Capture NX2 or Lightroom 2?

[chris_fuller1]

Let me be clear from the beginning. I currently use Capture NX 1.3 for editing my NEFs. I like the program,

especially the control point technology. However, as an advanced amateur, I am miffed at Nikon for charging

$109.00 for an upgrade. Also, because I work for an educational instituion, I can get Lightroom for $99.00.

 

In addition to the library module, do I gain any benefits with the development module in Lightroom that mitigate the

new features of NX2? I know that the difference is only $10.00. But I still cannot seem to get myself over my

distaste with Nikon for this upgrade price.

 

Finally, are there any other programs that I might consider?

 

Thanks for the suggestions,

Chris

[jasonflynn]

Have you considered Photoshop Elements at all? I personally enjoy Lightroom, but haven't had a chance to use Lightroom 2 much, but given the reviews I would assume that its a worthy program.

 

I would take advantage of the education discount, but thats just me ;)

[Carl Stone]

Upgrade prices are part of digital photography, they are not going to give them to you for free, whether or not you like it.

This goes for NX 2, Lightroom, Photoshop, Aperture, you name it, there is no free lunch. Why is it that you think you

deserves to get an upgrade without paying for it? It sounds like you're still in school, and think that the World owes you, it

doesn't.

[chrissyone]

Well, the obvious advantage would be that you can use LR with other kinds of Raw files. I don't use Canon's software for

that reason, but I'm also a huge Lightroom fan. I've never used NX2 so I can't speak to that.

[richsimmons]

Upgrade pricing is a reflection of how many units they think they will sell in accordance with how much R&D went into creating the product. This stuff ain't easy to write. It takes a genius (or a team of them) to come up with stuff that anybody can use easily. So yeah, I think it's worth it if you find it helpful. Considering that a copy of Nik's Viveza costs $249, Dfine is $99, Color Efx is $99, Sharpener is $199 (Capture NX is made by Nik), I think it's a bargain. Capture NX is a little strangled, but I think that's to be expected, since it's made particularly for Nikon NEF files. If you really want to unleash, you can get the whole Nik package now for $599. But with your educational discount, you'll get a steal. But, between LR and NX, I'd go with LR in a heartbeat and use the Nik plugins with PS.

[Keith Gierman]

Personally, I have given up on Capture NX and use Lightroom 2. Version 2 is a significant upgrade to 1.x due to the Adjustment Brush. I feel it is easier to get the desired result with the Adjustment Brush vs. Control Points. I downloaded the trial version of Capture NX2 and it bogged down my computer severely which I didn't notice with the switch from LR 1.4.1 to 2. I had a problem with being able to make virtual copies but that was solved in 2.1.

[chris_fuller1]

First, thank you for your recommendations. I appreciate them.

 

Second, to Carl:

 

Where did I ever write that I never expected to pay for an upgrade? My objection is to the price, not to paying for upgrades. I have paid for upgrades many times, most often for reasonable prices. In fact, the new version of Picture Window Pro is about to be released for which I anticipate paying for the upgrade. $109.00 is not a reasonable price for an upgrade.

 

Finally, as a matter of fact. There are programs that provide free upgrades for life such as Qimage. And no, I am not in school. I have earned my Ph.D. through hard work at my own expense (i.e., no government loans). Nevertheless, thank you for your concern that I may think that the world owes me something.

 

- Chris

[Carl Stone]

"Second, to Carl:

 

 

 

Where did I ever write that I never expected to pay for an upgrade? "

 

That's the impression I got when you said "I am miffed at Nikon for charging $109.00 for an upgrade." That's pretty much

a standard price for such an upgrade, even if you're "miffed" over it. Rather an immature comment, since Nikon is doing

just what other software providers do. You'll no doubt be even more "miffed" when you're asked to pay for the next

upgrade, even to Lightroom. The companies that make this software are not in it for fun, it's their business. Do you work

for free?

[hashim a]

Chris... if you like the RAW conversion the Nikon software delivers (which a lot of folks prefer over ACR), consider using ViewNX - which is free and still from Nikon.

 

well worth a look.

 

i'm using NX2 for 90% of all the post processing i do but will admit that the interface and features that i came across in the trial of LR2 i used are quite slick.

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

Why don't you continue to use your current version if you don't like the price of the upgrade? It won't stop working just because an update is available.

[chris_fuller1]

Robert:

 

Thanks for the input. Your point is well taken. A nice reminder that just because something is newer, it does not mean that the older version cannot be used. Sometimes it is too easy to get caught up in the "new" thing and forget than one can often be just as successful with older versions of any software.

 

I have limited fuynds. Your comments have helped me make an informed decision. Thanks.

[twmeyer]

I think your question juxtaposes two very different applications. It's kind of like asking if you ride the bus to work or take your lunch. Batch and catalog with LR, fine tune your NEFs with NX2... t

[chris_fuller1]

For what it is worth, I have made my choice. Thank you, again, to everyone for your input. In the hopes that the following is useful to others, either for or against, here are my reasons for ultimately choosing Lightroom. I found the following reasons more compelling than my initial concern about the cost of the upgrade to NX 2.0, although the ability to purchase LR for $99.00 is still a nice plus.

 

Reason 1:

Lightroom 2 can read input profiles. This is a big improvement over LR 1 which had the habit of rendering Nikon NEF files rather desaturated. Adobe has created input profiles for Nikon cameras based on Nikon's picture control settings (it has also done so for Canon settings). These profiles not only emulate the Nikon settings, but are also specific to each Nikon camera. It should be noted that one can also assign an input profile and choose Picture Control settings in Capture NX. However, the "sync" setting in LR makes this much quicker and easier. With these settings, along with some clarity and vibrancy , my RAW files meet my processing goals about 90% of the time.

 

Reason 2:

The "sync" mode makes applying general settings (e.g., capture sharpening, clarity, vibrancy) very quick and easy. Again, this can be done in Capture NX, but with more effort.

 

Reason 3:

Improved printing in LR 2 now adds print sharpening that is comparable to what I get with Qimage so I do not have to move between two programs for printing to my Epson 2200. For output to online services, I still find Qimage better.

 

Reason 4:

The integration of DAM, processing, printing, and slideshows, now allows me to work within one program for most of my needs rather than the five or six that I sometimes use to achieve the same results. For some extra editing I will send the files as TIFFs to Picture Window Pro. I am not a pro, so I do not need Photoshop's graphics and off-set printing capabilities.

 

Downside:

The new localized editing in LR is nice, but the Control Point technology of Capture NX is better. I still have NX 1.3 for this use, if need be. Thus far, I am please enough with LR's reading of NEFs that the Control Point stuff has been less necessary than I anticipated.

 

- Chris