ACR vs. Capture One for A7II

[shawngibson]

<p>Hi guys, are there any reasons to include Capture One in my workflow with a Sony A7II when I already have Photoshop CC? Are there times where Capture One is preferred? For $50, it's a no-brainer, but only if there are times I'd need it over ACR.</p>

<p>FWIW, I don't use Lightroom, and don't want to. I'm only concerned with getting RAW images into PS with the best quality.</p>

<p>So again, is it useful to have Capture One on my box in conjunction with ACR?</p>

<p>Merci:)<br>

Shawn</p>

[peterbcarter]

<p>It's a simple demission. If you like how Capture One renders your photos, buy it. If not, it's a waste of money. It really doesn't matter what we think.</p>

[shawngibson]

<p>I suppose you didn't read the question? I assumed it was clear that I've not used the software and have a background with CC/ACR. My objective was in fact to get opinions by those who have used both.</p>

<p>Thanks:)</p>

[peterbcarter]

<p>I use Noise Ninga for raw conversions, as it does a better job than I do with ACR. But I also use LR and tend to keep my PS alterations more middle-of-the-road. I usually shoot more film, which is why PS is still in the picture. I tend not to do heavy edits, so if digital were the only source I would just be in LR. I prefer how ACR is intergrated into LR and find it's interface in PS clunky. This is why I use a raw converter.</p>

[shawngibson]

<p>Thanks Peter. I suppose we work differently; I make a lot of adjustments in PS, even if the image is a good capture. But a lot of it is trial and error for me, so I prefer PS, since I'm used to the workflow (been using PS for almost 20 years).</p>

<p>I spent a few years scanning old 35mm negs and it's going to take me probably a few more years to output them. I'm so slow. About 90,000 images. Crazy.</p>

[peterbcarter]

<p>I tend to shoot "photo real". The PS step is mostly to deal with dust/scratch removal and sharpening. Even in LR the most I usually do is level adjustments and it is where I manage my printing and exports to the web.</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Shawn, I do not know how exactly CaptureOne renders Sony files - I've got the generic version, and use it for my nikons and scans. I very much like the results C1 can get, for my Nikons I find it easier to get good results than with the Adobe converter. For what it's worth, CaptureOne is much closer to Lightroom (though in the Pro version a catalog is not mandatory), with more focus on workflow, batch editing and the generic touchups, not a full-blown pixel editor as Photoshop is. In this role, I think it can happily live alongside Photoshop, and/or make a great addition to it.<br>

There is also a free Express version for Sony. While that misses a number of functions, it will give you a good idea of what the results will look like, and whether it's worth spending anything on the Pro version. Personally, I'm very happy with this tool, but if you're very used to a Photoshop-workflow, it might well be that the UI and its conventions do not suit you. So spending a bit of time on the free version would be time spent well, probably.</p>

[Uhooru]

<p>I think you can download a trial version of Capture 1 so you can check it out. I have used C1 in the past and it really was good as a raw converter, but its been a while so I don't know about now. I found lightroom pretty much catching up to it and I like the interface better.</p>

[steve_bingham]

<p>I have used both and used both on the Sony a7II. I see no reason what so ever to add Capture One to my arsenal. ACR has dozens (plural) of adjustments - most of which can be saved for later use.</p>