Home  »  Tech News   »   What Is The Best Imac For Photography

What Is The Best Imac For Photography

By | 11/12/2022


The new M1 iMac is a sleek, stylish and surprisingly affordable photo and video editing motorcar.
Photograph by DL Cade

Beginning, the elephant in the room: the redesigned 24-inch iMac was not created for photographers and video editors. Information technology’s a family-friendly Mac that’s much more concerned with artful sensibility than Adobe Premiere Pro performance. Despite this, it’s arguably the best starter Mac for anybody who is interested in exploring their creative side.

In terms of photograph and video editing performance, the new iMac is on par with every other M1 Mac, significant: excellent. And Apple has combined that functioning with a color-authentic 4.5K Retina brandish and crammed it all inside an impossibly sparse and playfully designed bundle.

Apple has combined M1 performance with a color-authentic 4.5K Retina display and crammed it all within an impossibly thin and playfully designed package.

Like very other M1 Mac, it has its frustrating limitations – some of Apple’s pattern choices have left professionals scratching their heads. But if y’all view the new 24-inch iMac through the lens of Apple’southward intentions for this product, the creative potential of this motorcar comes into focus and you brainstorm to understand who should (and who shouldn’t) buy this new machine.

Key specifications:

Base of operations Model
Our Review Unit of measurement
M1 8-core


M1 vii-core
M1 8-cadre


24-inch 4.5K Retina Display
2x USB 4 Type-C

1x Sound Port
2x USB 4 Type-C
2x USB 3 Type-C
1x Gigabit Ethernet

1x Audio Port

The M1 iMac nosotros received for review sits near the summit of the configuration spectrum. It features the eight-core CPU/8-core GPU variant of the M1, 16GB of RAM, 512GB of storage and all of the extra ports and cooling that come along with the higher-stop configs.

become the 24-inch iMac for as piddling as $ane,300, simply this involves a lot of sacrifices. The entry-level price point includes the eight-core CPU/seven-cadre GPU variant of the M1, only 8GB of RAM, a beggarly 256GB of built-in storage, no ethernet port on the power brick, one cooling fan instead of two and only two ports on the whole auto.

For creative work, we’d recommend stepping up to at least 512GB of storage and 16GB of RAM, like our review unit of measurement, or possibly going a step further by upgrading the storage to 1TB. That configuration will cost you $2,100, or approximately $800 more than than an identical M1 Mac mini. Given the quality and resolution of the iMac’south display, $800 seems like a reasonable cost to pay if you lot’re happy with a 24-inch brandish.

Pattern, build and usability

The iMac’south 24-inch 4.5K Retina display might seem a chip small if you’re used to editing on a 27- or 32-inch monitor.
Photo by DL Cade

The beginning thing I noticed when I unboxed and ready the redesigned 24-inch iMac on my desk was just how pocket-sized information technology is. Not just thin and lightweight – it genuinely looks like a huge iPad Pro on an aluminum stand up – but the screen size itself. I can’t remember the final fourth dimension I used a display that was smaller than 27 inches, opting for 32 whenever I can, and the downgrade to 24 inches was jarring.

The second and third things I noticed were the white bezels and the classic iMac chin, two characteristics that prompted much mockery on announcement day.

While the 24-inch screen size connected to carp me long afterward day i, the bezels and chin faded from consciousness nearly immediately. Maybe it’southward simply me, simply the thought that white bezels somehow disqualify this estimator from beingness used for photo and video editing seems ridiculous on the face of information technology. The bezels, specially when placed confronting a white wall, simply fade into the background every bit you focus on the content at hand.

As for the chin, it has been an integral function of the iMac’south design language from the very start. I may not love it, but I’m not surprised that Apple tree has chosen to keep it.

Almost the entire figurer is housed inside the controversial “mentum” of the iMac.
Photo past DL Cade
The new iMac’due south 1080p webcam takes advantage of the “Neural Engine” built into the M1 bit to amend paradigm quality on the fly.
Photo by DL Cade

Fortunately, there are benefits to some of these blueprint elements.

