[Brightcolours]

[quote name='ThomasD' timestamp='1307255573' post='9039']

But you don't have a library, IIRC, and it works only for Nikon cameras. It is less expensive, but not much.



Besides that, Capture NX is a .NET application (on Windows, at least), which means it is painfully slow, even on moderately fast hardware. The same holds for recent versions of Capture One (by Phase One). I really don't get why everyone follows the .NET hype as long as it slows down applications significantly. They could as well launch a JavaScript RAW converter, because it is so cool to work in the "cloud". <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/huh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[/quote]

There are not all that many alternatives to .NET to use certain functionality in Windows... I guess that is the reason for developers of even calculation intensive software to start with .NET. Even if they in the end could do without.



Microsoft themselves do not use .NET for most of their products, but they are privy to OS internals and library access which 3rd party developers have no access to.

[Guest]

[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1307614475' post='9090']

There are not all that many alternatives to .NET to use certain functionality in Windows... I guess that is the reason for developers of even calculation intensive software to start with .NET. Even if they in the end could do without.



Microsoft themselves do not use .NET for most of their products, but they are privy to OS internals and library access which 3rd party developers have no access to.

[/quote]

I don't think developers are so insane to code the raw conversion itself directly in C#/.NET. But the UI alone feels slow, sluggish and buggy. And at least Adobe manages to develop their applications without .NET. So there seem to be other reasonable ways to access the Windows API.



I would be interested to hear whether Capture One (in recent versions) and Capture NX are as buggy and slow on a Mac as they are on Windows.

[soLong]

[quote name='ThomasD' timestamp='1307616493' post='9093']

... I would be interested to hear whether Capture One (in recent versions)... is as buggy and slow on a Mac as on Windows.

[/quote]



… well then i hope the following might be useful -



C1 buggy? - please explain ...



for me C1 works on my mac with no problems so far, and the speed is fine for me . . . performance depends on the particular 'puter i expect, so here is my info -

- a 4yo 24" imac; OSX 10.6.7; 2.8g core 2 duo; 4gb sdram; 800 mhz bus; ATI,RadeonHD2600 …. so, not the fastest but but too bad

- C1 6.2.1



speeds? -



i've been using my own file/folder system for so long that i don't use the new capture library system - i copy only the files i'll be working on into a temporary C1 input folder = minimum files to look at -



C1 - start up time = 11sec

- i use 37.4mb ARW files -

time to display a new file at full rez = in the blink of an eye

time to make adjustments and see the result = close enough to instant

time to analyse and comp for ca = 6sec

time to output a 146.5mb tiff file and open in Ps5 (either from standard C1 settings or from having adjusted everything in C1) = 18sec

- so far i have had no hang ups anywhere … and, i haven't used a win pc since the previous century so can't compare systems …



i like the C1 quality -



so ...

[Guest]

[quote name='soLong' timestamp='1307750117' post='9130']

… well then i hope the following might be useful -



C1 buggy? - please explain ...

[/quote]

I am using the 64-bit version of 6.2.1 on Windows. I found several user reports that state that some bugs are only present in the 64-bit version. But I tried the 32-bit version and my bugs are there as well.



- There is an all-auto-adjustment button since version 6. Clicking it crashes Capture One immediately.

- Version 6 supports inline movie playing. It does work sometimes, but most of the time it does not. It then keeps showing the image of the previously looked at non-video file.

- Sometimes Capture One remembers the last opened folder, but most of the time it keeps opening one particular folder for several sessions. I always try to understand the logic behind that behavior.

- There was a bug with printing in 6.0, which was fixed in 6.1. It gave me spurious black borders on all prints. I had a long correspondence with the customer service, but in the end they solved it by accident. They had no idea how to fix it, in the end they did not know that they fixed it, but were happy that it now worked for me.



These are only the most annoying issues.



[quote name='soLong' timestamp='1307750117' post='9130']

for me C1 works on my mac with no problems so far, and the speed is fine for me . . . performance depends on the particular 'puter i expect, so here is my info -

- a 4yo 24" imac; OSX 10.6.7; 2.8g core 2 duo; 4gb sdram; 800 mhz bus; ATI,RadeonHD2600 …. so, not the fastest but but too bad

- C1 6.2.1



speeds? -



i've been using my own file/folder system for so long that i don't use the new capture library system - i copy only the files i'll be working on into a temporary C1 input folder = minimum files to look at -



C1 - start up time = 11sec

- i use 37.4mb ARW files -

time to display a new file at full rez = in the blink of an eye

time to make adjustments and see the result = close enough to instant

time to analyse and comp for ca = 6sec

time to output a 146.5mb tiff file and open in Ps5 (either from standard C1 settings or from having adjusted everything in C1) = 18sec

- so far i have had no hang ups anywhere … and, i haven't used a win pc since the previous century so can't compare systems …

[/quote]



Well, I am not talking about processing times. Making adjustments results in near-instant changes in the preview. And cnce I have put my conversions into the batch queue, it runs smoothly and reasonably fast. I am referring mostly to the sluggishness of the UI.



I have a folder structure based on months where the pictures are taken. That is about 100-300 photos per folder. Capture One maintains sidecar files including generated thumbnails in each folder, so I don't get why it takes half a minute to load all thumbnails. Sometimes it even reloads all thumbnails when you switch between two folders during one session.



I also really like the idea of Smart Albums. It lets you combine several folders to a virtual one and then search for things therein. But it is useless, because before you can perform a search or filter, it loads all thumbnails, which takes ages for multiple combined folders.



[quote name='soLong' timestamp='1307750117' post='9130']

i like the C1 quality -

[/quote]

I like the quality of the final images, too. This is why I am still using it. But I would like to have a program that is not in the way of the user.

[mst]

I can't comment on movies and printing, since I don't use that, but certainly don't have any of the other issues you mention on my Mac with C1.



-- Markus

[mduraj]

My advice is if you shoot with Nikon the best choice is Capture NX

[mst]

[quote name='fotografia opole' timestamp='1314948986' post='11242']

My advice is if you shoot with Nikon the best choice is Capture NX

[/quote]



Allow me to disagree. CNX certainly has some nice features and produces pleasing results, but the software itself is terrible. Unintuitive, buggy and slow as hell.



If you care about the final result more than anything else, it might be the "best" option indeed (allthough not significantly better than C1 IMHO). In all other cases, it's highly recommended to try other options, too. Most RAW converters are available as trial software.



-- Markus (shooting Nikon, just for the record)