chipset are more Fast/Good than the 2012 Macbook Pro, even if everything is glued in there and is not user-friendly )
If I buy the 2012 Macbook Pro By following Apple Products, I'd be spending 3000 Euros, and I found it too much since It doesn't come with retina, I might be wrong.
If I buy the 2012 Macbook Pro By placing the Ram and SSD by myself i'd be spending 2800 Euros, but 3rd part hardware is not under apple warranty.
If I buy the 2012 Macbook Pro WITHOUT SSD, but a 750 GB 7200 and by placing 8 GB Ram It's 2500 Euros.
So, here it is, I don't know what to do :\ Actually I don't like the retina and I hope that in June 2013 they'll change the Processor, Fix all the problems, and maybe add a solid Graphic Card, ( I doubt the'll change the graphic card, just the integrated intel graphic card might change, not the Nvidia for sure, because the rMBP thin )
But, If I wait June 2013 I Fear that the 2012 Macbook Pro will disappear, and if there's only a Not-So-Good Retina left, I'll really not know if to buy it or wait more monts.

Hello Andrea,
I edit video and am familiar with the MacBookPro models. Both the 15" MBP and the 15" rMBP will be fine for editing with Avid Media Composer, Adobe AE, Premiere and Photoshop. But there are some differences that may be important to you, depending on the external equipment you plan to use:
The regular MBP has the following i/o ports:
1 FW800 port
1 Thunderbolt port
2 USB3 ports
1 SDXC slot
Audio line-in port
Audio line-out/headphone port
The rBMP has the following i/o ports:
2 Thunderbolt ports (no native FW port)
2 USB3 ports
1 SDXC slot
Headphone output port (no audio-in)
HDMI output port (output, not input)
The lack of audio line-in port and native FW800 in the rMBP rule out that model as far as I am concerned.
Also, you need to be aware that you cannot upgrade the RAM memory after purchase. There are no RAM slots in the current MacBook Pro models (rMBP included), so no after-market upgrades are possible.
I would not recommend purchasing the very expensive SSD. I suggest configuring a MBP with the 750GB, 7200rpm SATA hard drive and invest the savings in external hard drives - you are going to need them for video work & backup.

Powerful laptop for video editing?

Sometimes people ask what laptop to buy for video editing. My laptop has the following specification.
1 gigabyte graphics memory (NVIDIA GeForce GT 620M)
Intel core i7 3632qm CPU (quad core, 2.2 GHz with maximum 3.2 GHz).
5400 RPM hard drive in two partions C: and D:
6 gigabytes with RAM
I use Windows 8.1, with Windows settings for maximum performance.
I have spent more than 200 hours editing a project which is about 110 minutes long.
RAM, graphics card respectively CPU have been no limitation. But my hard drive must often work hard.
Partition C: became full with media cache files since my project is so big. So in the future I will put the media cache files on partition D: For this project I solved the problem by deleting those media cache files which were no longer needed.
Alright, I have been forced to split up my long project into smaller pieces. So I have projects which each contains a few hours with raw material, out of which there is about 10 minutes on the timeline. For each project I export a video file. These files I import into another project where I join them into one video file which is 110 minutes long.
I find it inconvenient when PE 12 needs more than one minute to load a particular project. This is the reason why I split up my long project into smaller pieces.
To avoid confusion, I never use video transitions. And I only use video effects when I am forced to correct poor footage. So in each project there is at most about a minute of footage to be rendered. I mean, even though I don't render, PE 12 works well.
I hope this will help those who need to buy a laptop for editing.

Thanks for the comments.
Sorry for this delay in answering. I didn't check if there was any comment because I didn't expect any.
a.
I should had expressed myself differently.
No, I have not monitored CPU usage because it is the hard drive which limits how fast my laptop works.
There is one advantage with having a track for video expanded rather than collapsed. One can see what one has already put on the timeline without moving the cursor. If one waits until the computer has generated pictures on the timeline.
But I realized that with my laptop one has to wait uncomfortably long for those pictures to be created. So it is faster to move the cursor to that position where I have guessed that I have already put the footage I want to find.
b.
I have not tested multiple monitors. Neither would I bother if CPU usage increased because it is the hard drive, not the CPU, which limits how fast my laptop works.
c.
I have not used Premiere CC so I have not checked the hardware requirements.
Unless I have misunderstood something, Premiere CC has somewhat higher hardware requirements than Premiere Elements. Understandable since professional camcorders use higher bit rate (more information per second) than cheaper camcorders.
So presumably I would be forced to split up my projects in even smaller parts to make everything manageable. On the other hand, using footage which is intra frame compressed rather than inter frame compressed would mean that the hardware needs to work less hard, so perhaps it would be possible to edit long projects.
At the same time, some professional programs can work with proxy files, and in that case the high bit rate for professional footage would be no problem.
Besides, unless something is wrong with my memory, Edius has somewhat lower hardware requirements than Premiere CC, so possibly that program would be more relevant for usage on my laptop.
Higher bitrate means that there is room for fewer hours with raw material on my single hard drive. So with 100 Mbps I would in practice be limited to creating movies which are at most about 40 minutes long.
One advantage with professional video editing software is that it can edit video with higher resolution than 1920*1080. But I doubt that would work on my laptop.
Thanks for your congratulations.
Yes it works. And after posting in another forum in my native language, another film maker commented that he had edited on a laptop with even less powerful CPU. For him it was also the speed of the hard drive which limited how fast his laptop worked.

