I am just switching back to Nikon from Canon. In my first Nikon life (D1H,D1X,D2H) I found Capture to be a wonderful tool and used it quite a bit. Once in Canon I migrated to Raw Shooter pro (now Lightroom) and then just Photoshop 5 for raw conversion.
I now own D800 and D800E. Is it worth buying Nikon Capture? I haven't had any moire issues so I don't need a removal tool at this point.
Is there any other benefit? Or just a waste of time and money compared to othe tools out there like DXO or Capture !?
#2. "RE: Worth owning Nikon Capture?" In response to Reply # 1
I am proficient in Photoshop and CNX2 and prefer to use CNX2 for RAW conversion instead of ACR. I like to work in the NEF format. As Mick says it depends how proficient you are in Photoshop or LR as to whether or not you want CNX2. Photoshop is much more powerful and if you do Panos and HDR or usually blend multiple images together Photoshop is the way to go. What CNX2 offers is a very simple interface that allows you to make changes to RAW files that does not require that you have to use layers or complicated masks to get professional results as the SW does that for you. Also if you use ADL CNX2 is the only SW that will properly process the file. Finally I like the fact that all my edits are stored in the NEF and that all my camera settings are recognized and applied to the image when opened. It saves me time in processing.
#3. "RE: Worth owning Nikon Capture?" In response to Reply # 0
After five years using Photo Mechanic-CNX2 as my workflow, I got tired of waiting for CNX3 and Photo Mechanic's catalog function. Lightroom has become a sophisticated catalog and darkroom app. The camera profiles in LR are very, very close to what Nikon provides. LR is faster and more powerful, yet it has introduced additional controls that allow more precise image adjustment.
Jon Kandel A New York City Nikonian and Team Member Please visit my website and critique the images!
#4. "RE: Worth owning Nikon Capture?" In response to Reply # 0
Nikon is slow to update their software. Also Nikon mistakenly gives us what they think we need rather than what we want. The 3rd party makers can afford to cater to user needs because of much higher sales.
IMO Nikon should include its best software free, at least with the pro cameras. They could then benefit from a larger feedback base.
I use Lightroom 4 now and rarely touch Photoshop any more. LR4 seems to guess what I want rather than the you-get-what-you-select-and-no-more attitude from Photoshop.
"We dont see things as they are, we see things as we are" - Anaïs Nin
#6. "RE: Worth owning Nikon Capture?" In response to Reply # 4 Sun 01-Jul-12 09:13 PM by mklass
"Also Nikon mistakenly gives us what they think we need rather than what we want."
CNX is pretty much what I want, realizing that it can't be everything for everybody. Photoshop does that, but also required plug-ins to do things in a more user friendly manner. LR is a somewhat the same.
CNX is updated as new camera models come out to maintain compatibility. Yes, they haven't done a major upgrade for quite a while, but it still works very well, so why change it just for the sake of change?
#8. "RE: Worth owning Nikon Capture?" In response to Reply # 0
Though I have NX2 and PS, I have been using DxO plus LR almost exclusively for many years, I use DxO for raw conversion and most adjustments and LR mainly for cataloging. This combination gives excellent results with substanial time savings.