Apple's workhorse MacBook Pro laptop has been given a major overhaul for 2012 and now includes a stonkingly high resolution display, a thinner design and new, improved processors. But what benefits do these upgrades really mean for the professional media user?
To find out, I handed my review unit over to GameSpot's most excellent video producer, Seb Ford, who set about editing a whole episode of Start/Select (embedded below) to see what the Pro can handle and, crucially, if it's worth stumping up the extra cash for that retina display.
Screen
How much difference did the retina display make to your editing?
"Video editing requires as much display real estate as you can find," says Seb. "In the GameSpot office, my dual 24-inch monitors allow me to see all my footage bins, effects panels and multiple video displays all at the same time. It can look intimidating, but it's by far the most efficient way of producing video.
"One of the limitations of working on a laptop at trade shows is the severely reduced display area. With the retina display, while the video playback window appears to be the same size, it's vastly more detailed. It becomes much easier to make subtle adjustments and spot graphical errors in your footage."
So the increased resolution made it better for editing on than the older model?
"Certainly. On the older model, the raw footage can appear lo-res in the small display window, but it's crystal clear on the retina display."
Would you still need to use an external monitor?
"No, you wouldn't need an external monitor. I was able to edit an entire episode of Start/Select without having to connect any external devices," says Seb.
While doing testing for my review, I fired up Adobe Lightroom 4 and imported some photos taken with the astounding Canon EOS 5D Mark III. The high resolution of the screen meant the images were incredibly sharp, which made subtle changes in the edit much more accurate.
It's also superbly bold and vivid, making both images and video shine beautifully. I put the same photo side-by-side against my normal computer monitor and the difference was obvious.
Power
Did you notice a significant upgrade in its processing power from the older model?
"Working at trade shows will often require you to be downloading footage, while browsing for product information, as well as having at least one video editing platform open. Again, this can slow down both the edit, and the render, once you are finished.
"For the majority of the edit I did on the new Pro, I found its processing speed to be totally comparable to my desktop Mac Pro [a 3.2GHz quad-core Intel Xeon Mac Pro, with 12GB of RAM]. Only after adding some processor-heavy effects (like vignettes and gaussian blurs) did I notice any lag, though it was extremely minor."
Did that make it easier to edit on?
"Vastly. There is nothing more infuriating than waiting for your machine to catch up with you during an edit."
Were you ever worried about it freezing up?
"No, at no point in the edit did it show any signs of stalling or freezing up. The spinning rainbow wheel is a dreadful sight during an edit, and I didn't see it once from start to finish."
Would you stump up the extra cash and go for the 16GB of RAM?
"If I were to buy this machine for myself, I would definitely go for the full 16GB. The video I produced totalled 5 minutes, so for a longer edit I would expect to see the system slow down more. I would need a machine built specifically to make video, so increasing the RAM would be a must for me," says Seb.
I had a similarly positive experience with my photo editing. I was working with high-resolution raw images that each had a file size of around 60MB, so they would have stretched the limits of even the more competent laptops and would certainly be out of the question for low-spec machines.
I found that that it was able to import photos into Lightroom 4 very quickly and switching into editing mode was immediate -- less capable machines often suffer from lag here. There was no visible delay when I altered sliders that affected the whole image, which made applying small tweaks particularly easy. Crucially, at no point did I feel that the machine was struggling or was on the brink of freezing up.
What isn't so great about it?
"The video I capture is stored onto a FireWire 800 device, and without the native support [there's no FireWire 800 port on the new Pro] I was forced to find a workaround, without the Thunderbolt adaptor.
"I have also done several trade show edits that require editing on a network SAN server, which would require a high-speed wired connection over Ethernet [another port missing on the new model]. Again, I did not have the Ethernet adaptor," says Seb.
In general, the improvements to the screen appear to be particularly good for professional users who require a high level of detail, but don't have the luxury of using multiple displays when they're on the move. The beefed-up Intel Ivy Bridge processors make editing high-definition video a breeze.
The removal of the FireWire port proved problematic, as did the frankly bizarre exclusion of the Ethernet port -- an issue I had to battle with during my own review time. An Ethernet adaptor is available for £25, which isn't a huge amount, but it's more than a little galling to have to shell out for crucial extras after paying thousands already.
