michael49 Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
Ian.Dobinson wrote:
yeah I think the toss up between the 2 now they cost the same would give the nod to the SSD option .
As far as using external drives for your photo's , I don't see that as an issue . I use an external 3tb USB3 western digital my book studio . supposedly 'designed' for mac . its a metal case so it matches the iMac well and didn't cost much more than the standard . for a single spinning drive using USB3 its pretty quick . (about 110mbps read and write) . I store all the RAW files on there . the internal houses the LRcat file and the preview files . LR is plenty fast enough .
the only downside I can see about the 256 SSD is it would make me more diligent about only keeping stuff on the SSD that really needed to be on there . the Fusion gives that safety net of doing it for you .
as far as cost goes , are you looking at the non retina iMac or the retina 5K? from what I can see (maybe the US store is different) the 5k comes with the fusion as standard (the 256 SSD is a no cost option) while th non 5K they are extra . once you've upgraded the non 5K to have either the fusion or SSD the prices are a bit closer .
...Show more →
Thanks - I will probably go with the SSD and something like the WD for most of my storage needs.
Yea, with 256mb on the SSD I will have to be careful what goes on it, but at this point I would be mostly using the iMac for photo editing/cataloging (Lightroom), some internet browsing and not much else. Plus, the disadvange of the fusion drive is that I've heard that you have no choice as to what actually runs on the SSD component - Apple has some algorithm that determines that!
As far as the retina 5K I've heard of some issues with Lightroom - slowness for some reason - there is a youtube video demonstrating this so that has me wondering whether to avoid the 5K.
|