Thanks to the huge mentum, the entire space behind the screen was reserved for big air chambers that make full out the sound coming from the iMac’s five speakers. This helps the iMac produce more and better-quality sound than you lot would expect given its size. At total book, it can compete with some high-quality Bluetooth speakers.

Thanks to the relatively big bezels, Apple was able to squeeze in a high-quality 1080p FaceTime HD webcam that takes advantage of the M1’s Neural Engine to apply some AI magic to your feed in existent fourth dimension. Trying it out for the first fourth dimension the other day, the quality of the video output genuinely surprised me.

In terms of ports, at that place is a significant difference between the lower and higher-end configuration.

If y’all get with the entry-level model, y’all’re stuck with simply ii USB 4 Type-C ports and a headphone jack. If yous upgrade to the higher-finish configuration, you get an additional two USB Type-C ports on the back (non Thunderbolt, meaning 10Gb/s max transfer speeds compared to 40Gb/s, and no display output) and a Gigabit ethernet port that’southward built into the ability brick. Even on the high terminate, that’s not a lot of connectivity.

The higher-end configurations of the M1 iMac come up with 4 USB-C ports, but merely two of them are proper USB four ports.
Photo past DL Cade
Because the new iMac is then thin, Apple was forced to put the headphone jack on the side of the computer. At to the lowest degree they didn’t remove it entirely…
Photo past DL Cade

Speaking of the power brick, in gild to go along the iMac as thin as possible Apple has removed the power supply from inside the iMac’s chassis and stuck information technology inside of an external brick, just like a laptop. The brick connects to the iMac using a color-matched braided cable that ends in a proprietary magnetic connector, which twists into the right orientation all on its own and snaps into place with a satisfying

If you get with the entry-level model, you’re stuck with just two USB 4 Type-C ports and a headphone jack.

Annotation that it’s
a MagSafe connector. Given the strength of these magnets and the lightweight design of the iMac, you can easily pull the estimator off a tabular array using the power cable. Its purpose is to maintain the clean, piece of furniture-like aesthetic of the iMac and to provide i more port (if you go with the loftier-end configuration).

The new iMac plugs into the wall through a proprietary magnetic (but not MagSafe) connector.
Photo by DL Cade
In order to reach such a thin blueprint, Apple had to put the iMac’s power supply inside of an external power brick. On the plus side, some configurations utilize the brick to add together a Gigabit ethernet port.
Photo past DL Cade

How you react to the blueprint of the 24-inch iMac is largely downward to your expectations. If you’re looking for a high-powered creator Mac, this isn’t information technology. Apple’s focus on aesthetics comes at a cost: too few ports, the relatively thick white bezels, the huge chin and the external power brick, to proper noun the almost obvious.

But at that place’south no denying the computer’due south minimalist and modern aesthetic. Apple was going for a playful and approachable redesign, and they hitting that smash on the head.

Back to top

Performance benchmarks

Similar every other M1 Mac, the new iMac is surprisingly fast in both photo and video editing applications.
Photo by DL Cade

When information technology comes to performance, the 24-inch iMac is pretty much identical to every other M1 Mac that features agile cooling (i.e. an internal fan). You can look it to perform similarly to the M1 MacBook Pro and the M1 Mac mini.

But what exactly does this mean in terms of photo and video editing performance? And how does information technology compare to Intel- and AMD-based PCs with similar core specs?

We came up with a fix of benchmarks that we tin can use to test performance on the most common photo and video editing tasks.

In order to answer these questions and provide a solid basis for comparison moving frontwards, we came up with a ready of benchmarks that we can use to test functioning on the nigh common photograph and video editing tasks. No Geekbench or Cinebench; these are real-world import, export and rendering tasks that we timed manually, testing several dissimilar computers at one time so that we can compare the results against ane another.

Our Benchmarks

In Lightroom Classic and Capture I 21, we tested importing/preview generation and exporting using 100 raw files from four different cameras: the Canon EOS R6 (20MP), the Nikon Z7 II (47MP), the Sony a7R IV (61MP) and the Fujifilm GFX 100 (100MP). In the interest of consistency and comparability, we ran our tests using 100 copies of the studio scene photograph from each of these cameras, ensuring that the lighting and content of our examination photos never changes.