To read more about the new Pro, check out my full review now and be sure to let me know exactly what you make of it in the comments below and over on our Facebook page. And without further ado, here's Seb's latest MacBook-produced masterpiece...

Comments 12
Add your comment
anonymous 21 June, 2012 14:29
This is becoming a habit now of Apple deciding what we want rather than giving us what we need. I use a 17'' macbook pro for video related use and need to upload a lot of footage via the internet when on location. This is done via ethernet connection which is configured for me as I share a connection used for streaming. The ability to share my connection via the mac's wifi is also v. useful for other members of the crew.
All my storage hardware currently uses FW800 including HDD caddies and AJA KiPro. In the future some may be USB3 or Thunderbolt (too expensive) but at the moment they are not and it's an expense we can do without.
I'm already staying well clear of FCPX, but that's another story.
anonymous 21 June, 2012 15:36
One article slating Microsoft and Windows Phone with another praising Apple and their Macs....hum.....
Naryan 21 June, 2012 17:03
@anonymous, Is it really a surprise at this point?
I just can't take this seriously.
I do a lot of video editing and there's just *no way* it's worth forking out at least *£1800* just for the extra pixels. I don't know what kind of *tiny* visual errors Seb is hoping of finding that will be so totally obvious to people with regular screens yet so hidden to him on *his* regular screen that mean the simply stupid asking price is justified.
And if you needed one last thing to kill the credibility, he suggested spending *£160* extra on 8 *more* GB of RAM on top of the existing 8GB. Oh dear, oh dear...
anonymous 21 June, 2012 17:41
@Naryan
Seb here - I don't understand how paying £160 for the extra 8GB of RAM (which you can't do post-purchase) is such a big deal?
In this article I'm referring specifically to editing on a portable machine. So while I agree it's a lot of money, you're getting a device that is at least comparable to a high-spec desktop machine, like the Mac Pro I mention.
In answer to your question - if you are working with green-screened 1080p footage, displaying in a window roughly the size of your palm, there's plenty you could miss; namely getting a good key.
I have produced that show now on both the new MacBook and the last gen MacBook within the last two weeks, and having the retina display helped a lot. Considering the cost of professional video production kit in general, I think £1800 is a fair price for a powerful, durable, and portable editing station. It's not perfect, but it is very good.
anonymous 22 June, 2012 00:12
(...continued from the first post) oh, and I forgot to mention where the heck is the slot so I can insert Sony SxS cards (I have on on the 17 which I use all the time)? Minimalist laptops are pointless if you have to carry a bag load of ******* add-ons so you can do stuff!
anonymous 22 June, 2012 10:21
I unlike many other pc enthusiasts, think that macs are great, there speed, style and relatively quick acceptance of newer technology are great. However this is an extortionate price to pay for this specification. "But the retina display" I hear you cry,I think that the retina display was sharp and pretty awesome but it really offered nothing that was worth £300. The disappointing thing is that most of these won't even touch videos, or high intensity work and will spend there life browsing friends pictures on facebook, i suppose at least they will be high quality.
anonymous 22 June, 2012 11:59
LOOK the emperor isnt wearing any clothes!
Naryan 22 June, 2012 19:00
@anonymous
Seb, I see where you're coming from, but you're talking *eighteen hundred pounds*.
If it's so important, *do the work on a desktop*. You could spend *half* that money and buy a PC that could *laugh* off the highest resolution video editing. Why the heck would you want to spend such a ridiculous amount of money on a laptop that's only going to be replaced next year!? It's *insane*.
And if you can tell the difference between a laptop with 8GB of high-frequency DDR3 RAM and one with 16GB of high-frequency DDR3 RAM, then you deserve a knighthood, but the fact is, you can't, so why the heck would you spend £160 on it? Because you've been forbidden from upgrading by Apple? Sounds legit.
No offence, but it sounds like you've invented a problem that a shiny new £1800 Apple laptop could fix, and then promptly and happily fixed it.
ps. You must have *big* palms.
anonymous 22 June, 2012 23:07
The money part is not relevant. To someone getting their daily lunch at a soup kitchen, it would be prohibitive. To Bill Gates, it would be pocket change. Most of us fall somewhere in between. I'm willing to bet that most of those who call a £160 RAM upgrade and even £3000 for the machine itself exorbitant are just annoyed that some people can justify and afford this kind of expense while they themselves cannot. If so, you're not the target audience. Live with it! There are people who are willing to pay good money for beautifully designed and thoughtfully crafted products. The fact that you can't afford an Aston Martin doesn't mean that the car is overpriced. That care is not made for the masses, and neither is the MacBook Pro Retina.
