Jump to content

2nd imperssions - M10


ELAN

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I agree with several things mentioned in this good and helpful write up. After nearly three weeks of shooting, I too don't really notice a difference in the viewfinder. It just works. As did the M240.

 

I'm finding a slowness issue with LR -- I think it takes me less time to focus in the field than my souped up Mac and LR6.8 take to bring an image into perfect focus. I didn't notice that with the M240, though I also do with the SL, come to think of it. Serious question: could the precision of focusing a Summilux or Summicron image wide open tax the computer?

 

While it makes me nervous to go out with one battery - and as we all know, The Great M10 Backup Battery Void must be the reason the CEO was let go - I think I am getting more life from mine than ELAN is from his. I've shot 200-300 images at a time, and never had less than 65% battery life when returning. I think that's pretty good, and it's consistent, which eases the mind.

 

Agh, maybe he has a bad copy?  :p 

 

Rick

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 40
  • Created
  • Last Reply

 But Lieca can do better. The M10 battery is one third smaller than the M240 battery, yet its performance is down more than 50%. I suspect the new processor/sensor are power hungry, or perhaps the firmware hasn't been fully tweaked yet. Whatever, I need more juice!

 

Or at least drop the cost of spares commensurate to the drop in capacity.       

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you already try to uncheck the new 'graphics card acceleration' feature? This feature really slows down every MacBook...

 

Thank you, thank you, thank you!  :)  My LR is back in business!

 

@johnbuckley, the exact setting is:

Clear the Use Graphics Processor check box in Preferences > Performance.

 

@digitalfx, my MacBook Pro is a late 2016, i7 processor, 16GB, 1TB SSD.   The LR issue is thankfully resolved now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I shot over 500 images last weekend and had a little bit of juice left. Some chimping and reviewing photos.

 

The M10's battery size is 62% of the M240's battery, so you should be getting at least 620 shots if you got over 1000 with you M240.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, thank you, thank you! :) My LR is back in business!

 

@johnbuckley, the exact setting is:

Clear the Use Graphics Processor check box in Preferences > Performance.

 

@digitalfx, my MacBook Pro is a late 2016, i7 processor, 16GB, 1TB SSD. The LR issue is thankfully resolved now.

And increase the cache to at least 25Gb, ideally placing it on a different INTERNAL hard drive (not a USB drive...
Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not see any issue with battery capacity. So far the capacity was sufficient for shooting all day long. I cannot imagine that I will have such an intense shooting that the battery will fail before I need a break/coffee anyhow which will give me time to change the battery if needed.

 

 

Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk Pro

Link to post
Share on other sites

General sluggishness. Scrolling photos in Develop is slow, clicking the crop icon takes 2 seconds to respond, etc. The machine runs quite hot with LR open, even when idle, which is all consistent with the reported memory leaks. Restarting LR improves things a bit but not for long. I'm encouraged that it works fine for you, which machine are you on?

Interesting. LR 6.8 doesn't do that with my machines. I run it on a mid-2012 Mac mini (i7 quadcore 2.6Ghz, 950G SSD, 16G RAM, data on a USB3 external drive) and on a late-2015 MacBook Air 13" (i7 2.2 GHz, 512G SSD, 8G RAM, same data). Both running the latest macOS Sierra v10.12.3, both connected to an Apple Thunderbolt Display 27".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting. LR 6.8 doesn't do that with my machines. I run it on a mid-2012 Mac mini (i7 quadcore 2.6Ghz, 950G SSD, 16G RAM, data on a USB3 external drive) and on a late-2015 MacBook Air 13" (i7 2.2 GHz, 512G SSD, 8G RAM, same data). Both running the latest macOS Sierra v10.12.3, both connected to an Apple Thunderbolt Display 27".

 

Agreed. I think he solved his issue, but I honestly think this is mostly based on forum BS, not real experience.

LR has always been very responsive, and with the exception of one release, which was quickly fixed Ive never experienced the issues described above even with the graphics option selected.