Thinking to buy a new 15inch macbook pro retina display. Aim to use it for video editing and compositing... Is ıt worth for it?

Hi... I am a freelance filmmaker. Now I have 2008 model mac pro and I am thinking to buy a new macbook pro 15 inch retina display. Do you think its worth for it? I aim to use the macbook mainly for video editing, video compositing (after effects) and photo editing. My current old mac pro has 12 GB and the graphics card is ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT 256 MB (Yes I still use it). My main question is, do you think its better to move to macbook pro or upgrading the old one? Making it 32 GB of RAM and buy a new NVIDIA cuda capable graphic card? I dont have enough budget to make it together... Want to hear your suggestions...

I'm not sure, I've seen pro animators use MBPs but usually with a large monitor. Especially doing video editing, compositing and editing it might make more sense to upgrade the Mac Pro to an SSD as the boot drive. What kind of CPU setup is in your Pro?
Check these out:
mac pro SSD upgrades?
SSD as system disk while users folder + data on HDD
Early 2008 8-Core Mac Pro GPU Upgrades
I deal exclusively with OWC. I'd call them and walk them through your system and see what they say.
What you do takes a lot of CPU, RAM, graphics and boot disk power.
I've upgraded my two computers to SSDs and the first thing I noticed was that Photoshop CS6 opens in 7 seconds vrs. 50 seconds when the application was on a HDD.

Better for Video Editing? MBP 13" or 15" w/9600M GT

I am planning on purchasing a Macbook Pro for relatively extensive use of Final Cut Pro (HD video) along with possibly some light Motion work and video transcoding. In addition I will be using it for photo editing and web editing. I don't plan on using it for any high-end gaming.
I will be purchasing a $200 24" external monitor to use most of the time along with external keyboard and mouse (so MBP screen size isn't an issue), but I need the portability and don't have the funds to purchase an additional dedicated desktop yet.
I am having trouble deciding between the 13" and the 15", mainly due to conflicting opinions I've been hearing over the importance of a dedicated graphics card for video editing. Salespeople at the Apple store tell me it's important and I should get the 15". Research online yielded heated forum arguments over whether it really makes a difference or not.
The price difference is quite significant though at the configurations I picked ($765) so I am seeking advice here for whether people think the cost difference is really justified for my needs. Note that both configurations include 4GB of RAM, smallest hard drive option (i've got external drives) and AppleCare protection.
Pricing with education discount after tax:
13" 2.26GHz - $1520
15" 2.66GHz w/9600M GT 256MB - $2285
*Is there a real difference in video editing performance and if so, is it really worth an extra $765? Or is there a better option that I'm not considering?*

Thanks everyone for the feedback!
Studio X wrote:
Are you planning on making any money at this or are you only in it for fun? Have you ever edited before? Have you ever edited with FCS before? What of the 44 billion HD formats are you planning on editing? Do you have a camera? What format does it record? If it's a flash media based device, what's your back up strategy? How are you planning to externally monitor the HD material ? What are you planning to use as media drives as the system drive should not be used for media capture or playback?
Still, I guess I come down on the side of "it doesn't matter as neither one is a serious editing machine". If I was in the market for a laptop and was limited to the current apple lineup, the only machine of interest is the 17" MacBookPro. The other two MacBookPros you are considering have no expresscard slot and come only with glossy screens - both are serious deficiencies in my world.
I do plan on using this computer professionally. I am a recent college graduate but do have professional FCS editing experience under my belt. However my work was done using both school and employer resources. I do have an archive of work in Mini DV(HDV) and AVCHD formats. I don't currently own an HD camera, however will likely be purchasing one in the near future. As far as externally monitoring HD material, what else would I need other than the 24" external monitor (perfectly capable of full HD) or a separate HDTV? In addition to several older usb2 external drives for backup I do have a 1TB 7200rpm external capable of FW800 and eSATA that I would use as a media drive.
I currently have an old 17" dell notebook with a glossy screen. The screen hasn't really bothered me, but the size and weight of the notebook has. And while the 17" MBP is a little lighter and smaller than my old dell, I would still prefer a 13" or 15". But from the opinions I've been hearing I'm steering away from the 13" and fully realize the downsides to the lack of ExpressCard slot in the current 15" as well. Still wondering while Apple decided to remove it.
MartinR wrote:
If budget is a primary constraint, then consider a refurbished 15" or 17" MBP from Apple, or a used MBP from a reputable supplier.
I hadn't checked into the refurbished options, but now that I did, I found a nice 15" (late 2008 unibody) configuration that would provide a lot more value for the buck. For about $550 more than the new 13" config I would get a faster processor, 2" bigger screen, 9600M 512mb GPU, double the internal storage, removable battery as well as the ExpressCard slot (even though its not listed in specs, it's there). The only trade off I can see is battery life.
http://store.apple.com/us/product/FC026LL/A?mco=MjE0NjE5MA

LCD Monitor for Video Editing: Resolution Concern

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for