Of course, at these prices, the machine won't sell. I supposed that's why the order I placed will take about four weeks to be delivered. And of course, you think Apple should have dropped this or added that. What do we have here? The opinion of someone I never heard of versus the opinion of the most successful company in stock market history. I think I know whom I'll trust to make the correct decisions.
-dk-
anonymous 27 June, 2012 23:08
Did you convert your footage to apple pro res or edited natively? If you did, what format do you use?
anonymous 12 July, 2012 22:43
How fast is macbook pro retina compared to iMac 27"?
anonymous 30 September, 2012 07:22
Oh anonymous -dk- thank you so much, and I do mean so much for your last comment. You see I have spent more money than I care to admit this year building a performance and productive Headquarters for our company this year, we have recently upgraded just about everything we had available to speed up our workflow and output the highest quality multimedia our wallets can muster, and you sir just saved me from making a roughly 16000 mistake. I have always been a fan of apple products, and this article was an important read because we are in need of machines that can go into the field with us, do what needs to be done on the road, and bring home rough cuts we can piece together and apply the glitter to. Of course the new mbpretina has been an option we were considering, we need at least four units, and productivity is our concern. Quality work is our goal, high standards is our code of conduct, and this is why your comment has been so valuable. See, you are a reminder as to why apple is becoming less and less appealing to us as professionals. Your arguments started out solid, keying is important, attention to detail as well, but then your Aston martin "not for you" comment allowed your true value in your technology to shine through. See I would bet, for you, it is more important to have an apple at Starbucks while pretending to do some "really important video editing" where everyone can see your new expensive purchase than actually doing the work for the right reason. People who drive Aston martins Dont drive them for their practicality, they drive them because they like fancy sports cars and have an affinity for things expensive, and the fact you compared your electronics to that standard says a lot about why you own one to begin with; follow that up with an egotistical comment like "this is just not for you" suggests that in your case you 'fit' into a higher class of 'professional' than the rest of us. Thirdly, you trust a company that is the most successful in the world, at making money, and that is why you are willing to 'spend more for less'. Wait... what? Dont get me wrong, its a sexy piece of tech, but your original post was abut its functionality in the field, not its convertible heated seats, and I am pretty positive apple didn't make all that money by spending it recklessly, but money is irrelevant according to you. Uh.. what?
It is insane to spend that kind of money on these machines for what 'we' do if there are other viable options at half the price, some of us have 4k cameras we had to buy this year. Some of us have to licence 6 machines with cs6 master this year, some of us have to consider what we teach our interns and students and how we can give them the most VALUABLE education and experience that will drive their work and art further. So the money part is relevant because some of us are more concerned with what our work is worth rather than what we think our electronics make us seem like were worth, something I believe even Serve Jobs himself passionately cared about, and its not his fault so many apple users subscribe to this stigma you are helping to perpetuate. Trust that salesman, because you obviously have money to waste, I on the other hand will make an educated decision as to what these electronics can bring to the table when it comes to the big picture, and the math says that the retina display (although you 'might' get a cleaner key on your fifteen inch display, you certainly aren't doing this to any level of seriousness if you aren't having it peer edited, critiqued, and or aren't mastering it on a more powerful machine after the fact, you can clean up a key in seconds, any work done on a laptop at least for us is definitely not something we will be outputting as a final draft anyhow, its more of a get work done while you can solution) eats up more of the cuda cores than the macbook pro non-retina, takes up more power, decreases resources in opengl/mercury playback, and it can't be upgraded. Sounds to me like a 'smart' editor would opt for the non retina, trick it out to its max, and it its going to be the comp where he does so much crucial keying he needs the resolution, hell buy a 27 inch IPS display to throw on his desk... still, I'd kill myself if I had to wait for even these machines to render instead of having a desktop solution. I definitely wouldn't do this as my career.
Enjoy your latte, I think that hipster over there is scoping out your pixels 'bro'. Your laptop was worth every penny.