There is clearly an irrational hate for Adobe, which may have some basis. But personally I would rather pay a company for a tool so that development can continue, rather than expecting everything for free. When you really analyze the subscription model vs the purchase/upgrade model its pretty much a wash as far as your cost goes...so why so much hate? If you don't like the model, move on. No need to constantly bash them over and over. (and I'm referring to the OP, its a general comment)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I take objection to what your call 'forum BS'. Many people have real issues with LR sluggishness on their machines. If you had a reproducible problem with your M10, and others concurred, you probably wouldn't take kindly to people calling your issue forum BS.

 

It turns out that LR default setting of using the graphics processor runs afoul with the latest and fastest MacBook Pro. Some Windows machines experience the same problem. The Adobe forum has dozens of discussions about this. It is a real issue for many people. It was for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed. I think he solved his issue, but I honestly think this is mostly based on forum BS, not real experience.

LR has always been very responsive, and with the exception of one release, which was quickly fixed Ive never experienced the issues described above even with the graphics option selected.

There is clearly an irrational hate for Adobe, which may have some basis. But personally I would rather pay a company for a tool so that development can continue, rather than expecting everything for free. When you really analyze the subscription model vs the purchase/upgrade model its pretty much a wash as far as your cost goes...so why so much hate? If you don't like the model, move on. No need to constantly bash them over and over. (and I'm referring to the OP, its a general comment)

 

 

Believe me, this is definitely no forum BS. It is real experience and it is a huge difference between turning the graphics option on or off!

 

However, it depends on the machine you use. As far as I remember, the effect (in the Develop module) is far less pronounced (if any) for Macs which do not have a dedicated graphics card - like both Macs mentioned by ramarren (as far as I remember)! If LR detects a dedicated graphics card, it tries to calculate photo editing operations (in the Develop module!) using this card. If this card is not fast enough to compensate for the overhead created by transforming, transferring and receiving the data, everything gets really slow...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I take objection to what your call 'forum BS'. Many people have real issues with LR sluggishness on their machines. If you had a reproducible problem with your M10, and others concurred, you probably wouldn't take kindly to people calling your issue forum BS.

 

It turns out that LR default setting of using the graphics processor runs afoul with the latest and fastest MacBook Pro. Some Windows machines experience the same problem. The Adobe forum has dozens of discussions about this. It is a real issue for many people. It was for me.

 You were a little bit faster...   :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I take objection to what your call 'forum BS'. Many people have real issues with LR sluggishness on their machines. If you had a reproducible problem with your M10, and others concurred, you probably wouldn't take kindly to people calling your issue forum BS.

 

It turns out that LR default setting of using the graphics processor runs afoul with the latest and fastest MacBook Pro. Some Windows machines experience the same problem. The Adobe forum has dozens of discussions about this. It is a real issue for many people. It was for me.

 

 

Sorry, didn't mean to offend...I was speaking in general terms.

I can switch on and off and don't experience this issue...could it be an Apple issue and not a LR issue?

 

I use LR every day and just don't see the problem. Ive used 5 different MBPros as well.

 

are you on 6.6 or 6.8?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I take objection to what your call 'forum BS'. Many people have real issues with LR sluggishness on their machines. If you had a reproducible problem with your M10, and others concurred, you probably wouldn't take kindly to people calling your issue forum BS.

 

AFAICT, a lot of the issues seem to arise with how much manipulation you do, how much flipping between images you, the size of the cache, etc.  The non-destructive editing is great, but piggy back enough operations and things get bogged down when the situation requires reapplying them.  Limiting the number of discrete steps and the amount of experimenting before hitting on a final setting, seems to matter quite a bit. Its like there are circumstances where they hit the wall and are forced down a brute force, straight line, follow the sequence of changes, model. Could be wrong, but it doesn't seem as though they are doing the obvious optimization of parsing the sequence of all operations first to determine the final state for each applied slider/tool as opposed to sequentially calculating the effect of the entire list of changes and rendering the result. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...