In Adobe Lightroom, previews were rendered in 1:1 quality. In Capture One, previews were set at the default 2560px. In both programs, we used an identical preset/fashion to apply heavy mail-processing then exported the variants every bit full-resolution 100% JPEGs gear up to sRGB.

In Adobe Photoshop, nosotros relied on the excellent PugetBench benchmark created by Washington Land’s own Puget Systems. PugetBench tests a multifariousness of common Photoshop tools and filters, measures how long it takes to perform each job and assigning a score after performing the full complement of tests three times in a row. We’ve chosen to utilize an older version of the criterion (v0.eight) instead of the most recent build, because information technology was the terminal build to include a Photo Merge test.

The results are dissever into an Overall score and a prepare of Category scores that rate the General, GPU, Filter, and PhotoMerge performance of each computer.

A sample score sheet from Puget Systems’ PugetBench v0.8 Beta. The scores reported in our reviews are based on 3 consecutive runs of this benchmark.

the GPU score is based on the performance of five Photoshop tools: Rotate, Smart Sharpen, Field Blur, Tilt-Shift Blur and Iris Mistiness. These tools take full advantage of GPU dispatch, but they’re also sensitive to CPU and RAM, and so the GPU score is non comparable beyond devices unless they are identical in every other way.

Finally, for video editing operation, nosotros came up with a ready of standard benchmarks in Apple’s Last Cut Pro and Adobe Premiere Pro, which you can learn more about in our Head to Head comparing published final month.

In summary, nosotros created two identical 4K timelines using 8K footage from a Sony a1, and then performed five tests: we rendered previews in 4K ProRes 4:ii:ii, exported the master file using previews, encoded an H.264 file, encoded an HEVC/H.265 file, and practical Warp Stabilization to a 15-2nd prune. You can watch the video we use for our Premiere and Final Cut tests beneath:

Testing the M1 iMac

For this review, nosotros compared the M1 iMac against an Intel MacBook Pro, an Intel-based Razer Bract xv Advanced and an AMD-based ASUS G14. Yous can see the specifications of our test machines below:

iMac MacBook Pro Bract 15 ASUS G14
CPU M1 (8-core) Intel Core i7-1068NG7 Intel Core i7-10875H AMD Ryzen 9-5900HS
GPU M1 (8-core) Intel Iris Plus Graphics





RAM 16GB Unified Memory 32GB LPDDR4X 3733MHz 32GB DDR4 2933MHz 32GB DDR4 3200MHz
Storage 512GB NVMe SSD 4TB NVMe SSD 1TB NVMe M.two SSD 1TB NVMe G.ii SSD

24-inch 4.5K Retina Display

100% Display P3

thirteen-inch Retina Display

100% Display P3

fifteen-Inch 4K OLED

100% DCI-P3

xiv-inch WQHD LCD

100% DCI-P3


$1,900 $3,600 $3,300 $2,000

We also tested an M1 Mac mini with identical specs to the iMac and, equally expected, their performance was essentially identical. As such, we’re non including the Mac mini results in the tables and charts below.

Adobe Lightroom Classic

In Lightroom Classic, the iMac is surprisingly fast cheers to its Unified Memory Architecture (UMA).

Based on our testing, the speed of a Lightroom import and preview generation is determined largely past CPU performance, while the speed of the Export is determined by a combination of CPU functioning, RAM amount and RAM speed. The M1 Macs all feature “unified” memory that is much faster than the DDR4 sticks found in nigh computers, giving information technology an border. That’s how it was able to out-export computers with more RAM in certain situations.

As file sizes get bigger though, the amount of RAM plays a larger role and the competitors brainstorm to pull abroad.

Canon EOS R6 Import Nikon Z7 II Import Sony a7R IV Import Fuji GFX 100 Import
M1 iMac ane:44 2:55 3:06 8:40
MacBook Pro ii:22 3:42 4:02 x:12
Blade 15 1:55 iii:23 three:52 8:26
ASUS G14 1:38 2:59 3:30


Canon EOS R6 Export Nikon Z7 Ii Export Sony a7R IV Export Fuji GFX 100 Consign
M1 iMac 4:x 9:24 xiv:43 38:29
MacBook Pro v:55 12:01 fifteen:35 26:46
Blade 15 4:25 9:41 12:l 30:38
ASUS G14 iii:58 8:55 11:41 23:40

Capture 1 21

This aforementioned blueprint does
play out in Capture 1 21. Unlike Adobe Lightroom, Capture One takes much amend reward of GPU acceleration, giving the ASUS G14 and Blade fifteen a meaning heave in consign performance cheers to the NVIDIA RTX thirty-series GPUs packed inside. The iMac held its ain when importing and generating previews, but it lost to both PCs in every export test, with the gap widening as resolution/file size increased.

CPU speed and RAM still play a role, which is how the iMac is able to keep up at all, but the benefits of a full-featured PC are much more obvious in a plan that’s well-optimized to take reward of a discrete GPU.

Canon EOS R6 Import Nikon Z7 Ii Import Sony a7R 4 Import Fuji GFX 100 Import
M1 iMac 0:44 1:05 1:xix 2:01
MacBook Pro 0:47 ane:42 2:12 3:12
Blade xv 0:49 1:10 1:25 2:02
ASUS G14 0:40 0:59 1:12


Canon EOS R6 Export Nikon Z7 Two Export Sony a7R IV Export Fuji GFX 100 Export
M1 iMac 2:15 5:31 6:56 12:48
MacBook Pro 4:57 12:fifty xvi:18 27:38
Blade 15 ii:01 four:21 five:09 8:51
ASUS G14 i:35 three:12 3:50 half dozen:53

Adobe Photoshop

In Photoshop, the speed of the M1 CPU and the Unified Memory once over again give the iMac a big boost in performance. Since about Photoshop filters and tools are not optimized to take full advantage of a discrete GPU, the Mac steals the show past winning the Overall, General and PhotoMerge categories.

The iMac’s PhotoMerge score in particular is just staggering. Where the Bract 15 takes well-nigh 97 seconds to merge six 45MP Nikon raw files into a panorama, the M1 iMac does this same job in just 69 seconds, which is why its category score is so much college. No surprise: that chore is heavily RAM and CPU dependent.

Overall General GPU Filter PhotoMerge
M1 iMac 1010.four 99.6 82.2 82.ane 141.viii
MacBook Pro 597.7 65.4 32.6 52.8 62.6
Blade 15 827.eight 87.0 84.5 72.1 95.6
ASUS G14 973.6 99.0 97.three 86.9 115.0

Apple Terminal Cutting and Adobe Premiere Pro

In our final examination, we ran identical benchmarks in both Apple Final Cut Pro and Adobe Premiere Pro. We shared some of these results in our Caput to Caput comparison last month, but that was before nosotros were able to throw an AMD contender into the mix.

The iMac is exceptionally fast in Apple’s own Terminal Cutting Pro – no surprise in that location – simply it’s also impressively fast in Premiere. Using the ARM-optimized Beta of Premiere Pro, we clocked render and consign times that are inside spitting distance of both the Razer Blade 15 and the ASUS G14, both of which feature bulky NVIDIA GPUs that can take full advantage of CUDA hardware acceleration.

For Concluding Cut, we could only compare the iMac against the Intel-based 13-inch MacBook Pro, since the program is not available on Windows. It won’t surprise you to learn that the iMac is nearly twice every bit fast overall equally its Intel-based sibling:

Render All Export Master File Export H.264 Export HEVC/H.265 Terminal Cut Stabilize
M1 iMac 5:21 1:24 4:19 ane:55 0:25
MacBook Pro 9:57 2:07 half-dozen:55 2:59 0:55

For Premiere, we once more compared all four machines.

Interestingly, despite the fact that Warp Stabilize is a GPU accelerated effect, it’s the but category where the iMac was the fastest of the agglomeration. In rendering and export tasks it brutal short of our Intel- and AMD-based PC: approximately 12% slower at rendering and 18% slower when encoding H.264 and HEVC files.

The poor 13-inch MacBook Pro never stood a take a chance. Information technology’due south and then much slower that we really had to remove information technology from the graphical version of these results in society to amend compare performance between the other three.

Render All Export Master File Export H.264 Export HEVC/H.265 Warp Stabilize
M1 iMac 7:40 0:16 7:28 7:16 ii:06
MacBook Pro 25:53 0:37 26:12 25:09 2:36
Blade 15 6:47 0:12 6:05 v:57 3:13
ASUS G14 6:twoscore 0:15 6:06 5:59 2:33

Back to summit

The takeaways

The M1 iMac doesn’t sit at the tiptop of functioning. Of the four computers tested hither, the AMD-based ASUS G14 earns that distinction by topping about of our tests, and the Intel-based Razer Blade xv Avant-garde has a peachy showing besides. What’s frankly shocking though is that this consumer-focused iMac can continue upward at all.

Remember, this computer features half the RAM, an “entry-level” CPU and an integrated GPU. Nosotros should really be comparison information technology against the 21.5-inch iMac that it replaced, which featured a measly 8th generation half dozen-cadre Intel Core i7 processor. Instead, nosotros run into it keeping up with high-end gaming laptops that avowal flagship laptop CPUs and the latest NVIDIA graphics cards.

What’due south bluntly shocking is that this consumer-focused iMac can proceed up at all

In tasks where the GPU plays no role, both the ASUS and the Razer would take struggled against the Mac if not for their 32GB of RAM; in tasks that do involve the GPU, we never expected the Mac to come so close.

All in all, we were very impressed with the performance of the M1 against such stiff competition. It’south more than fast plenty for serious photo and video editing, simply every bit long as you don’t mind the limitations inherent in an entry-level calculator that was never designed to handle the huge files that accompany most professional workflows.

Back to elevation


In our stance, the M1 iMac is the best “starter” Mac for aspiring creatives who are looking for a practise-everything device that’s just as fashionable as it is functional.
Photo by DL Cade
What We Like What We Don’t Like
  • Professional class operation
  • Colour-authentic 4.5K brandish
  • Excellent build quality
  • Thin, stylish design
  • High-quality webcam
  • Not bad speakers
  • Small-ish screen
  • Limited to 16GB of RAM
  • Limited to 2TB of storage
  • Poor port selection
  • External power brick
  • No 10-gigabit ethernet option

Given its RAM, storage, screen size and port limitations, the M1 iMac will be a no-become for the most demanding professionals, just information technology’due south a
compelling options for beginners and enthusiasts. That’s why we’re calling it the all-time “starter” Mac for creatives. Thanks to the power of its M1 scrap, the quality of its 4.5K display and a toll-to-functioning sugariness spot around $2,000, the M1 iMac is a great all-in-ane desktop for fans of the Apple ecosystem.

If you’re looking for a practice-everything device that’due south merely equally fashionable every bit it is functional, the M1 iMac does not disappoint.

If you’re just starting out on your creative journeying, and you want to embark on that journeying nestled comfortably in the decision-making bosom of Apple and MacOS, it’s hard to fence against the value proffer of the new M1 Mac.

Savvy buyers volition desire to consider their priorities first. If you need portability, you may choose the M1 MacBook Pro. If yous desire a larger screen and more ports, the smarter buy is an M1 Mac mini and a color accurate 27- or 32-inch display. And of form, if you’re non enamored of the Apple ecosystem, a high-end Windows automobile with a dedicated GPU is difficult to vanquish. But if yous’re looking for a practice-everything device that’s simply equally stylish equally it is functional, the M1 iMac does not disappoint.

Back to top

Source: https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/2021-apple-m1-imac-24-inch-review-the-best-starter-mac-for-creators

Posted by: Fusiontr.com

Originally posted 2022-02-13 00:40:01.